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.

 

aliens vs God.........

page: 1
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 8 2003 @ 07:58 PM
link   
What is it that gets so many people interested in the beleif of "Alien life exists""and not God???

There is much more evidence in the beleif of God then there is Alien,so why all the ""lets find alien existence???

just something to think about.........


www.conspiracyarchive.com...



Although he brings a diverse array of theories from world religion and philosophy to bear on his subject everything from Hindu mythology to the warfare of St. Anthony the Great with demons religion and God in the traditional sense are conspicuously absent from his thinking and he comes down in favor of the popular modern idea that SCIENCE is the only "key" if still primitive to understanding the experiences. But, as Hiermonk Seraphim (Rose) wrote in his study of UFOs (in Orthodoxy and the Religion of the Future): "Science fiction has giving the images, evolution has produced the philosophy, and the technology of the 'space age' has supplied the plausibility for such encounters".

Rather than a boundless thirst for God, we have instead a "great thirst for contact with superior minds that will provide guidance for our poor, harrased, hectic, planet" (Jacques Vallee, quoted in ORF, p.138). Indeed Streiber is himself a fervent environmentalist with an apocaliptic sense of destruction man is bringing upon his little earth-home.

taken from the above web site...............




posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 03:38 PM
link   
can be made for the existence of intelligent life. For one thing, we have an existing, provable sample at least on one planet...i.e. us. The same cannot be said for God. The odds are in favor of there being other intelligent beings on other planets (ref the equation, etc.). The same cannot be said for God. Reliable sightings of UFOs have occurred in recent times. Most of the "reliable" sightings of God come from times when man still thought of thunder as the gods' wrath... The origin of creatures by a God is constantly being disproved (not discounted, dis-PROVED) by examples of evolution.

There is more evidence to support the idea that God does not exist. The same cannot be said for UFOs, as there is more evidence in favor of them being aliens.

Taken in total, the existence of a God is easier to disprove than the existence of aliens...



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by helen

There is much more evidence in the beleif of God then there is Alien




Theres not a single bit of evidence that supports god. god was just invented before science could explain anything, ooo theres a big yellow ball in the sky, it must be something amazing! and your saying that theres more evidence to proove he exists rather than thousands of hours of video footage of UFOs.

so wake up accept that people arnt fools anymore.



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 07:41 PM
link   
It's very hard to believe in a inmaterialistic god (meaning no evidance and no solid form),while aliens are more believable because...come on the vast universe and all.



posted on Mar, 10 2003 @ 08:39 PM
link   
Guys -
Evolution "disprove" God? Come on, think logically. First of all, "Nothing can be its own first cause."(Aquinas) If you didn't exist, could you make yourself? Can an apple create itself? I know I can't convince you of anything, but I hope this will make you think. If you're going to be absolutely certain of something, at least have something substantial supporting your convictions.
What about Thermodynamics? As far as we can tell, things don't get better - they only get worse. The universe isn't going to collapse upon itself anytime soon - in fact, its speeding up.
Also, random mutations - the motivation behind macroevolution - cannot change one species into another. When you hear "mutation," imagine a switch being flipped from the "on" to the "off" position, or vice versa. Mutations happen because the genetic code for that feature already existed in the first place - it just wasn't activated. Example: there's a tropical bird that "can" grow teeth and horns or something, I forget exactly.


How old are you anyway?


upward and onward.

[Edited on 11-3-2003 by wannabe]



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 07:27 AM
link   


Mutations happen because the genetic code for that feature already existed in the first place - it just wasn't activated. Example: there's a tropical bird that "can" grow teeth and horns or something, I forget exactly.


forgive me, but I don't think that explains mutation via radiation, in the sense that mutations can also be caused by breaking down what is there.. essentially removing parts from what already exists to form something new. Once that link in the chain is removed you have something new correct, hence ppl with no arms / legs etc... its not that its been switched, but actually removed from their DNA.

I may also be wrong, but every 'thing' on this earth does not have the same DNA does it? - when you take into account which genes are turned off or on. I do not recall hearing that a flower has exactly the same number of genes in its DNA sequence as me, just that it has some swicthed off whereas I have them switched on. If they do then I'm obviously wrong, but I didn;t think they did. Your argument implies that I share the same number of gene sequences as a flower but without some genes turned on.

I know were fairly close to a fruit fly and a mouse, but I don't think we are that similar with all things on this earth. If we are not all similar then where are the originators of the different gene sequences. I am open to evolution, but I think that maybe things could have evolved by taking things away as well as things being flipped on or off. Heck, maybe aliens are able to 'add' to the sequence for self improvement.

