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.

 

ok creationists answer me this please

page: 2
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
Etc....Or Im wrong.. What is for sure, is that iwe are approaching the Age of the Water Bearer, the age of the destroyer, and last time was 6500 years ago in the Flood of Noa,
[edit on 23/4/2010 by ChemBreather]


The last Age of the water bearer (Aquarius) wasn't 6500 years ago it was over 26,000 years ago.

Zodiac "Ages"




posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:40 PM
link   
reply to post by DISRAELI
 


Reply to post by DISRAELI

We share your opinion.

Both story and theory have not in anyway something what makes it impossible to exist together.

Reply to post by Rockstrongo37



. If there were truly missing links like these in the evolutionary stages, we would be seeing millions of fossils around the world and not just these single or handfull of skeletons.


Here is where you are wrong.( no offense ) You see, there are no such things as missing links. Every single fossil was a species fully formed and complete.
A fossil is on it's own already a little miracle. Changes are extremely small for a dead animal to become fossilised. Conditions got to be just right.



[edit on 4/23/2010 by Sinter Klaas]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 03:51 PM
link   
@ the OP.

Why do you ask this question ?

You ask a question to creationists to debunk early humanoids fossils.
You say bible texts are not welcome.
You ask for them not curse and start yelling.

I'll give you my two cents on why I don't get you.

A creationist is usually religious. ( Not always ) You ask no bible quotes yet religion is based on those.
You will never be able to debunk faith. Just because that's what it is faith.

Even science can't give you a 100 % correct answer to your question.

Usually asking anything on this topic will end up in mayhem on a fundamental scale.

What is it where you are looking for? What makes you ask this question ?



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:02 PM
link   
Well, they could be different versions of humans before the creator(s) got the correct sequence needed for whatever we were needed for. They could also be the result of humans mating with the creator(s).



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:09 PM
link   
It would be called "natural selection" and "micro-evolution" these two well documented observed scientific occurances fit perfectly within the Biblical framework. There is no reason to think that a human in our modern world would look like a human from 6000 years ago. Natural selection gave us all the different species of dog that we have. They are all from the same "family" but each has traits condusive the their unique environment

It is no different with humans. Hence Black people and White People. Black skin is the perfect protection from the sun when you live in a place near the equator and are exposed to the sun. A pale skin person would roast and not be able to survive.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:11 PM
link   
reply to post by JPhish
 


i think the reason that there are not many bones is because the conditions for preservation was not as good as it was in the dinosaur age, i mean there are tons of fossilized dinosaurs.

it is my theory that the various acavemen died in conditions that would not preserve their bones too well, though there are some that did



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
@ the OP.

Why do you ask this question ?

You ask a question to creationists to debunk early humanoids fossils.
You say bible texts are not welcome.
You ask for them not curse and start yelling.

I'll give you my two cents on why I don't get you.

A creationist is usually religious. ( Not always ) You ask no bible quotes yet religion is based on those.
You will never be able to debunk faith. Just because that's what it is faith.

Even science can't give you a 100 % correct answer to your question.

Usually asking anything on this topic will end up in mayhem on a fundamental scale.

What is it where you are looking for? What makes you ask this question ?



ive been reading alot of threads about how evolution doesnt make sense
and all the creationists will do is quote the bible and make very few scientific s tatements, i understand thats a generalizatiin but thats also what ive noticed alot
so im not trolling or anything i just want answers

and usualy when people wuote the bible here they get in huge arguements over them and the thread loses its focus



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:31 PM
link   
All skulls of proposed "missing Links" and "ancestors" are apes. Simple as that. I'd like to turn this Q around and ask evolutionists how the heck could you believe cows came from whales?! From my point of view, evolutionists worship mother nature as they do believe in a spirit of nature that allows for animals to 'evolve' overtime.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ashanu90
 



I've been reading alot of threads about how evolution doesn't make sense
and all the creationists will do is quote the bible and make very few scientific statements, i understand that's a generalization but that's also what I've noticed alto
so I'm not trolling or anything i just want answers

and usually when people quote the bible here they get in huge arguments over them and the thread loses its focus


Well I can't argue with you on this. It's true and it really annoys the living ... out of me.

But why do you ask this question ?
You say you're an evolutionist. So you've already made up your mind.

