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.

 

Survey Results: Origins and Evolution

page: 50
82
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:42 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


Well the question then is. Does foresight exist for God? And is it bad or good if he has it or not.

Sometimes, in the heat of the chaos of education, I sort of go into this partial trance of sorts. It's just like everything slows down. My mind pops up a display of things to get done. And I just play some music, and it's like I am "grounded" to the situation. Creating my craft, doing well. I know I will get done on time. I know it will all work out, and indeed it always does. I think that's really what God exists in to some degree. Every disaster can be used to make something better, and really there is nothing but ourselves preventing that.

And then of course, perfection is not necessarily good in reality. Don't know about you, but I did have mostly everything I ever wanted, at one time when I was younger. And I have to say, it was boring. It's the imperfections that make me know reality is real.




posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeverForget
reply to post by Gorman91
 



Saying things are dead means a bad designer I think is a bit assumptions.


LOL!

Where did I say "bad" designer?

How did "no forsight" translate to meaning "bad design" in your head?

Certainly, Richard Dawkins and many other micro-biologists agree that "Nature has no forsight". And the laryngeal nerve of the giraffe (for example) is imperfect, and finds a much longer path than it could, it could be more efficient, but nature cannot go "back to the drawing board", it can't correct it's mistakes, hence extinction, and hence my comments on "no forsight".

LOL, Gorman, keep writing dude. Loving it.
edit on 31/8/2011 by NeverForget because: (no reason given)


I don't call it "bad" design, because I don't believe in "designer/creator" theories. They are badly thought out, and the philosophical reflection within is less than careful. Not to mention the infinite regress, that are inevitable, and offer as much absolution as the idea of "GOD" itself.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


I've never really thought of it that much. It's literally infinite matter doing stuff, in such a way to create everything that's there.

From my perspective, it's like yelling that there are paint drips on the floor where The Mona Lisa was painted. Look at the beauty. Who cares about the mess.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 



From my perspective, it's like yelling that there are paint drips on the floor where The Mona Lisa was painted. Look at the beauty. Who cares about the mess.


No one is yelling though, I appreciate nature as much as the Pantheist, I love a sunrise, or a rainbow as much as the next guy.

You just believe an entity willed it, and you call it God, i don't. That's the only difference between my position and yours.

Although we are in the same position as regards to knowledge, we are both naive, we don't know, I don't believe, and I don't assume because of a book made by man, who has been proven to be fallible, and sometimes untrustworthy.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:13 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


What can I say? I haven't found that yet in the Bible.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


well he's a serpent being. a seraph, which is singular for seraphim. the seraphim were a race of angels. yet the word seraph means serpent or firey flying serpent (a dragon reference), those verses in ezekiel also call him a cherub. also note that they are said to be created.not evolved

so can we safely say this serpent guy in the garden is a reptile, who upon losing his legs, is likened to a snake?



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


Not everything can be found in the bible.

You don't have to say anything, it's your choice; it always has been. But with the threat of hellfire, people found it hard making their own choices in regards to belief.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


no. Because that could mean burning like the poison of a snake. It could mean burning snaps of flame, similar to the Holy Spirit's presence. It doesn't actually mean snake just because the word is a derivative of it. Because the main word used is "burning ones". It could mean it's shape, it's form. anything really. Considering tradition uses the snake as an image of deception, and not really relevant to its physical appearance, I don't see any reason to think the seraph as anything but apparitions of fiery light.

I do take note that such angelic things, be them evil or good, are usually described as things of light, without physical appearance, beyond what they choose to look like.

If I were an atheist and thought to think of them in practical terms, I'd call them a thruster, like that of a rocket ship.
edit on 31-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


Didn't say everything could be found in the Bible. Just salvation. That's all it's ever been for. I've yet to find much contradiction with itself and the scientific world. That's just what I've seen so far.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 



Didn't say everything could be found in the Bible. Just salvation.


