It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Dodo the bird that killed Yahweh/ Jesus god?

page: 2
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 12:43 AM
link   
How do you know what Gods' purpose for the Dodo bird was?




posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 12:56 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


Are you familiar with Genesis where it describes what we know today as genetic regression? It was due to the fall. If the dodo was once a bird with the power of flight but later lost that ability, it would appear to line up with that.

Probably similar to the history of the penguin. That's at least the scriptural answer. You could see it as a 'creation mistake' or you could see it as a consequence of nature's fallen state after the fall.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:40 AM
link   
reply to post by AshleyD
 





Are you familiar with Genesis where it describes what we know today as genetic regression? It was due to the fall.


Please enlighten me I was unaware that genetics was discussed by people who'd not even learned to write.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by hulkbacker
 





How do you know what Gods' purpose for the Dodo bird was?


As I don't believe your god actually exists, I consequently don't entertain the thought of a bird having a purpose.

However I am aware of the overwhelmingly popular idea as to the purpose of a wing.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:52 AM
link   
reply to post by The time lord
 





I have family members with different eye colours, hair types,


The hair on your head is different to the hair around your pubic region, the hair in the pubic region is the same as that of the entire body hair of the gorilla.

needless to say you accept that the gorilla is your distant cousin.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 04:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
The hair on your head is different to the hair around your pubic region, the hair in the pubic region is the same as that of the entire body hair of the gorilla.

needless to say you accept that the gorilla is your distant cousin.


Is this supposed to be proof of something?

More startling proof. Once and for all this proves evolution. Shut the board down. We don't need to debate anymore.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 05:09 AM
link   
reply to post by B.A.C.
 





Is this supposed to be proof of something?


Not trying to prove anything dude, just observing the obvious connection i response to the post






More startling proof. Once and for all this proves evolution. Shut the board down. We don't need to debate anymore.


No ones forcing you to debate, but I've got loony people shoving invisible gods and demons down my children throats, so I will bloody well debate these people.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 05:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
No ones forcing you to debate, but I've got loony people shoving invisible gods and demons down my children throats, so I will bloody well debate these people.


I've got the same problem with Evolutionists trying to shove a theory with more gaps than the playboy mansion down Everyone's throat.

Good luck.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by SumnerKagan
 










I want to thank you for continuing with these Bible-attacking, garbage threads of yours. You are proving my point that ATS Ownership and the Mods are pushing and protecting this direction whenever possible.


No problem my friend, however my posts have nothing to do with the site owners or the mods, in fact I've been a little pissed off with them on a few occasions for kicking my butt, and forcing me to try and use my tiny brain a little harder before I post, so that can't bad all bad.

If you have a problem with direction perhaps you should take it up with the owners. I have a problem with the direction of religions so I bring my gripes here, no one's forcing you to respond, hey if you think I'm an infidel idiot then ignore me.
Hey you may get lucky and actually get enough power or authority over me to shut me up permanently, wouldn't that be cool moocowman could no longer question the beliefs that would be forced upon his children.

So lets get back to the subject of wings that appear to be designed not to fly.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by B.A.C.

Originally posted by moocowman
No ones forcing you to debate, but I've got loony people shoving invisible gods and demons down my children throats, so I will bloody well debate these people.


I've got the same problem with Evolutionists trying to shove a theory with more gaps than the playboy mansion down Everyone's throat.

Good luck.



I've got the same problem with Evolutionists trying to shove a theory with more gaps than the playboy mansion down Everyone's throat. Good luck.


Very funny
.

So why don't we then compromise ? You send your kids to school that teaches what you believe and I send my kids to school that teaches kids not to believe anything but to look at the best available evidence so far and lets them make up their own minds.

I'll wont force my lack of beliefs upon you and you wont force your beliefs on me, we could then go to the pub like civil human beings and argue over our prefer football team.

