evolution: The greatest conspiracy , page 8

privacy

Pages: << 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 16 times

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:08 PM by undo

reply to post by newworld

so is it the easy way out if you create a new thing from other things? like you make an aspirin from combining chemicals? is it taking the easy way out if you attend a course on artificial insemination, rather than having a baby via natural childbirth and intercourse?

i don't get the scientific basis for your reference to "gods" or whatever, being the easy way out! how do you know it was easy?

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:12 PM by undo

reply to post by Pauligirl

i would but i can't find it now. i found it originally over 5 years ago and posted it on a different forum i can't remember the name of now. i think it was theologyweb.com. but they had to change servers and when they did, most of the old posts were lost.

let's put it this way. they said the reason they didn't date everything was because, 1) it was already predated , 2) they knew what to expect in the strata and 3) they couldn't afford to date everything as they needed more funding and manpower, both of which were woefully absent!

now that i think about it, it sounds like it may have been a lab connected to an university

[edit on 4-10-2009 by undo]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:18 PM by jokei

Originally posted by sisgood
reply to post by VitalOverdose

Yes it is known as the THEORY of evolution but it is taught in schools as the only thing that makes sense!
Most people I encounter treat it as a LAW.

Clearly it is not the only THEORY

taught in schools as there is so much controversy in the U.S. over the whole Creationist/Evolution/Intelligent Design debate, so that's not a correct point.

Most people you encounter? Why relevant, I think you need to further elaborate upon that for it to be relevant to this discussion.

Personally I believe in evolution, I just don't think that science has managed to catalogue or research it adequately yet - and I don't think it will until we stop using science to find better ways to kill each other.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:26 PM by debunky

Originally posted by spy66
Newton and Einstein and many other great scientists believed in a creator. And still they did great things.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

... so we should teach our kids that according to Newton the world will not end before 2060?

Also let's not forget that Newton is responsible for millions of deaths with his F=m*a nonsense

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:34 PM by spy66

Originally posted by debunky

Originally posted by spy66
Newton and Einstein and many other great scientists believed in a creator. And still they did great things.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

... so we should teach our kids that according to Newton the world will not end before 2060?

Also let's not forget that Newton is responsible for millions of deaths with his F=m*a nonsense

Well i didn't say he was God

And i didn't say that he didn't make mistakes. Humans always have and always will make mistakes and wrong judgements. That's all part of being a human.

And by the way you should learn how to understand what you read. Newton never say that the world will end in 2060. Try again. And why did he say that the world would at least last until 2060. Well it was because we should stop predicting the end all the time.

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:46 PM by nomorecruelty

Think the Grand Canyon couldn't have been formed in 40 days? Check out this footage from England, filmed in July of this year - they only received three inches of rain in 24 hours.

And wah lah.......... what a nice lit'l "hole" that is there now.

Link

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 01:47 PM by undo

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
If you need "scientific" proof that the Bible is accurate, you can also view this video -

Again, I would ask you to debunk it, but it can't be.

Link

nice, will have to research this. i like the fact they found a sphinx! proves egyptian connection.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:01 PM by woodwardjnr

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
Think the Grand Canyon couldn't have been formed in 40 days? Check out this footage from England, filmed in July of this year - they only received three inches of rain in 24 hours.

And wah lah.......... what a nice lit'l "hole" that is there now.

Link

I take it you've never been to the Grand Canyon

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:02 PM by kleverone

I think the world would be a lot better place if we all just said "we don't really know, lets all try and figure this out together as objectively as possible".

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:09 PM by nomorecruelty

reply to post by woodwardjnr

No, I haven't but that doesn't mean forty days of continuous rain did not create it.

This second line doesn't make this any less of a one liner.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:10 PM by nomorecruelty

Originally posted by kleverone
I think the world would be a lot better place if we all just said "we don't really know, lets all try and figure this out together as objectively as possible".

To a degree, I agree.

We know as much as the Bible tells us - it's kind of like a
movie trailer - we won't know the entire storyline until we
are actually seeing it in person.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:13 PM by nomorecruelty

reply to post by undo

That's just one piece of evidence from the Bible - but a good solid one for the peeps that want to cry 'foul'.

It is amazing that hundreds of prophecies have thus far been fulfilled, with more to come that will be filled as well with 100% accuracy - yet there are still scoffers.

Leaves me scratching my head sometimes.

But then I remember that even in Jesus' days, there were those that scoffed against Him - while standing there watching the miracles happen before their very eyes.

Mankind is a finicky kind of creature, isn't he.

Anyone interested in Biblical arch. can take their pick
on videos -
Here

[edit on 4-10-2009 by nomorecruelty]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:19 PM by LiquidMirage

Originally posted by sisgood
... You were doing pretty well until you mentioned taller humans.
Humans today, as a rule, get better nutrition. Better nutrition makes humans taller because we have more resources to grow with.

Children who do not get good nutrition have stunted growth.

You are exactly right! Just compare the average heights of South Koreans to the average height of North Koreans who typically get much less food then their southern counterparts. The North Koreans are are shorter and thinner.

Evolution didn't do that. Access to proper and nutrition did!

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:21 PM by woodwardjnr

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
reply to post by undo

That's just one piece of evidence from the Bible - but a good solid one for the peeps that want to cry 'foul'.

