evolution beats creationism 10 to 3 and thats generous

Originally posted by SaturnFX


Day 7, some guy named Lord (in hebrew, Lord was the lord of the land, the overlord) came along and made Adam/Eve.

[edit on 12-3-2010 by SaturnFX]

i wasn't even aware of this other guy quite an interesting thing yes. will you explain more?

Science the great leveler of all , the end all..... or so we thought. "Piltdown man" brings all this talk of evol-ution into doubt. What is to stop these "Scientists" from creating forgeries and piecing together human bones with apes for the sole purpose of sticking it to religion while destroying true scientific method? Or misidentifying extinct species of monkeys for that same goal , all in their zealousness to prove their is no "Supreme". I for one stand on the picket fence but have one foot clearly on creation's side. I find evol-ution nihilistic and severely sterile. Call it left of right or vice versa.

Here's my reason. All these evol-ved creatures would all need common ancestors. How did these grandpapi/mami of all come to be , who did they evolve from? Question , why hasn't the Coelacanth evolved in 400 million years and yet Humans supposedly made leaps and bounds in 60 million years , doesn't all life evolve? 400 million years is quite a long time to remain stagnant.

Show me an organism that has evolved naturally without any human tinkering in the last ten thousand years , make me a believer.Does evolution go backwards e.i devol-ution? I see it everyday in my own species

well here is some simple logic
humans havent evolved much further because we don't need to
we don't have wings because we have airplanes
we dont have fins and gills because we have submarines and boats

as for evolutionists piecing bones together and making forgeries that is crazy whats the point in that and why do even think that?

as technology advances we change less and less physichally but more mentaly

it's true that in a way we have deolved our eyesight and hearing has been greatly redused throughout the years but heres a secret we don't need great eyesight or hearing anymore we have technology to make up for that so in a way tech is also a part of our evolving selves

who needs a ton of muscle to hurl a spear at a gazelle? all you need is enough muscle to hold your ground and enough muscle in a finger to pull a trigger and shoot it

logic

reply to post by ashanu90

as for evolutionists piecing bones together and making forgeries that is crazy whats the point in that and why do even think that?

Again , may I refer to Piltdown Man?!

The point being they wanted to find a missing link so badly , they made one up.

Here's another one , before , scientists used to have t-rex standing on it's two legs and using it' tail for support kinda like a kangaroo posture.

Then someone realized this may have broken t-rex's back so now we have t-rex in a more birdlike posture with the tail sticking out and used for balance and not support as it was previously reconstructed. So which is it? Does rex have a kangaroo posture or a blackbird posture.

Another mistake in anatomy that was held as fact until that was overturned.

Originally posted by De La Valletta
Science the great leveler of all , the end all..... or so we thought. "Piltdown man" brings all this talk of evol-ution into doubt. What is to stop these "Scientists" from creating forgeries and piecing together human bones with apes for the sole purpose of sticking it to religion while destroying true scientific method? Or misidentifying extinct species of monkeys for that same goal , all in their zealousness to prove their is no "Supreme".

Other scientists. it certainly wasn't any religious organization that exposed the hoaxes; it was scientists using scientific method and examination that proved these cases false. In so doing they actually strengthened the case for evolution, just as replacing a weak link strengthens the chain.

Same with your t-rex example. The assumed posture was wrong; it was then corrected. I'm not sure how you're so deeply confused by this idea.

I for one stand on the picket fence but have one foot clearly on creation's side. I find evol-ution nihilistic and severely sterile. Call it left of right or vice versa.

You want nihilism? Okay. You're born into a cursed, doomed existence because of some fruit a long, long, long-dead ancestor of yours ate. because of this fruit, you will suffer pain and toil, your mother endured agony to queeze you out, and you and everyone you know will die, almost always before they fulfil whatever they regard as their grand scheme in life. After you die, you will be thrown into a pit of fire, hatred, and gnashing teeth, where you will wail in agony and knowledge that your creator detests you, for all eternity

But there's an out! Your creator had a kid. If you worship this kid just right, you will still suffer untold agonies and death, but you will be spared the eternal torment, and will instead be granted a life of eternal worshipful servitude to your creator.

Unfortunately nobody can quite agree as to how this creator's kid should be properly worshiped! So odds are, you will be born into a painful, detestable life, laboring under a crime committed by your ancestors, will die unfulfilled, and with all great probability, be rewarded for it with an eternity of unimaginable pain and suffering.

Maybe the idea that when you die, you're dead is a bit nihilistic. But compared to Christianity's view of the situation, it's freaking sunshine and daffodils

Here's my reason. All these evol-ved creatures would all need common ancestors. How did these grandpapi/mami of all come to be , who did they evolve from?