How about a situation whereby a gene may flip on and in doing so causes another new gene type to be formed thus adding to that sequence. Anyways, just a few thoughts running through my head.

[Edited on 11-3-2003 by phait]



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 09:52 AM
link   
"So do some research before you guys go shooting your mouths off again. How old are you anyway?"

I did not insult you, I'd appreciate the same...


Very well though, I'll elaborate on that point. In ANY religious texts, do you see mention of animals that existed before man? No, this is because religion was created by man, not handed down from some "god" on high. You will see no mention of dinosaurs, 12 foot tall killer birds, etc. What you will see, is mention of pigs, sheep, cattle, etc. as these are the animals that were familiar to the monks/priests/shamans, etc. who dictated the dogma of whatever religion they espoused.

There is a clear fossil record showing how we evolved from ape-like creatures. THIS is not mentioned in any tale of creation. THIS is how evolution disproves God, and THIS is what was meant by my arguement...Thanks.


[Edited on 11-3-2003 by Gazrok]



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 10:34 AM
link   
I always wondered if Dinosaurs were mentioned/explained in the bible, Ive never bothered reading it all myself so wouldnt have a clue.

If anyone can clarify this for me I would really appreciate it



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 12:02 PM
link   
Sorry for that demeaning comment, usually the peeps that come in here knowing everything are around 14 years old.
Ezekiel - Yes, dinosaurs are mentioned in the Bible. Read Job. Chapter 30 or 31 talks about the "Leviathan." Job mentions "Behemoth" somewhere, but I forget.
Gazrok - I don't know about other texts, but the Bible lists birds, sea creatures and land creatures as being created before man. Or were you looking for specific creatures? And I don't know much about fossil records, so I can't respond to that.
Phait - Yes, that DOES explain mutations via radiation. I've studied this for a while, I guess you haven't. You can find load of studies where scientists have done thousands of radiation tests on animals like flies (because they reproduce so quickly). Although the flies exhibited changes like more/less legs or wings, or altered maturation, the flies did not change into anything that could not be called a fly. If you can explain to me how radiation can change something from one SPECIES into another SPECIES, then shoot. (I use caps to emphasize those words)
"Your argument implies that I share the same number of gene sequences as a flower but without some genes turned on."
No, you misinterpreted my words. I tried to make it simplistic, but its hard to convey true meaning in this setting.... What I mean is that, because mutations occur within these boundaries, it is IMPOSSIBLE for something to change into another species.



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 12:15 PM
link   
The Hand of God?

www.howlinweb.com...

Is there a God? The evidence for and against


www.anthropic-principle.com...



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 12:40 PM
link   
And more...

atl-perimeter.hiexpress.com...

strange though....



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 01:17 PM
link   

wannabe
What I mean is that, because mutations occur within these boundaries, it is IMPOSSIBLE for something to change into another species.

Are you saying evolution is impossible. Evolution is not all mutations, most of it is adaptation.

If a type animal is black to begin with, and the world takes a turn, a really long ice age sets in, after millions of years would that type of animal develop a white coat (or even fur)

We humans adapt to our environment all the time, whats to say in a million years we won't look different.



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 01:32 PM
link   
"Chapter 30 or 31 talks about the "Leviathan." Job mentions "Behemoth" somewhere, but I forget." the words Leviathan and Behemoth simply mean "large creature", and in most cases, referred to whales, but sometimes to demonic creatures. Nowhere, will you see a description of dinosaurs in the bible, or other ancient religious texts for that matter. The use of "Dragon" is actually the closest, description-wise. If we were such an important creation though...how come we weren't created until way after these creatures? Sorry, it just doesn't make sense at all.

As far as evolution goes, just look at vestigal tails in some humans, vestigal leg-bones in whales (left over from when they returned to the sea from land orignally), and evolution can easily be seen... Heck, just look at your fingernails, and think back to when they were more like claws.



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 09:48 PM
link   
Are you serious? Is that what those words meant in the original Hebrew? Huh. that's interesting. So what is Job referring to, then, when it compares the tail of the Behemoth to a tree? Maybe "large creature" is what they called those "large creatures."
And I don't know about whales, but aren't "vestigal tails" just an extension or defect related to spine formation? I mean, the first thing we develop is a brain and a spine - to put it simply, we all have "tails" before we're born. But vestigal legs in whales? I don't have an answer.
I'm gonna get philosophical for a moment - if we evolved from animals, which operate on instinct, then how do you explain our consciousness? (reason)

JOEHAYNER -
You say that evolution is a demonstrated fact, but you offer no evidence. How is "adaptation" proof for macroevolution? Adaptation is only the alteration of pre-existing variables within a certain animal. I'll say it one more time: An animal can adapt into a different version of that same animal, but it CANNOT become a complete different kind of animal. I.E., a cat can develop into a small, large, fast, slow, hairy or hairless cat(and they have), but its genes prevent it from developing characteristics of a dog.
If you feel that I am still in error, please respond with some kind of support for your argument.


upward and onward.