If it helps.
You can stop trying to figure out what makes someone to deny facts in favour of an idea or story. It's impossible. Believe me I've tried myself.

PS.
A little advice .
Use a spellings check



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 05:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeltaCommando5
All skulls of proposed "missing Links" and "ancestors" are apes. Simple as that. I'd like to turn this Q around and ask evolutionists how the heck could you believe cows came from whales?! From my point of view, evolutionists worship mother nature as they do believe in a spirit of nature that allows for animals to 'evolve' overtime.

what makes you so sure of that? also who says cows evolved from whales? if your trying to knock evolution could you at least be realistic?



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 05:49 PM
link   
reply to post by Sinter Klaas
 


i ask because i want to haer the other side as well

yeah my spelling has been off lately, im not really feeling myself



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 05:51 PM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


thats great and all and i imagine well thought out, but you didnt answer the question at all



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
==>There is an incredible amount of data and evidence supporting evolution.

Meanwhile, on the creationists side... they have their stories that came from some ancient scrolls hidden in caves that were written by authors not even present during the events. Its words written within make claim of some invisible man in the sky (who was a violent raging madman and mass-murderer, but a GOOD AND RIGHTEOUS GOD, yea whatever) was showing them visions and therefore its divine and the work of god. Funny that the Bible stories somehow were already told by EARLIER CIVILIZATIONS.

So evolutionists whom are those that live in the realm of reality and common sense, are outmatched by uneducated religous followers who have the power of fairy tales and fiction on their side. Therefore, defending reality cannot win against the madness of fairy tale believers. We can only hope that they WAKE UP some day.

[edit on 23-4-2010 by Captain_Sense]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:20 PM
link   
reply to post by Captain_Sense
 


yeah im so sick of them cracking out a bible and saying well this is true because this and this and this, but they ridicule you when you tell them well science provides evidence against this and this and this, but they hold on to their belief and wlalk away learning nothing

now not all creationists are like this, some are very open to discussion
but here on ats they are few and far between

i personally take the side of evolution, athiesm, and science and i cant stand how people will take ancient superstitious man's word over science's
and then they go and say well science is wrong, science is not god,
well noone ever claimed it was god, but science is definetley not wrong
because science is the art of trying to find the truth, so how can it be wrong? but yeah people make mistakes with science, they misenterperit their findings, but thats the fault of people not science

ive ranted a little bit sorry about that star for you



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ChemBreather
 


well now thats interesting and all but you dont really take all that seriously do you?



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashanu90
neanderthal, homo erectus, homo georgicus, homo antecessor, homo sapiens idaltu, homo ergaster, homo habilis, and many more

if god or any other entity for that matter(other gods, aliens etc) made us in our current form then who are all these other guys?


Other, different creatures. Where is the problem? It doesn't say in the Bible anywhere that God made human beings to specifically look like him, it just says "likeness." A head with two eyes, four limbs, etc. That's a likeness, not a duplicate.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:40 PM
link   
personally, I'm just glad that whoever created the female of the species to look like Chembreather did so!








Joke, people



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


then why is it that thesse other guys seem to be slowly turning into us? ever so slowly they seem to be going, from ape like to more man like.
also neanderthal and another human lived side by side, the neanderthal died out, it is my theory that the other humans at that time and the neanderthals mixed genes and now you have us
anyone have any thoughts on that?

[edit on 23-4-2010 by ashanu90]



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by ashanu90
then why is it that thesse other guys seem to be slowly turning into us?
also neanderthal and another human lived side by side, the neanderthal died out, it is my theory that the other humans at that time and the neanderthals mixed genes and now you have us
anyone have any thoughts on that?


It's all part of the same thing. Mixing, creating, moving things around. It's a continuing paradox of constant change. The trick here is that every living thing has a point of view, and point of view is what allows a quantum wave function to collapse. It creates reality out of virtuality. Any kind of God would naturally want to keep that happening, because the more reality you have, the more God you have. It doesn't really matter, I guess. Because it all happens forwards and backwards in time. And as consciousness grows and life incorporates all matter in the universe (inside and out), the more it is and was and will be God.



posted on Apr, 23 2010 @ 06:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Blue Shift
 


whoa whoa whoa back up, lois this is not my batman cup
but seriously
your getting into the metaphysichal there you should save that for a philosophy, and metaphysics or whatever thread



new topics

top topics



 
2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join