Good question, but the origin of life is not covered in evolution; obviously life has to be a preexisting condition before evolution can kick in. You want abiogenesis, two doors down.

Question , why hasn't the Coelacanth evolved in 400 million years and yet Humans supposedly made leaps and bounds in 60 million years , doesn't all life evolve? 400 million years is quite a long time to remain stagnant.

All life does evolve; just not at a set pace. Some creatures are under no selective pressure, and thus their "evolution" consists primarily of odd genetic drift. others are under strong selective pressure, and so mutations are either rapidly encouraged or rapidly discouraged.

Do keep in mind though, that creatures like the coelocanth aren't the same as their 400 million year old representatives. "living fossil" is, like "transitional species" a non-scientific boondoggle that seems to exist only to confuse people. its changes may be minor, depending on how you measure, but they're there.

Show me an organism that has evolved naturally without any human tinkering in the last ten thousand years , make me a believer.

Why discount human tinkering? You realize that selective breeding could not function unless the mechanisms for mutation, selection, and evolution were already in place, don't you? We wouldn't have chihuahuas if evolution didn't exist - we'd just have wolves that are very puzzled as to why we want them to be small and bugeyed.

There's also the trouble that for the last 9,900 years, humans just haven't been paying that much damn attention.

next question, exactly how much evolution do you want?

Does evolution go backwards e.i devol-ution? I see it everyday in my own species

Define "backwards" - a species does not regress to its ancestral species, but it can occasionally display atavisms - such as dolphins with hind flippers, eyeless cave fish that have eyes, that sort of thing

[edit on 15-3-2010 by TheWalkingFox]

[edit on 15-3-2010 by TheWalkingFox]

Hello TheWalkinFox,
Reply to your Q:

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by edmc^2

 

As I asked someone else on another thread - why the deception, why the metaphor? If this supreme being wanted its new favorite primates to know how it created them and the entire universe, why tell them it happened in "days"? Even if trying to keep it to human conception ("Billions" is a really big number that most people can only comprehend in an abstract fashion, after all) then wouldn't "years" or even "ages" or "lifetimes" have been a better choice of word? Why days?

No deception here neither in an abstract fashion as you put it. On the contrary, it's very elegant the way the writer of Genesis put it. You see the holy writings are full of gems - only need to do is dig a little bit deeper to get the full sense of it. Why even Jesus used illustrations and metaphors to get his audience to ponder and think about what he said. Otherwise people will become lazy and will not get the full benefit of finding the gems hidden in his words. So back to your question, why not use 'years, ages or lifetime? Because the idea that was being conveyed by the writer and by the author (God) was the 'DAY' of creation, a ‘day’ (time) when the Creator put into action his plan for the ages, a 'DAY' when the sons of God shout for joy for all the glory of his creations (Job 38). It also of interest to note that even though the author of the bible is Jehovah/Yahweh he let the writers put it down in writing based on their own understanding and experiences and way of writing. Not being dogmatic, I don’t know if Moses had a concept of what is ‘billions and billions of years’. But let’s put your idea to a test to see how it comes out.
“…then there was morning and evening a first day” to “…there there was a lifetime”, “…then there was billions and billions of years passed” or “…then there was ages” “…after ages”. If you were given the chance to write it down how would you put it in its simplest yet elegant form?
Here’s a comment from a geologist, please let me know if you disagree with his statement:

“If I as a geologist were called upon to explain briefly our modern ideas of the origin of the earth and the development of life on it to a simple, pastoral people, such as the tribes to whom the Book of Genesis was addressed, I could hardly do better than follow rather closely much of the language of the first chapter of Genesis.”—Geologist Wallace Pratt.”

And here are some questions to ponder upon:
Does it not seem to you that life on earth, which came about as described in the Genesis account, was made to be enjoyed? Did you ever wake up on a sunny day, breathe in the fresh air, and feel glad to be alive? Perhaps you took a walk in a garden and enjoyed the beauty and scent of the flowers. Or you might have walked in an orchard and picked some delicious fruit. Such delights would be impossible were it not for the following: (1) earth’s abundant water, (2) the correct amount of heat and light from the sun, (3) our atmosphere, with its right mix of gases, and (4) fertile land.


