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.

 

Show me infallible proof of creationism

page: 5
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Lannock
Electriczombie, evolutionists like doing that (trying to ridicule the "no transitional forms" argument), but it is seriously damning evidence against your belief.


Actually, it isn't damning evidence. We have transitional fossils. There is no argument about it.




posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 01:21 AM
link   
Double post. Please Delete if possible.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by PieKeeper]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by PieKeeper

"The things that have been used as examples of evolution either have supported microevolution..." - Micro and Macro are part of the same process, if one exists, then so does the other.



You are wrong. Something adapting to it's environment is one thing (a proven fact). Something changing into something else is another (a pipe-dream at best).

There are "transitional fossils", all of which are pretty debatable, but for macro-evolution to be true there should be more transitional fossils than non-transitional fossils. There is no getting around THAT my friend. All evidence shows fully formed creatures appearing as if by magic


EDITED to add some dramatical phrases


[edit on 25-6-2009 by Lannock]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 01:50 AM
link   

When people are confronted with a question they do not know the answer to, they turn to a god to explain it. This has been done for hundreds of years, so it is not something new. It does not prove that a god exists, and it does not prove that the universe was created by a god. God is merely a scapegoat.



'Now from the sixth hour until the ninth hour there was darkness over all the land . . . And Jesus cried out again with a loud voice, and yielded up his spirit . . . So when the centurion and those with him, who were guarding Jesus, saw the earthquake and the things that happened, they feared greatly, saying, "Truly this was the Son of God!" Matthew 27:45-54

The first reference found outside of the Bible mentioning this darkness which fell over the land during the crucifixion of Jesus Christ, comes from a Samaritan historian named Thallus, who wrote around 52 A.D. His history was quoted by another early writer by the name of Julius Africanus who researched the topic of this darkness and wrote the following: “Upon the whole world there came a most fearful darkness. Many rocks were split in two by an earthquake, and many places in Judea and other districts were thrown down. It seems very unreason-able to me that Thallus, in the third book of his histo-ries, would try to explain away this darkness as an
eclipse of the sun. For the Jews celebrate theirPassover on the 14th day according to the moon, and the death of our Savior falls on the day before the Passover. But an eclipse of the sun can only take place when the moon comes under the sun, how then could an eclipse have occurred when the moon is directly opposite the sun?” (Scientifically it is impossible to have a full moon on the same day that there is an eclipse of the sun.)
Another first century historian who also mentions this darkness was Phlegon, who wrote a history entitled the "Olympiads.” Julius Africanus mentioned
a quote taken from the Olympiads which said:“Phlegon records that, in the time of Tiberius Caesar, at full moon, there was a full eclipse of the sun from
the sixth hour to the ninth . . . It is evident that he did not know of any such events in previous years.”Phlegon is also mentioned by Origen in his
work ‘Against Celsus’ Book 2: “The darkening of the sun took place at the time of Tiberius Caesar, in whose reign Jesus was crucified, and the great
earthquakes which then took place, Phlegon, Ibelieve, has written an account in the thirteenth or fourteenth book of his Chronicles.


It's the multiple secular historical and archeological consistencies that verify so many parts of the bible, even the parts that are "impossible", tied together with the hundreds of fulfilled prophecies that provide me with faith that there is a creator. Science merely provides us with the finer details to truly appreciate his handywork.

Men occasionally stumble over the truth, but most of them pick themselves up and hurry off as if nothing ever happened. Sir Winston Churchill

[edit on 25-6-2009 by dnaobs]

[edit on 25-6-2009 by dnaobs]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:50 AM
link   
The problem is in your OP question.

There will never be absolute proof of either creation or otherwise. That is the way God intended it to be. The door is open for you to make a choice between either believing God or believing scientific fact. Let me explain:

This life is a test. The test began with Adam and Eve. They were given information by God, and they had a choice to believe it or disbelieve it. They chose to disbelieve God and to believe Satan. They believed that the fruit of the Tree of Knowledge was not going to make them die. That free will choice was essential to proving if they loved God, or loved themselves more.

We are undergoing tests daily. God has shown us throughout the Bible that these are tests of love, to see if you love Him or if you love the messenger that counters what He said. For example, Deuteronomy 13:1-3.

1 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, 2 And the sign or the wonder come to pass, whereof he spake unto thee, saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them; 3 Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for the LORD your God proveth you, to know whether ye love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul.