So, back to wings that appear to be designed not to fly.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


i wonder. if it's a chimera of sorts, like the duckbill platypus. the DNA for several different species are in the platypus. it's like a repository

egg-laying, venomous, duck-billed, beaver-tailed, otter-footed mammal
fur instead of feathers. swims but doesn't fly

(what the freak? read this!)
Monotremes (see also echidna for the other species) are the only mammals known to have a sense of electroreception: they locate their prey in part by detecting electric fields generated by muscular contractions. The Platypus' electroreception is the most sensitive of any monotreme.[25]

uses its tail for storage of fat reserves (an adaptation also found in animals such as the Tasmanian Devil[11] and fat-tailed sheep). It has webbed feet and a large, rubbery snout; these are features that appear closer to those of a duck than to those of any known mammal. The webbing is more significant on the front feet and is folded back when walking on land.[8] Unlike a bird's beak (in which the upper and lower parts separate to reveal the mouth), the snout of the Platypus is a sensory organ with the mouth on the underside. The nostrils are located on the dorsal surface of the snout, while the eyes and ears are located in a groove set just back from it; this groove is closed when swimming.[8] Platypuses have been heard to emit a low growl when disturbed and a range of other vocalisations have been reported in captive specimens.

en.wikipedia.org...

anyway, what if some "wings" were never meant for flying?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:30 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


(an adaptation also found in animals such as the Tasmanian Devil[11] and fat-tailed sheep)

very interesting article, wow what a chimera I wonder if proponents of alien intervention or ancient civilizations, observe the issues with this animal.




(an adaptation also found in animals such as the Tasmanian Devil[11] and fat-tailed sheep)


What is interesting here is adaptation, is adaptation not evolution ?


So what was this particular wing designed to if not what almost what every other wing was designed to do?

I fail to see the logic in designing what is for all intents and purposes a bird so as not to fly, where's the point in giving it a superlight skeleton if it's not going to get off the ground?

I cannot but help the feeling that others, seem to be proposing that their god picked something off a shelf for an environment and thought to himself "oh that will do" regardless of suitability.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 07:33 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 


well being a believer in micro "(not macro) evolution, i believe it may have encountered something earlier in its development that modified the original design. perhaps a mutation that was carried on via inheritance to the subsequent generations.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:05 AM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


So the question then would be why something would need to be modified ?

If something needs modification then it does not do what it was intended to do, or it is to serve a different purpose ?

So this leads top the problem of change this would preclude an unchanging yahwehjesusgod.

If something is to be utilized in manner not intended, this would imply saving. If saving is required then there must be deficit to require the saving. Having a deficit would then imply that the creator is not the creator of all that there is and no omniscient.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:38 AM
link   
reply to post by moocowman
 

I think they went extinct because pissed of religious haters wanted an arguement against god. They rolled dodo's up and smoked 'em and then sat around trying not to giggle at the concept of something originating from nothing.

But anyway, what were you on about again?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman

The hair on your head is different to the hair around your pubic region, the hair in the pubic region is the same as that of the entire body hair of the gorilla.

needless to say you accept that the gorilla is your distant cousin.


Does that make Gorillas in the mist a porno?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:55 AM
link   
Avoid foolish question and genealogies....for they are unprofitable and vain. Titus 3:9 (ancient Hebrew for "do not feed the trolls"-LOL)

Some posters, having had problems in their daily life, have determined to take out their frustrations on the Christian segment of ATS; even declaring "war".

The instruction to Christians was to "go and preach the gospel unto all the earth" not to argue endlessly with those who have openly declared themselves your enemy.

AshleyD is correct in that "the fall" caused a physiological change in nature in which death was now a component. The microevolution seen in nature is more a de-volution than an advancement of the various "kinds" (species).



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by atlasastro
 





They rolled dodo's up and smoked 'em and then sat around trying not to giggle at the concept of something originating from nothing.


Please explain this concept of yahwehjesus god creating itself from nothing .


Evolution so far explains as far as what has been observed, clearly you are ahead of the game, I'm all ears.



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:03 AM
link   
reply to post by whitewave
 





The instruction to Christians was to "go and preach the gospel unto all the earth"


Well this is the point is it not, don't preach at people and try to influence their way of life.

Xtianity has had over 2000 years, HEY We got your message loud and clear now leave us alone, sit back and wait for jesusgod to come and kick our evil asses, it's not your place to impose his will on me and deny me free will.

If xtianity left us alone we wouldn't be having this conversation duh ?



posted on Mar, 10 2009 @ 09:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by moocowman
reply to post by whitewave
 





The instruction to Christians was to "go and preach the gospel unto all the earth"


Well this is the point is it not, don't preach at people and try to influence their way of life.

Xtianity has had over 2000 years, HEY We got your message loud and clear now leave us alone, sit back and wait for jesusgod to come and kick our evil asses, it's not your place to impose his will on me and deny me free will.

If xtianity left us alone we wouldn't be having this conversation duh ?


I'm not the one who started the thread. So WHO'S doing the "preaching" here? You're taking your anger out on the wrong people. Got that school issue straightened out yet?

Now what was the point you wanted to make about dodo birds?



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join