It is amazing that hundreds of prophecies have thus far been fulfilled, with more to come that will be filled as well with 100% accuracy - yet there are still scoffers.

Leaves me scratching my head sometimes.

But then I remember that even in Jesus' days, there were those that scoffed against Him - while standing there watching the miracles happen before their very eyes.

Mankind is a finicky kind of creature, isn't he.

Anyone interested in Biblical arch. can take their pick
on videos -
Here

[edit on 4-10-2009 by nomorecruelty]

Can you enlighten me on the prophecies from the Bible that have come true, i would be interested to know

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:21 PM by Pauligirl

Originally posted by undo
reply to post by Pauligirl

i would but i can't find it now. i found it originally over 5 years ago and posted it on a different forum i can't remember the name of now. i think it was theologyweb.com. but they had to change servers and when they did, most of the old posts were lost.

let's put it this way. they said the reason they didn't date everything was because, 1) it was already predated , 2) they knew what to expect in the strata and 3) they couldn't afford to date everything as they needed more funding and manpower, both of which were woefully absent!

now that i think about it, it sounds like it may have been a lab connected to an university

[edit on 4-10-2009 by undo]

Well, if it came from theologyweb.com, then we have a problem. I'd like to see where someone who actually does this kind of work say that they just toss things out, not a statement from someone who thinks that is what happens.

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:33 PM by Pauligirl

Originally posted by nomorecruelty
Think the Grand Canyon couldn't have been formed in 40 days? Check out this footage from England, filmed in July of this year - they only received three inches of rain in 24 hours.

And wah lah.......... what a nice lit'l "hole" that is there now.

Link

And that rain fell on nice soft plowed farmland.

The Geology of the Grand Canyon
www.bobspixels.com...

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:34 PM by Welfhard

reply to post by John Matrix

Like it or not friends, if you teach people from the time they are children that they are a product of natural processes, survival of the fittest, mutations leading to speciations, etc. and not the result of divine creation with divine purpose to their lives......you destroy moral restraints and moral purpose.

Evolution ideology has in fact fanned the flames of racism and moral decline:

Evolution = Everyone does right in their own eyes.

I don't know what you base your conclusion on but it's wrong all the same, "like it or not".

A common criticism of atheists is that they have no values, no moral compass, and a philosophy of "if it feels good, do it." But is that really borne out by the evidence? And, if not, where does their moral compass come from?

www.youtube.com... (because the embed isn't working)

You can pretend that evolution destroys morality and corrupts minds but that'll never become true just because you want it to be. Not only do the numbers show that people who believe in evolution are not corrupted, it shows that the people who believe in the christian god to be more corrupt than the godless.

Pull your head out of the sand.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Welfhard]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:36 PM by nomorecruelty

reply to post by woodwardjnr

You can start on Google - different sites have different ones
listed - I'm sure there's one online that lists them all - if I run
across it, I'll post it.

This site lists alot though -

Link

And this site also has quite a few listed out by title

Link

[edit on 4-10-2009 by nomorecruelty]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 02:47 PM by nomorecruelty

There are millions of people that are 'nice' people - they help others, don't steal, don't cheat on their taxes.........

Does that make them moral according to the Scriptures?

No.

It would make them worldly moral.

Morally speaking, in the Bible, is to accept Jesus -
not reject Him.

The Bible instructs us to be "in" the world, but not "of" it.

Worldly - rejects Jesus.
Morally - accepts Jesus.

John 15:19
"If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.

Ex: People at your workplace routinely clock out
an hour early at the end of the day without the
boss knowing.

You work in the same office but choose to not participate
in this behavior.

You would be "in" the world, but choosing to not be "of" it.

"God is asking all of us to walk a very fine line between being actively and properly involved "in" the world so we can reach and help other people - but at the same time making sure that we do not fall too deep and too far into the world where we then start to fall into the actual evil, depravity and corruptness of this world."
Source

[edit on 4-10-2009 by nomorecruelty]

[edit on 4-10-2009 by nomorecruelty]

reply posted on 4-10-2009 @ 03:04 PM by Welfhard

reply to post by nomorecruelty

Does that make them moral according to the Scriptures?

Does it really matter?

It would seem odd that in countries that have higher rates of Jesus rejection, peace, contentedness, wages and health are all higher than very religious/christian countries whilst simultaneously having lower crime.

What the statistics show is that religion and religious thought, specifically christian thought, are a detriment to society regardless of whether or not you percieve a dual moral standard.

One thing we know is that morals are not unique to humans at all. Any animal with a social framework has them. Animals get a bad rap as being described as "animalistic" as if they were savage bests when in reality they can be as altruistic as we can be. Morality is built into us as social animals, it doesn't come from holy books or churches.

As I understand things, Christians believe that all that matters is the next life, not this one, hence "Be in the world not of it." Christians have the innate morals but alter them with their religious thought.

The irreligious aren't so concerned with the 'after death' problem but rather their own lives and as such just stick with the morals they have to begin with.

Nature gave rise to these morals and they seem to do a good job because the people without the religious thought are generally more moral. This gets reflected throughout the statistics, for example the proportion of Americas christians in prison is higher than that of the proportion of atheists in prison or divorce rates.

However, despite this very clear trend, you still get people like John Matrix preaching that evolution (because as he sees things, evolution is atheistic) leads to moral decline as I quoted which is the opposite of what we do find.

[edit on 4-10-2009 by Welfhard]