reply to post by EarthCitizen07
Originally posted by EarthCitizen07
I am not a scientist but I do know that more-or-less ALL the theories evolve as we develop a better understanding of the universe and our
Yes, they evolve. They aren't radically overturned very often.
We just moved out of the caves?
Yes. Yes we did.
Do you even know and understand the supposed stages of human evolution?
I understand the confirmed
evidence of human evolution.
I don't buy that BS at all because nothing can evolve without genetic manipulation of the DNA which involves intelligent guidance/control.
Citation needed. You do realize that we have evidence of things evolving, right? There are the PCB resistant fish that are mentioned in another
thread and were recently a news item. Nylon-eating bacteria are yet another example.
Humans of 10,000 bc are not the same humans of 2,000 bc which are also the exact same species of modern man.
Well, as a species they are all the same. In fact, the modern human species emerged around 200,000 years ago.
And the Lascaux cave paintings are around 17,000 years old.
The old testament and genesis speak of this but I am not sure how much stock we should put into it because like I said almost everything has been
Or you could just not take stock in the tales of bronze age individuals who had no understanding of the universe.
And you do realize that we're still apes, right? Genetically, we're apes. Morphologically, we're apes. Which explains this better, evolution or
Wrong! Apes and humans share many similar characteristics but there DNA is slightly different from ours.
What? We are apes. We are in the "ape" family, Hominidae. Slight genetic differences are what differentiate species within a family.
Just out of curiousity do you realise that BigFoot's DNA is also close to our DNA with slight variations? In fact its more human-like than
No such thing as Bigfoot DNA because nobody has found Bigfoot DNA.
Aka "I make things up"
No. I don't have an agenda like mainstream science does, so I say it like it is..or at least what I think is true!
AKA "I make things up because I don't trust the establishment even though 'mainstream science' is the most transparent practice in the world"
You have no evidence for your claims, science does.
Paganism = polytheism
Satanism = Oppositional Judeo-Christian monotheism.
I understand what paganism is and what satanism is. It is you that has a narrow point of view. Yes paganism is/was supposedly polytheism but
many pagans did human and animal sacrifices in the name of "the god(s)" which was most likely satan.
...Jews did human and animal sacrifices to. Animal sacrifices aplenty. And Judges 11 recounts the sacrifice by Jephthah of his daughter.
Paganism predates Abrahamic religion.
Yes I already knew that! What makes you think I did not? When did I claim the opposite; please point it out to me with a
specific quote if you dare. Since paganism predated abrahamic religions it also corrupted abrahamic relgions and that IS the point I have been
trying to make all along! While many pagans were polytheists, many were actually satanists because earth is satanic territory. I am not
rellying on the bible or any mainstream source for what I say, so obviously my conclusions will seem "off the mark" or "crazy". I like to read
/end reactionary rant.
This 'alternative material' is also known as 'things people have just made up', something that they seem to have in common with you.
I have nothing against jews, christians or muslims other than all those religions are phoney because they are abrahamic religions! Do you get
it now? Nice try painting me "anti-semitic" when I actually go to the anti-zionist bashing threads to support israel and zionism in general.
You do realize that I was referring to a specific text as being anti-semitic garbage. The Protocols have had their origins traced, and it isn't
Talk is cheap and your beef is primarily against the christians who supposedly
"bash" atheism, when in reality they are ten
times more hateful towards jews and muslims.
Really? Studies tend to disagree.
Unless you seek alternative media, like me and others do, then you will remain in the twilight zone seeking answers to the wrong questions.
Alternative rarely, if ever, means right. It just means that it isn't rigorous, it's almost always badly produced, and it's almost always
I spent a long time looking through alternative media, it fascinated me in my childhood and early teenage years...and then I realized it was crap.