[edit on 15-3-2010 by edmc^2]

Originally posted by edmc^2
Hello TheWalkinFox,
Reply to your Q:

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox
reply to post by edmc^2

 

And here are some questions to ponder upon:
Does it not seem to you that life on earth, which came about as described in the Genesis account, was made to be enjoyed? Did you ever wake up on a sunny day, breathe in the fresh air, and feel glad to be alive? Perhaps you took a walk in a garden and enjoyed the beauty and scent of the flowers. Or you might have walked in an orchard and picked some delicious fruit. Such delights would be impossible were it not for the following: (1) earth’s abundant water, (2) the correct amount of heat and light from the sun, (3) our atmosphere, with its right mix of gases, and (4) fertile land.


[edit on 15-3-2010 by edmc^2]

hmm earth being the in the right position? right amount of water? atmosphere?
allow me to explain out of the 9 (apparently 8 now) planets one of them had to be the third rock from the sun the same would happen if mars was in uor place and we were in theirs right now the martians would be asking the same questions about their gods/religions and what not.
since we are in the right position from the sun we get just enough heat/gravity/other forces for all these things to occur did you know the moon was once part of the earth? long ago before the dinosaurs an asteroid hit the earth and separated two parts of the planet the other smaller part became our moon. also i stated before we know the stars are much older thatn the earth, as are lots of galaxies and other natural things in the universe. did you know there is a huge black hole in the center of our galaxy? its much older than us. have you noticed were on the outside fringe of our galaxy but there are other solar systems further out than us? meaning that they are older than ours. look at the flow of our galaxy or any galaxy they go in a circular or spiral pattern. this means the gasses are moving with the gravity of the center of them and as i've stated before we can tell how old certain solar sytems are by looking at how far away they are from the center. i'm sorry for the rant but i had an add moment and a huge flow of ideas

Originally posted by De La Valletta
reply to post by ashanu90

 

as for evolutionists piecing bones together and making forgeries that is crazy whats the point in that and why do even think that?

Again , may I refer to Piltdown Man?!

The point being they wanted to find a missing link so badly , they made one up.

Here's another one , before , scientists used to have t-rex standing on it's two legs and using it' tail for support kinda like a kangaroo posture.

Then someone realized this may have broken t-rex's back so now we have t-rex in a more birdlike posture with the tail sticking out and used for balance and not support as it was previously reconstructed. So which is it? Does rex have a kangaroo posture or a blackbird posture.

Another mistake in anatomy that was held as fact until that was overturned.

maybe they did make one up but those were hoaxers not the majority of the scientific community should i remind you of the shroud of thruth? you know jesus's supposed burial sheets with his imprent on it, it was later found out to be a hoax so with your logic since an evolutipnist can hoax that and disprove evolution then a theist can hoax and disprove religion. thank you come again

Originally posted by TheWalkingFox

Originally posted by De La Valletta
.

You want nihilism? Okay. You're born into a cursed, doomed existence because of some fruit a long, long, long-dead ancestor of yours ate. because of this fruit, you will suffer pain and toil, your mother endured agony to queeze you out, and you and everyone you know will die, almost always before they fulfil whatever they regard as their grand scheme in life. After you die, you will be thrown into a pit of fire, hatred, and gnashing teeth, where you will wail in agony and knowledge that your creator detests you, for all eternity

But there's an out! Your creator had a kid. If you worship this kid just right, you will still suffer untold agonies and death, but you will be spared the eternal torment, and will instead be granted a life of eternal worshipful servitude to your creator.

Unfortunately nobody can quite agree as to how this creator's kid should be properly worshiped! So odds are, you will be born into a painful, detestable life, laboring under a crime committed by your ancestors, will die unfulfilled, and with all great probability, be rewarded for it with an eternity of unimaginable pain and suffering.

Maybe the idea that when you die, you're dead is a bit nihilistic. But compared to Christianity's view of the situation, it's freaking sunshine and daffodils

THANK YOU!!

i've been trying to argue this for a long time but never had the words for it truly you sir are a warrior of words

reply to post by ashanu90


Actually I watched a very interesting show on the Shroud of Turin and it turns out that the area where they took the sample from was not representative of the whole Shroud. Instead, that area looks like it was rewoven sometime in the 16th or 17th century. One of the researchers who originally dated the Shroud wrote a paper on it right before he died. It's off-topic, but I thought I'd throw it out there, since it also shows that scientists are willing to admit they are wrong, even in cases where religion is involved.

reply to post by Xcalibur254


??? i don't think so. even though if what your saying is true that doesn't mean that the shroud is the real deal you know

[edit on 15-3-2010 by ashanu90]

You guys here's a quote from the most intelligent one of ya.

"There are only two things I know of, that go to infinity. The universe and
the stupidity of man. I'm not quite sure about the universe."
Albert Einstien

You wouldn't even have your Science, or your labs or your pointed heads for that matter if it weren't for God and the Bible. The Bible is what got science going in the first place kids.

