It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Quest
You should go take some evolutionary biology classes and read up on the big bang.
Showing ignorance of the two theories doesn't help your argument.
You've butchered both of them. I'll explian more when I have the time to post. If one of the other science guys doesn't beat me to it.
You're trying to counter argue science when you are obviously misinformed of the theories and their functions.
Originally posted by Jakko
1. Where does life come from.
On our planet we have (if you have not noticed) quite a large amount of life. All kinds of different species walk around, acting as if they have always been here, including us.
Most likely we have not always been here, and this topic is about how everything started.
The big bang theory is nice and all, but explosions usually destroy life. They surely don't affect life in a positive way, let stand create life.
Fish turning into apes turning into humans sounds very cool as well, but recent theories have showed that there is enough proof against that as well.
According to a lot of folks on this planet, life started by DNA improving itself. In fact the whole idea of evolution is based on the idea of DNA changing and improving over time. This is the first and most important thing in the whole evolution theory that does not make sense.
The problem is that DNA does not change at all.
A child is a copy (a mix of 2 DNA's) of the parents.
We are all unique because DNA contains so much info that a random mix between 2 DNA's will always lead to a unique result. But nothing new is added to it.
This means we do not improve at all, but it goes further then that.
Sometimes something goes wrong. Because of various reasons, DNA can be damaged. And it does not take a nuclear disaster for DNA to become damaged.
In this case, the child (copy of dna's) will also copy this small error, and after a few thousands of years quite a lot of people might walk around having this error.
What people assume, is that these "errors" (new dna) is what changed and improved several species, leading to the life that we have today, including us.
And this is where stuff goes wrong.
Small errors in your DNA generally do not improve you at all.
Just like everything else in this world, DNA slowly decays over time as more errors creep in.
The life that eventually survives, are the ones with the least errors, not the ones with the most.
A fish can not turn into an ape, and an ape can not turn into a human just by errors in the DNA.
If by mistake in DNA, a dog would be born with 7 legs, we do not call it evolution either.
Having 7 legs is not cool for the dog, neither is it the start of an evolution to a new species, it's just plain stupid.
Now what does God have to do with this you might be wondering...
Well the above theory does not prove that there is a God, but it sure makes the existence of such a being more likely.
The maximum speed in the universe, the small insects that look like leaves to fool birds.
It almost looks as if some thought went into the creation of the universe and everything that's in it.
Not some random chain of chaos, explosions and apes.
Originally posted by Seapeople
Here is another point I thought I should share.
Religion is based on faith. The christian religion especially is based on faith without proof. The idea behind it is the reward for blind faith. It is greater to believe without having proof than to believe because you know.
If evolution does not exist, then God MUST EXIST. If evolution does exist, then God may or may not exist.
So where is the blind faith. Evolution leaves room for both possibilities while the lack of it eliminates one. If there was no evolution, then there can be no faith.