So, we can deduce from this that the scientific data will be right. It will state that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. Tests will prove it. However, God said He made it in 6 days. Who will you choose to believe? If you choose to believe it is old, do you lose faith in the Bible? Of course you do. Who wants you to lose faith in the Bible? The same entity that wanted Adam and Eve to lose faith in God.

So, God made the world aged. The starlight was enroute and already arrived. Adam was able to eat ripe fruit and name existing animals. Animals were able to eat grass and herbs that were fully mature. Adam and Eve were not embryonic, but were fully grown. Atomic structures had moved through much of their half-lifes, etc. Everything, including a fossil record, was aged and in existence. Why? Well, logically, if it all scientifically tested to be around 6000 years old, you wouldn't have a choice, would you?

Well, God can do anything He wants. It is no big problem for Him to make an aged world. Take a look at the earth from space in this photo grebz.fr... and with an understanding that God made the entire universe, do you see a problem with Him having the ability to make this world aged?



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 05:00 AM
link   
reply to post by sobek52
 

To my knowledge, here is no infallible proof for any of the wide variety of evolutionary theories, so why do you demand this of the creationists?

It seems we have a war of vested interests here, instead of a clash based on rational thought.

It comes down to: who has the best PR? Because even if science finds a really workable explanation, how many are ever going to study the research well enough to fully understand how that explanation was arrived at?

In science, one must honestly devote oneself to finding workable answers based on true data. If one fails in this, one just becomes a marketing mouthpiece for the latest get-rich-quick scheme.

It is quite possible that both old science and old religion are significantly off the track in this matter.

Look at what the genetic engineers are trying to do. Now, is that creationism or darwinism? Well, I'd call it...genetic engineering. Hey, maybe that's actually closer to the truth than these other two ideas. After all, the genetics boys are getting some results.

Of course, to believe that an organism such as homo sapiens is essentially the result of some ancient engineering project, you would have to step outside the realm of conventional science.

But look at some of the other threads and topics being mulled over right here at ATS!

Secret government science projects:
genetic manipulation
biological robots
time travel
anti-gravity
mind control
ancient alien technologies

Well, that last one sort of opens up pandora's box, doesn't it?
If aliens are real, and they've been flying around in those ships for millennia,
and if they have bodies just like ours, but their bodies developed somewhere else...

I don't think modern science considers this an important issue any more. Just fodder for the media machine. Modern science is going to plow ahead with genetic engineering. To hell with its moral implications!



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 05:21 AM
link   
All species on the planet appear fully developed, not partially developed. They all show design. There are no examples of half-developed feathers, eyes, skin, tubes (arteries, veins, intestines, etc.), or any of thousands of other vital organs. Tubes that are not 100% complete are a liability(my blood will be circulating properly in 5 thousand years); so are partially developed organs and some body parts. For example, if a leg of a reptile were to evolve into a wing of a bird, it would become a bad leg long before it became a good wing."
Name Meaning
Adam = Man
father to
Seth =Appointed
father to
Enosh = Mortal
father to
Cainan = Sorrow
father to
Mahalalel = The Blessed God
father to
Jared = Shall come down
father to
Enoch = Teaching
father to
Methuselah = His death shall bring
father to
Lamech = The despairing
father to
Noah = Comfort



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 06:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by sobek52
I cannot seem to get a straight answer from any creationists. WHAT PROOF IS THERE? I do not want to insult (too much) but I just want to know what's considered proof? Please read others' posts before you go ranting, and I want REAL proof. I welcome atheists, agnostics, freethinkers, evolutionists, etc. to help counter anything that is less than absolute, undeniable proof.

(if you like the thread, flag it)

[edit on 24-6-2009 by sobek52]



Even though I often refer to different writings treated by some as religious material, I am Not A Religious person, nor do I follow after any religious doctrine or order of human invention.


Now about that Question of Creationism.....

You Created this Thread, didn't you ???

You were motivated and Controlled by Awareness, Consciousness or Life to write this thread or Create this Thread, within the boundaries of your own understanding and choices ???

It is The Mind that Rules over the Animal or any other Species, this includes Human kind...

You personally, Create every Day.

You Create your Needs, and You Create your Actions, from the Choices that are available to you.

Without Awareness there would be No knowledge of anything at all.

The only Theme behind your existence and your experience, is Creation...

You Create and in many cases fulfil what you are Aware of every day.

You Create the necessary actions, in your own experience to fulfil your own desires...

Therefore You are a "Junior Creator" Learning how to Create!

