Debunk evolution once and for all, page 3
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 13 times


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 01:49 AM by lestweforget
reply to post by SaturnFX


I can put it even simpler,what planet are you from?
What evidence can you provide that there is any change
in human form or human nature since recorded history?
We dont have to change any thing we are a perfect
creation and if you cant appreciate this fact i sympathise
with you. Phisically, apart from flying what more could we
possibly hope to acheive?


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 01:54 AM by oozyism
reply to post by SaturnFX



computers evolve based on necessity, but they lack the self replicating and mutations to evolve on their own...we dont..everytime you see a mutation in a human being, that is proof enough..eventually someone will be born with some really beneficial attribute as a random mutation and will perhaps breed, spreading the mutation/attribute further and voila, a new chapter in the history of humanity.


I think the point I'm trying to make is hard to put on words, rather I need much more thinking in how to put it on words and destroy any barriers which may exist that would make it hard for others to understand.

I will give it another try.

See if you put yourself in a scenario where there is no human beings around, and only technology, and fossils of technology (rubbish) exists. Then from that point of view put your self in an ignorant position, that you don't know human beings made technology or at least won't believe it. From there on create a theory similar to evolution and see if it fits and tags along the current theory of evolution in regards to humans and biological beings as a whole.

The idea that computer don't replicate therefore can't be compared to technology is mute, because we can give computers the coding necessary for it to replicate, just because we are not that advanced yet doesn't mean it is false.

I hope that gives a little easier to understand interpretation of what I'm trying to point out.


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 01:54 AM by seagrass
reply to post by rogerstigers

Honestly questioning?
seems like it if one knows truth it is simply there. Knowing. Why question it? Questioning only brings tests. Tests can be difficult. Tests can be unnecessary. Truth comes from within they say.


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:00 AM by rogerstigers
Originally posted by seagrass
reply to post by rogerstigers

Honestly questioning?
seems like it if one knows truth it is simply there. Knowing. Why question it? Questioning only brings tests. Tests can be difficult. Tests can be unnecessary. Truth comes from within they say.


Touche. Still, acceptance without questioning can open one to being lied to. Balance in all things, I suppose.


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:04 AM by seagrass
Originally posted by rogerstigers
Originally posted by seagrass
reply to post by rogerstigers

Honestly questioning?
seems like it if one knows truth it is simply there. Knowing. Why question it? Questioning only brings tests. Tests can be difficult. Tests can be unnecessary. Truth comes from within they say.


Touche. Still, acceptance without questioning can open one to being lied to. Balance in all things, I suppose.
You can't be lied to if you have inner truth. If you have inner knowing. Acceptance comes from no longer questioning or needing to. Balance comes from accepting the light and the dark, not just the light right good side.


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:05 AM by oozyism
reply to post by mister.old.school



'm sick of Atheist and any anti-Religious, or anti-God movement who revolve all their arguments around evolution.


That is the point I was trying to address.
Secondline..



reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:06 AM by Firepac
Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by rogerstigers



basically, it is that computers do not self-replicate, thus cannot be considered life.


Ohh really ..
What century are you living in? .

Ever seen those massive computer arms which puts your cars together? Computers producing computers, like human beings producing human beings


yeah except a car is not a computer....


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:13 AM by oozyism
reply to post by Firepac


Do you agree that in order for something to evolve, that thing has to be able to reproduce? This isn't exactly a hard concept to grasp.


I guess you never read about how the Universe evolved.

Evolution isn't isolated to biological being only, it also exists in Universal structures, and how the Universe evolved in to what it is today.



the whole matter of the universe was once concentrated in an extremely dense and hot (~10 12K) fireball. Then about 20 billion years ago a vast explosion (big bang) occurred. The matter was broken into pieces, which were thrown out with high speed in all directions forming stars and galaxies;



reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:14 AM by oozyism
reply to post by Firepac



yeah except a car is not a computer....


Cars also have computers in them these days, and they are all called technology. Even a car..


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:30 AM by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by oozyism



I'm sick of Atheist and any anti-Religious, or anti-God movement who revolve all their arguments around evolution.


I don't know a single atheist who bases their arguments on Evolution and I, as an atheist, certainly do not. Evolution has to do with the source of bio-diversity and has absolutely nothing to do with the existence of gods. Now it is true that Evolution works well in a system without gods, as gods denote the supernatural and evolution is a purely natural process with no need for supernatural intervention in order to function.

No, those trying to link Evolution with Atheism are dishonest Creationists who think that Evolution and Theism are not compatible. This isn't true, there are plenty of believers who accept Evolution and there are even a handful of atheists who reject Evolution.