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 09:49 PM
link   
By the way, if you guys want to make a lot of money, there's an organization offering 50,000 or so to someone who can demonstrate how to create life using the "basic elements" present in the supposed primordial ooze. Email me for details.



posted on Mar, 11 2003 @ 10:28 PM
link   
well since you asked...........evolution based on Darwin............


www.tdtone.org...


islamicweb.com...



www.geocities.com...



[Edited on 12-3-2003 by helen]

[Edited on 12-3-2003 by helen]



posted on Mar, 12 2003 @ 05:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spinster

Theres not a single bit of evidence that supports god. god was just invented before science could explain anything, ooo theres a big yellow ball in the sky, it must be something amazing! and your saying that theres more evidence to proove he exists rather than thousands of hours of video footage of UFOs.

so wake up accept that people arnt fools anymore.


God is like the wind. You can't see it/Him, but you can see what he's doing.



posted on Mar, 12 2003 @ 11:54 AM
link   
"Are you serious? Is that what those words meant in the original Hebrew? Huh. that's interesting. So what is Job referring to, then, when it compares the tail of the Behemoth to a tree?"

Didn't mean it as a literal translation, no. But, likewise, are you inferring that it means "dinosaur" in Hebrew? Just pointing out that some info can be lost in the translation, as well as the translator inferring the meaning of the original text. My point was more to the effect of showing that though dinosaurs ruled far longer than man, thus must have been pretty special to God, it's funny that there is no specific mention of them in the Bible, which is presumably, authored by God, though written by man...

As for the "legs" in whales...here's just a sample of info on this...

"Confirmation:
Probably the most well known case of atavism is found in the whales. According to the standard phylogenetic tree, whales are known to be the descendants of terrestrial mammals that had hindlimbs. Thus, we expect the possibility that rare mutant whales might occasionally develop atavistic hindlimbs. In fact, there are many cases where whales have been found with rudimentary atavistic hindlimbs in the wild (for reviews see Berzin 1972, pp. 65-67 and Hall 1984, pp. 90-93). Hindlimbs have been found in baleen whales (Sleptsov 1939), humpback whales (Andrews 1921) and in many specimens of sperm whales (Abel 1908; Berzin 1972, p. 66; Nemoto 1963; Ogawa and Kamiya 1957; Zembskii and Berzin 1961). Most of these examples are of whales with femurs, tibia, and fibulae; however, some even include feet with complete digits.

Many other famous examples of atavisms exist, including (1) rare formation of extra toes (2nd and 4th digits) in horses, similar to what is seen in the archaic horses Mesohippus and Merychippus, (2) atavistic thigh muscles in Passeriform birds and sparrows, (3) hyoid muscles in dogs, (4) wings in earwigs (normally wingless), (5) atavistic fibulae in birds (the fibulae are normally extremely reduced), (6) extra toes in guinea pigs and salamanders, (6) the atavistic dew claw in many dog breeds, and (7) various atavisms in humans (one described in detail below) (Hall 1984)."



posted on Mar, 12 2003 @ 02:52 PM
link   
"As for the "legs" in whales...here's just a sample of info on this..."
Thanks gazrok, i wasn't aware of that. Something to think about...
And as far as the creation account in Genesis - if you read it in the context of a 7-day creation, then it fits just fine. And in response to your earlier comment, wouldn't you want to make the earth a complete environment before creating humans? Doesn't it make sense?

But back to the original discussion-
What proof do you chaps have in support of the existence of aliens? Internet information aside, do any of you have hard evidence? (devil's advocate)

Based on mere physical evidence, I admit that its hard to demonstrate the existence of a being who exists outside of space and time (since he created them). But how many of you can look at the beginning of the universe and honestly believe that it created itself?



posted on Mar, 12 2003 @ 06:01 PM
link   
How do you know that "God" didn't come out of nowhere. Or even better, what did "god" come from or what created "god". There has to be a beginning of everything. You can't just say "OH, "God" was just in a void and always existed in nothingness. This is hard to believe.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join