If Not, then I do Not know what you are, or your Purpose of existence ???

You Create the Solution (even if only by choice) to your Own Problems Don't You???

But you can only Create, from the options available to you at the time...

These Options are Controlled by Something else other than you...

Perhaps by what has designed You as you did Not manifest yourself and you can't stop the disintegration of your body when this experience is over for you, and the next experience awaits your "Awareness" or "Consciousness", or "Conscious Identity".

The Intelligence behind Creation, is Awareness and Organisation, Not a Human impression of a god or anything else....

It requires Something to make any action take place, whether in Concept or what many Identify as Energy or Material.

There are Rules or Laws controlling the functions within Physics and in Evolution even if it only exists in the imagination of the Human Primate....

Rather than argue over our beliefs we should keep looking for the Truth and Not Trust in the belief of Religion or Evolution.

The Writings that people claim to be Religious in fact aren't.

Humankind has made a religion based on information that is structured in the form of parables and in fact the writings have nothing at all to do with the human race, or this world, (people refer to as this Universe).

The Writings are in fact about what your Earth and Universe is Created in...

But As I have said these writings are in Parable form and are Not what is taught today...

What is taught today is nothing more and nothing less than a Conspiracy against Life itself.

Life is Not a Biological Function. A human or any other species is only a Biological Robot or Machine and Nothing else.

But Life is Awareness, Consciousness, Intelligence....

Intelligence, is Not of, or found in any Brain, as the Brain is merely a Biological Decoder/Encoder "Interface", between Life and the Biological organism and a Support System for this Biological Robot or Biological Machine!

You are "Aware" of your Body and Environment of Your Experience, but Your Body is Not Aware of Your "Awareness" or "Consciousness" or Your Identity ???



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 06:33 AM
link   
reply to post by PrisonerOfSociety
 




My mother in law to be will have a heart attack if she saw that.. She already told me Im going to helll For making statements that the bible is a load of crock to blind you from the truth!

The problem I have with genesis is that it implies that women are made as a lessor to man- if god created Adam from dust, why create Eve from Adams rib? This has been used to keep women in line for many centuries having them think that they are owing unto Adam.

Another thing, Supposedly there was only Adam,Eve, Cain & Able.. When Cain Kills Able and God banishes him from his land, Cain states'-Where will I go? Forthe others will hunt me down & kill me!' Who are these 'others'? I got kicked out of youth goup for asking that question, the priest could not answer me.

Religeon is a tool for keeping people in fear & under controll. Thats it!



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 08:17 AM
link   
Sadly, there is no proof for the theory of evolution. There is much compelling evidence for it. It appears to be the most likely explanation for what we see around us. It's a widely accepted theory. Subject to change on the presentation of new data. Therein lies the beauty of science. Another explanation is creationism. There is no evidence for it. It appears to be a highly unlikely explanation for what we see around us. It's a widely accepted theory. Not subject to change. Therein lies the beauty of religion. So, which of these foundations you going to build your beliefs on? The shifting sands of science or the immutable rock of faith? Dr Mengele or Mother Theresa? Neurosurgeons or witch-doctors? That's right sparky, the choice is false. What do I believe? That the the mechanism of evolution DESCRIBED by Darwin is accurate. This mechanism was CREATED by Dave the Great Space Bunny. This view is shared by the other members of the institution where I'm kept. Therefore it's true.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 08:54 AM
link   
mistaking the book of genesis for a scientific text is a mistake that many christians and atheists make.

it is no such thing, it is a crafted communication, directed to an audience of contemporary humans to understand.

if they were given a book outlining concepts of dna, evolution, sub-atomic processes, the communication would have failed, and have long been forgotten.

who knows? this may have been tried before the genesis communication. completely lost now, to time...

but who today has not heard of the genesis book?

a very successful communication from god, to his creation would be my conclusion.

what is the real point of this thread, anyway? more cheeky atheist spite?

[edit on 25-6-2009 by DohBama]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lannock
You are wrong. Something adapting to it's environment is one thing (a proven fact). Something changing into something else is another (a pipe-dream at best).


I'm not wrong. As I stated, they are part of the same process. Synapsids show a clear transition from reptiles to mammals.