Atheism, is, more often than not, based on skepticism. It is a default skepticism about the theistic claim that there is a God.


People seem to think because there are different versions of human beings, somehow it all came together by chance.


Do you honestly believe that is the reason? I'm pretty sure the reason we think human beings evolved is because we've found human ancestors in the fossil record and we know that our genetics and behavior share striking similarities with forms of apes that are alive today. So because of our close genetic, physical and behavioral similarities towards, say, Chimps, and because we've found evidence in the fossil record, we can determine that human beings evolved. We also know, as you said, that there are different "versions" of human beings, that humans evolve. I'm gonna pull out my favorite online article ever to illustrate evolution at work in us humans today:

Genes explain why Tibetans Thrive

The Tibetan people have evolved certain genes that help them thrive at altitudes that most people would find unbearable. This is evolution at work. If the Tibetan people were to stay in isolation at high altitudes for a few hundred thousand more years they may well become a separate species.


you can also conclude that they came to existence without any creator


Wrong. There are no natural processes that could bring a computer into existence. Life, on the other hand, is a chemical process that can be explained as a natural phenomenon. The main thing is that computers have NO method of reproducing themselves. Life reproduces itself, in fact that's its main function, and when that reproduction takes place slight genetic changes occur from one generation to the next - these slight changes compound over the course of thousands of generations - that's all evolution is.


GOD takes the idea of evolution as an insult to him.


Even if God is real Evolution would still be happening, it's been directly observed (Google Observed Speciation). So I think God, if he is real, takes it as an insult that his genius (creating a world in which creatures can evolve on their own) is overlooked by people who would rather believe he got a clump of dirt together and said some magic words.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by Titen-Sxull]


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:30 AM by NichirasuKenshin
If everything that exists was created, then God was created too - as this is, as you imply, a universally apllicable rule.

In that case, God was created by Metagod 1.

Who, himself, was created by Metagod 2.

Who, himself, was created by Metagod 3.

Isn't it funny that Creationists can be ultra-strict with applying their rules - (it counts for all things, not just for living things, also for computers) but somehow they always fail to apply said rule to god? Pathethic.
If this is truly the whole picture then this argument must be applicable to god too - which brings us to an infinite regress that tells us that there is no such thing as a final creator.

What Creationists do is take the one line they have established as proof of creation and just arbitrarily push it back to god, stopping there, without giving a reason. If All things were created, so was God. So there are godlier things than god. Ah no, let's arbitrarily stop at god, right? Because the principle is only so universal as to count for anything EXCEPT god. Yeah right.

Archeologists, alien or not, would never suppose that computers evolved in a biological sense for the simple reason that these archeologists would eventually come to understand that computers don't reproduce. Even if there was "self-reproducing" code those archeologists would understand that the assembly itself could not have come into existence by natural, non-volitional methods because of enthropy, probability.
While with humans - we have found and accuratly described the mechanism that does that. No archeologist would ask - who created them? because the mechanism itself would be part of the archeological discovery.

But nevermind.

Also. This is about the 26th time I have read some version of this argument on ATS. use the search function, maybe?

It's funny how almost all of these threads are titled "evolution debunked" etc. - always those big words, while the thread itself is literally a burial ground for creationist arguments.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]

[edit on 24-8-2010 by NichirasuKenshin]


reply posted on 24-8-2010 @ 02:38 AM by oozyism
reply to post by mister.old.school



Evolution does not apply to that which is not life.

The universe did not "evolve" in the sense typically associated with biological evolution.

The universe grows and changes as a result of a change in entropy, not adaption to facilitate survival of a species.


The point is, they still evolve.

Therefore it is still called evolution. The point was made against the other poster who claimed things which do not reproduce can't evolve.

You have to process so much data in order to conclude whether the Universal structures are adopting to facilitate survival of Universal species or not + the Universal time system is much different than that of Earth level, so in comparison we might be ahead, or much, much behind.

Look at human beings how we have centralized our societies at different levels, look at the Universal structures and how it has centralized its own societies at different levels.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5    6  >>    ^^TOP^^



How Are Plants Aware of the World Around Them?
  Posted 3 days ago with 5 member flags
The Genesis Code
  Posted 10 days ago with 4 member flags
Explain Diversity Reloaded
  Posted 10 days ago with 3 member flags
Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge
  Posted 5 days ago with 3 member flags
The carrot (chicken or egg , vegetable version)
  Posted 4 days ago with 3 member flags
A theory of proof of a God
  Posted 11 days ago with 2 member flags
Eden: The Double Sided Coin
  Posted 5 days ago with 2 member flags
We are all connected with nature and The Universe IMO
  Posted 4 days ago with 2 member flags