Survey Results: Origins and Evolution

I think one of the biggest nightmare for some "Atheists" is when a person of faith doesn't hide behind ancient and archaic scripture anymore but rather embraces the sciences and new discoveries.

Conversely, those of Faith who cannot see beyond their myopically held beliefs to the point of ignoring the bulk of what a Creator has in store for us to still explore and discover is sad.

In my humble opinion.

Extracts himself from the discussion.
Makes a sandwich, continues reading.

Originally posted by avatar01

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by avatar01

Originally posted by rhinoceros

Originally posted by avatar01
How about "humans are a product of hybridization between indigenous ape-man creatures and extra-terrestrial DNA"

How come that's not an option?

If this is what you want to believe. The thing is thou, that genetics absolutely 100% falsifies it.

edit on 30-8-2011 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)

Really?

Please elaborate.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I ask you to elaborate and you post a link to a website? How about a summary of your argument?

Ok, my edit was too slow. They've got this tool called BLAST (Basic Local Alignment Search Tool). For the extraterrestrial hypothesis to be true, you'd expect that BLASTing some regions of the human genome against the database would yield no results (no homology to other animals). However, we get results. Thus, no alien DNA. Don't believe me? Pick a random sequence from the human genome, and paste it into BLASTn. Remember to exclude homo sapiens from the results, and search against the nr nt database.. see what happens.

tl:dr the next time you hear somebody claiming there's alien DNA in our genome, ask them to pinpoint the exact location of said sequences.

reply to post by RevelationGeneration


For someone so inciting, you demonstrate an amazingly low degree of insight.

He wasn't purely or only talking to you.

That's what blinkered thinking will do for you, you don't notice what's going on around you.

reply to post by spikey


I agree!

... and to Slayer 69...

Extracts himself from the discussion.
Makes a sandwich, continues reading.

What type of sandwich?

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
I apologize if im appearing to be judgemental...

You're not appearing to be judgmental, you ARE reflexively judgmental... and it seems as though you can't help it.

I personally do not believe you can lose your salvation once you've been saved,

But I realized I was never "saved," instead, with my experience I was oppressed and denied knowledge.

reply to post by spikey


I imagine, in one has faith in God, that God knew it was impossible to save them. They WERE going to grow up to be pirates and rapists.

This is further reinstated in Genesis. God did not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because they were gay, he destroyed them because they had sunk so low that it as impossible to save them without direct intervention. And because that destroys faith, he had no choice but to destroy them. After all, did God not say to Abraham that if he could but 50 he would spare the city? He went all the way down, with fewer and fewer. The point is, it only takes one person whom is not corrupted to save a place. But there were none.

I expect Canaan was no different. After all, he is God. He knows what you'll become.

The part about the prostitute makes quite good sense to me. After all, if you kill of your children, then you don't have innocent people in your mist now do you? Being a traitor to your own people is never said to be wrong in this regard. Even Christ says he came to divide with the sword. It is inferred this division is between the saved and unsaved, and the sword is of salvation, not killing.

When it comes to war, you have to realize one thing. War is not as we define it today. Today we have petty wars to off some idiot in some land. Back then, war was the worse thing you could do. It was reserved only for the ones whom had become so incompatible with the very act of being human, that the only solution was their total and complete genocide.

You ask me to have pity on those slayed. I say rather, have pity on those that would have been slayed if their ways had continued. I have no pity for the death of savages and rapists and criminals, nor even their offspring if there is no chance for their alteration of mind.

Rather than viewing it as making God look evil, look at it as the sense that a place was so evil, that was the only thing God had left to do.

If you look at life through the eyes of the rules of science only and have no times of openmindedness then more than likely God is not apart of your equation, I think that has to be understood by believers and accepted, then those that are getting offended should try to be openminded themselves.

I know if I lived in a world in my head that specifically lived by science only I would probably not have much faith either, but key word, faith, is something you have cause you choose to have it, not out of scientific fact, that is something that is a choice.

We all die in the end and if death was so glorious would we all off ourselves to go to Heaven. Thats as atheist as I get, because I believe there actually is a meaning to it all even if I don't know what it is.

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


I would save you Skeptic.
You're the one who keeps a cool head amongst all this.

reply to post by SLAYER69


Thats me. I do not hide nor try to dismiss facts when there are facts to display, regardless of my belief in God.

It was the bible, not the Catholics for crying out aloud

Our galaxy is the centre of the universe, ‘quantized’ redshifts show
by D. Russell Humphreys

Over the last few decades, new evidence has surfaced that restores man to a central place in God’s universe. Astronomers have confirmed that numerical values of galaxy redshifts are ‘quantized’, tending to fall into distinct groups. According to Hubble’s law, redshifts are proportional to the distances of the galaxies from us. Then it would be the distances themselves that fall into groups. That would mean the galaxies tend to be grouped into (conceptual) spherical shells concentric around our home galaxy, the Milky Way. The shells turn out to be on the order of a million light years apart. The groups of redshifts would be distinct from each other only if our viewing location is less than a million light years from the centre. The odds for the Earth having such a unique position in the cosmos by accident are less than one in a trillion. Since big bang theorists presuppose the cosmos has naturalistic origins and cannot have a unique centre, they have sought other explanations, without notable success so far. Thus, redshift quantization is evidence (1) against the big bang theory, and (2) for a galactocentric cosmology, such as one by Robert Gentry or the one in my book, Starlight and Time.

and science
creation.com...