This very soon won't even be debatable. The rise in quakes recently is nothing compared to what is do to come upon this world as you sit in front of your computers and mock the creator for not being your" genie in a bottle." Scouffing at the truth of his word as if you people know something.
You don't even know the first thing about life.
That it is God given, it is a gift that most of you have taken for granted .

It really dosn't even bother me at all either. I don't care, I don't have to.
Just you need to stop try'in to get the young impressionables to buy into
your B.S. Cause that's just come'in off a lil pedo if you ask me.

reply to post by randyvs


The Greeks, the Egyptians, the Sumerians, The Chinese, the Romans, and many other cultures were all doing science long before 70 AD. So, no the Bible did not start science. The Torah didn't either. As long as civilization has been around Man has been doing science.

Originally posted by edmc^2
quote]Originally posted by ashanu90


But before I begin, let me clarify somethings in the bible that led others to the wrong conclusion.
The word 'day' mentioned in Genesis 1 does NOT necessarily mean a 24 hr day as some believe nor a 1000 years each day. No it's longer than that – millenniums and millenniums. Also, the Genesis account was written from the perspective of a human being on earth. So the things that Moses wrote was from his perspective. I'll also show you that the things he wrote are scientific even though he didn't have the instruments like we have today (Q: did he just made up the events he wrote or someone provided it to him, someone with the knowledge of space and time?)

so if that's the case then explain this;

Adam was made on the sixth day (Genesis 1:26-31) which was supposedly thousand of years long. This was followed by the 7th day which was also thousands of years long. Following the 7th day, Adam fell into sin and was expelled from the Garden. This would mean Adam lived thousands of years, which is false, since he died at age 930 (Genesis 5:5).

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by randyvs

 

The Greeks, the Egyptians, the Sumerians, The Chinese, the Romans, and many other cultures were all doing science long before 70 AD. So, no the Bible did not start science. The Torah didn't either. As long as civilization has been around Man has been doing science.

thank you!! excellent point
and if i'm not mistaken the sumerian civilization had started long before theists believed creation started.

Originally posted by randyvs

You guys here's a quote from the most intelligent one of ya.

"There are only two things I know of, that go to infinity. The universe and
the stupidity of man. I'm not quite sure about the universe."
Albert Einstien

You wouldn't even have your Science, or your labs or your pointed heads for that matter if it weren't for God and the Bible. The Bible is what got science going in the first place kids.

This very soon won't even be debatable. The rise in quakes recently is nothing compared to what is do to come upon this world as you sit in front of your computers and mock the creator for not being your" genie in a bottle." Scouffing at the truth of his word as if you people know something.
You don't even know the first thing about life.
That it is God given, it is a gift that most of you have taken for granted .

It really dosn't even bother me at all either. I don't care, I don't have to.
Just you need to stop try'in to get the young impressionables to buy into
your B.S. Cause that's just come'in off a lil pedo if you ask me.

i find that quite immature and backwards randys perhaps you should watch some cosmos or go on youtube and watch the internet where religions come to die

reply to post by ashanu90


I'm just saying what's been reported. Even if it were to be dated to the first century AD it still wouldn't prove it was the burial shroud of Jesus. I can't find the article he published, but here is an article talking about it in the Telegraph.

heres an interesting piece of an artical i was reading
for the full article click here www.theonion.com...

Historians believe that, immediately following the biblical event, Sumerian witnesses returned to the city of Eridu, a bustling metropolis built 1,500 years before God called for the appearance of dry land, to discuss the new development. According to records, Sumerian farmers, priests, and civic administrators were not only befuddled, but also took issue with the face of God moving across the water, saying that He scared away those who were traveling to Mesopotamia to participate in their vast and intricate trade system.

Moreover, the Sumerians were taken aback by the creation of the same animals and herb-yielding seeds that they had been domesticating and cultivating for hundreds of generations.

"The Sumerian people must have found God's making of heaven and earth in the middle of their well-established society to be more of an annoyance than anything else," said Paul Helund, ancient history professor at Cornell University. "If what the pictographs indicate are true, His loud voice interrupted their ancient prayer rituals for an entire week."

According to the cuneiform tablets, Sumerians found God's most puzzling act to be the creation from dust of the first two human beings.

"These two people made in his image do not know how to communicate, lack skills in both mathematics and farming, and have the intellectual capacity of an infant," one Sumerian philosopher wrote. "They must be the creation of a complete idiot."

a bit satyrical and maybe offensive to somebody but the point remains quite valid

A picture says a thousand words!

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/2c4fffe02516.jpg[/atsimg]