Originally posted by Lannock
There are "transitional fossils", all of which are pretty debatable, but for macro-evolution to be true there should be more transitional fossils than non-transitional fossils. There is no getting around THAT my friend. All evidence shows fully formed creatures appearing as if by magic

[edit on 25-6-2009 by Lannock]


They aren't really debatable. Archaeopteryx clearly shows a dinosaur with feathers, you could even go ahead and call it an early species of bird. You should know that fossils are extremely rare, and we really only have a handful of all the millions of species that have existed over time.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:23 PM
link   
reply to post by peaceonearth
 


You obviously don't understand Evolution in the first place.




Originally posted by l_e_cox
To my knowledge, here is no infallible proof for any of the wide variety of evolutionary theories, so why do you demand this of the creationists?


Because Evolution has been proven.



reply to post by Myrmecobius
 


Evolution is not a theory. The Theory of Evolution is an explanation as to how Evolution works. Learn your science terms.

[edit on 25-6-2009 by PieKeeper]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:33 PM
link   
There is and has been a great move of astro physists to creationism in the past 20 years. Why? Because the more they see and learn about the universe it is apparent that there is a beginning or big bang if you will and eventually and end as the universe expands and the entropy of the universe disapates all energy. There is no snapping back of the universe. conclusion- wheres theres a beginning and end theres usually a Beginner. Alos the Universe is fine tuned for life. Life is a intregal part of the universe despite what some traditional religions would have yu believe. The universe is teaming with life. However on this earth and any planet where life simular to ours would prevail exists a fine balance. so fine that if the rotation of the earth were any slower of faster it would cesae to exist as we know it. or if it revolved around the sun any faster or slower or its distance from the sun were any different than our ecosystem as beautiful and diverse as it is would fail to exist. This is direct evidence of a designer and design. However if you read the work or view any you tube videos by Dr. Gerald Schroeder you will see how a MIT renowned Physist shows using science, the torah, nasa graphs and illustrations of the birth and expansion of the universe coincide with the 6 day creation of the bible depending on where you exist in the creation as all time is relevent, and, that the universe is tuned for life and as it expanded life was manifest just as the genisis creation story describes. proving, well at least in my eyes, that what many would call evolution is really just the progression of the creation to the time of Adam where God/Creator intervened and gave Mankind a spirit which was the next step in his plan ofr Mankind from just being a hominid to being a spirit based being that could at one time access the spirit of the Creator. That spirit has however been put to sleep. If you want to find proof you can if you don;t want to you won't, you will just find what proves what you want to find and your mind will be closed to anything that suggests creation.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 02:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by sobek52
I cannot seem to get a straight answer from any creationists. WHAT PROOF IS THERE? ***snip***


I'm not a creationist (far from it) but I do think the proof you ask for is non-existent in other ways than creation is based on Faith.

It's kind of on par with non-existing proof of the universe being endless, yet it is accepted in scientific circles. UNTIL something comes along and disproves it or makes it unlikely.
Dark Matter is invented because our formulae for what happens in the universe has to add up.

My brain cannot - and will not - comprehend an endless universe. My basic instincts tell me that everything has got to have a limit or an end. Even time has an end I am told.
Of course knowing that the universe is rather large does present me with a problem of trying to fathom what will be beyond this limited universe.

The Big Bang theory states that at the beginning everything was compressed in a very small part of space and then exploded and is spreading outwards in our amazingly huge universe.
So there was a beginning. But what was there before that?

Time moves in one direction only. Are we sure about that?

We are almost at the brink of accepting multiverses simply beacuse it fits in with some super complicated calculations. But it might be wrong.

I we can accept the above mentioned claims perhaps we should accept the theory of a supreme force which is part of or even directly responsible for our universe (and the others).

Of course, when it comes to God and creation in 6 days. The rapid forming of Grand Canyon. The young Earth argument. etc. etc.

Well that is surely pathetic given what we do know through science.

Instead of getting small bits thrown at me from ID's and Creationists I decided to read a lot of their material, just to get a feel for the subject.

Ye Gods - it is scary and hilarious at the same time.

If you want a good laugh you should try this website
CSC

You owe it to yourself to read the lot. You will find explanations why Gold cannot exist at surface level. Why mountains cannot form naturally. Max age of jupiters comets are 12,000 years. Fossils in different strata caused by liquefaction.

I tell you it straight. It's a laugh.

I am left to wonder why they have chosen pink for their colour scheme. It almost looks like a por* site (or so I am led to believe
)



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by jinx880101
The problem I have with genesis is that it implies that women are made as a lessor to man- if god created Adam from dust, why create Eve from Adams rib?


Clearly mud didn't work. It's like having a prototype and then refining it for the production line.