Originally posted by Gorman91
God did not destroy Sodom and Gomorrah because they were gay, he destroyed them because they had sunk so low that it as impossible to save them without direct intervention.

Yet the God of Abraham embraced and protected a man who willingly gave up his virgin daughters to gang rape? I propose that act is more inherently evil than anything that the Bible implies happened in the two supposed cities.

reply to post by racasan


Yeah i got confused it was The Parting of the Red Sea that i ment not the dead sea.

Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee though.

Your logic is extremely flawed.

Here's what you're saying:

Human DNA and animal DNA contain similar/identical sequences;
therefore Human DNA does not contain Extra-terrestrial DNA.

That's like saying:

This muffin has blueberries in it;
therefore it does not contain strawberries.

EDIT: In case you don't understand the fallacy... you'd have to actually look for the strawberries to know if the muffin has strawberries or not. But if you don't know what a strawberry is, then how can you look for it?

reply to post by SkepticOverlord


No. He was drunk. He got taken advantage of. I don't recall God telling them to go Rape him, but by all means, if I'm wrong, prove it. I'm not going to pretending like I've read the whole bible yet.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
But I realized I was never "saved," instead, with my experience I was oppressed and denied knowledge.

So your saying you was not actually a Christian, but was thinking about becoming one and then decided not too because the church disagreed with your belief of evolution and certain aspects of science?

I think i understand now.

Originally posted by RevelationGeneration
reply to post by racasan

 

Yeah i got confused it was The Parting of the Red Sea that i ment not the dead sea.

Jesus was walking along the shore of the Sea of Galilee though.

The Red Sea's name derives from the corruption of the name 'Reed Sea' doesn't it?
There may be some sort of clue there in how Moses and his crew got across the waters.
But then again, did God put those reeds there for that reason...?

It's the Show that never ends.

Another thing to consider

The difference between a evolutionist and a creationist is that an evolutionist is the only one truely seeking out the answer.

If tomorrow science uncovered and peer reviewed a game changer...say we find that we didn't evolve from monkeys, but rather dolphins...same with monkeys but they are not our ancestors, just our cousins...then if the science is strong, we would accept it.

Evolutionists are actively seeking the answers...and the only way to ever get something close to a answer is to first off, reject all previous answers (God made us from mud). A creationist is stuck with the answer before the investigation even began, and anything that sheds light on a different senario is immediately rejected, because they already have the answer without any requirement for proof...so, they laugh at anyone whom is seeking answers verses just believe what was told to them...

I don't understand that mindset personally...I mean, I understand it academically, but I cannot understand how one can purposefully accept it, knowing they are being willfully ignorant.

reply to post by avatar01


Well no. What I'm really saying is that anything alien would inherently be incompatible to humanity.

Perhaps you don't understand how evolution works on the galactic scale. Let's say the 3rd chromosome, 50 codexes down, is the location for my foot. There is no guarantee that same location will be the location of a foot for an alien, let alone that he would even have chromosomes.

See you are failing to understand that something not of this world will not be in any form relate able to humanity, let alone a chimp, so as to form a hybrid species.

Originally posted by avatar01




Your logic is extremely flawed.

Here's what you're saying:

Human DNA and animal DNA contain similar/identical sequences;
therefore Human DNA does not contain Extra-terrestrial DNA.

That's like saying:

This muffin has blueberries in it;
therefore it does not contain strawberries.

EDIT: In case you don't understand the fallacy... you'd have to actually look for the strawberries to know if the muffin has strawberries or not. But if you don't know what a strawberry is, then how can you look for it?

No, what I'm saying is that you can look at any location of the human genome and you'll find homology to other animals. If there was some alien DNA there, then surely it would show no homology to any other animals (it's supposed to be something the aliens put into us only, right). So anyways, feel free to tell me which chromosome(s) and which exact loci have these alien DNA sequences. I promise to report back.. Hell, we can even coauthor a paper and share a nobel prize. All we need is the loci.. counting on your to deliver.

Originally posted by Gorman91
I don't recall God telling them to go Rape him

Lot offered up his virgin daughters to the angry mob at his door, looking for the "angels" he was hiding...

Genesis 19:8
Behold now, I have two daughters which have not known man; let me, I pray you, bring them out unto you, and do ye to them as is good in your eyes: only unto these men do nothing; for therefore came they under the shadow of my roof.

But the supposedly corrupt inhabitants of Sodom rejected his offer. So who is the more evil in this situation?