Another thing, Supposedly there was only Adam,Eve, Cain & Able.. When Cain Kills Able and God banishes him from his land, Cain states'-Where will I go? Forthe others will hunt me down & kill me!' Who are these 'others'? I got kicked out of youth goup for asking that question, the priest could not answer me.


Adam's first wife was Lillith. After the divorce (she wasn't happy) she went and got busy populating the earth (implies incest I'm afraid - presumeably Adam got the garden and she got the kids) while Adam was running around showing Eve "The propeller".



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by dnaobs
***snip***

It's the multiple secular historical and archeological consistencies that verify so many parts of the bible, even the parts that are "impossible", tied together with the hundreds of fulfilled prophecies that provide me with faith that there is a creator. ***snip***


Please enlighten us on - say 10 - of those prophecies that have been fulfilled.



[edit on 25.6.2009 by HolgerTheDane]



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by peaceonearth
All species on the planet appear fully developed, not partially developed. They all show design. ***snip***


But I assume we can agree that it often is far from Intelligent Design.

Just look at how a cow is put together. No matter how it stands it will still crap down it's hind legs.

Your nose. How smart is it that your runny nose is running straight into your mouth?

If I get a piece of apple stuck when I eat I will suffocate. Well done on that one.

And men with nipples?



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:43 PM
link   
Show me infallible proof of anything. You cannot know anything with asny degree of certainty. Anything that you "know" is derived from your senses. Your senses are deceptive.



posted on Jun, 25 2009 @ 03:58 PM
link   
reply to post by jinx880101
 


Note I am Not a Religious person or follow after any Religion of humanity so called, but do make reference to religious studies from time to time..



Adam is Not Man.... Never has Been and Never will be!

Adam or more correctly A'Dam, was formed from the dust of the ground.

On death, that is of the Descendants of A'Dam, it is said "Dust to Dust and Ashes to Ashes"...

But Man, is Not A'Dam, but is another Entity....

Man is formed in the Image of God and Not of the ground.

It does Not mention in The Genesis that Man is formed of the Ground but does say A'Dam was formed of the dust of the ground and that his life (A'Dam Not Man) is the breath of air!

But the Life of Man is The Light or Life of God... See The Gospel According to John!

Again this is why Man are the Children of God but A'Dam, is the Flesh or Primate, and is an outcast and Not in Paradise!

Man is The Soul while A'Dam is the Primate form.

The "Son of Man" is The Son of God and Not the Son or descendant of A'Dam.

So All Men are The Sons of God.... But A'Dam is The Dammed One and is of the Dust of the Ground.

It was given for Man, and Not A'Dam to rule over the Animals!

It is The Mind that rules over All species and Not the Flesh or Primate...

Man Rules over the Primate that humankind call falsely call man today...

This is why Jesus said, "This is a wicked and Adulterous Generation..."

The Flesh or Primate Commits Adultery, by Claiming to be Man but Isn't...

It is written, Jesus said, "It is a Wicked and Adulterous Generation that seeks for a Sign...."

No Man has ascended into Heaven save Him who has descended from heaven.

Man or the Soul remains in Heaven and experiences the Descendant of A'Dam in the manifestation of Earth or Environment.

How can you go somewhere if you are already there ??? LOL...

The Flesh will Never be Man...

As Jesus is reported saying and teaching...

From The Gospel of Thomas,


[Quote] Merchants and Businessmen shall Not enter the Places of My Father.....


You (Man) can Not ascend into heaven, because the Man is already there but the Primate or Descendant of A'Dam is in Earth and is of the Dust of the Earth Environment.

The Image of God is Not a human or Primate!

The Return of The Son of Man or Man Child refers to the Soul and Not the Flesh which is a Descendant of A'Dam....

It is church or Roman Doctrine that teaches A'Dam and Man to be one and the same.

It is also written in The Gospel of Thomas....


Jesus said,

“The Pharisees and the Scribes
have taken The Keys of Knowledge
and Hidden Them.

They themselves
have NOT entered,
nor have they allowed to enter
those who wish to".


What is being taught by churches today is Not what is written.....

Jesus, Never makes Mention of the Roman church or any other denomination
based on Roman indoctrination.... Why ???

In the Original "Greek text" the word "church" was Not used, but reference is made to.... "The Assembly of Lights"


"The Assembly of Lights" was translated by the Roman church and other scholars, to the Word "church", which is nothing less than deception and Lies...



new topics

top topics



 
4
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join