That can be found without that bible too, upon introspection.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by undo
 


no. Because that could mean burning like the poison of a snake. It could mean burning snaps of flame, similar to the Holy Spirit's presence. It doesn't actually mean snake just because the word is a derivative of it. Because the main word used is "burning ones". It could mean it's shape, it's form. anything really. Considering tradition uses the snake as an image of deception, and not really relevant to its physical appearance, I don't see any reason to think the seraph as anything but apparitions of fiery light.

I do take note that such angelic things, be them evil or good, are usually described as things of light, without physical appearance, beyond what they choose to look like.

If I were an atheist and thought to think of them in practical terms, I'd call them a thruster, like that of a rocket ship.
edit on 31-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


well we've established with bones, that reptiles ruled this planet.
we've established with statuary that reptiles of various kinds played important roles in various religions
we've also established via ancient texts, including the bible, a race of serpentine or dragonlike beings, who are shining ones.
so why's it so hard to believe that isn't exactly what the text means, that in the garden, the serpent was a shining, spectacular dragon like being, encrusted with various gems?
also the theme of shedding ones old skin, to have new, naked skin, is a snake reference.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Could just be biologically natured fear. Certainly the species to evolve fear of reptiles would stay alive longer in the Cretaceous. Can't say why, but there's plenty of stuff common in all religions. World tree, flat earth, etc etc. Doesn't make it true.
edit on 31-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:16 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


Salvation from what? You'd have to create something to be saved from then. Spiritual salvation I meant to say, not just any.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by undo
 


Could just be biologically natured fear. Certainly the species to evolve fear of reptiles would stay alive longer in the Cretaceous. Can't say why, but there's plenty of stuff common in all religions. World tree, flat earth, etc etc. Doesn't make it true.
edit on 31-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)


can you point out an example of flat earth teaching that predates the dark ages?



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:23 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


Many many many cultures around the world believed in a world supported on an elephants back with turtles on each foot, or some variety there of.

en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
edit on 31-8-2011 by Gorman91 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
reply to post by Gorman91
 


The desire to savour life instead of destroy it. The desire to love, instead of hate.

Salvation is a man made concept, and thus was written about in a "Holy book", it must precede the "Holy book." We had a civilisation before we had the capability to put pen to paper.

"Human decency isn't derrived from religion, it precedes it" - Christopher Hitchens.

No doubt you'll have a comeback to my points here, interested to read it.
edit on 31/8/2011 by NeverForget because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
early abydos egypt


underwater scene, abydos egypt


the only surviving statue available from eridu, as photographed in the baghdad museum,
• provenience: Eridu
• dimension(s) (in cm):
height: 14
• material: clay (baked)
• date: (ca. 4000 BC)
• description:
terracotta, nude male, with 'lizard-shaped' face and pointed head (hair piece?), holding stick in his left hand; shoulders decorated with applied clay pellets



female, procreative
UR, 4000 BC
oi.uchicago.edu...

willendorf, from the side


the reptilian-mammalian mother goddess that was turned into a human by the addition of a human head at the museum
originally she had clawed feet and mottled looking rough skin, that also looks like heavy duty armor. she looks more like a turtle woman than a human being, till they "fix" her up at the museum and make several assumptions about what kind of head she would have and change her feet


and there's tons more, with rows of scales on their legs bellies and arms. and all of these predate 3000 BC. only human headed statue i have found prior to 3000 BC, is the tepe statue and it looks like it's been modified heavily, at the museum



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by NeverForget
 


Well I'd agree with it actually. I think that civilization was the one before the flood. and it got blown up. They did choose hate instead of love, corruption instead of creation.

I'm pretty sure that's why the Holy Book was written. Man proved he couldn't do it alone.

When I see Star Trek's mirror universe, I sometimes think I am looking at the pre-flood world, or perhaps what the world would look like had God not intervened.

As always, weather this world is good or bad cannot be spoken of in objectivity.




posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:39 PM
link   
reply to post by undo
 


It's your choice to see that as reptilian. I see an acorn head, people wearing masks with horns like the local wild life, etc etc.



posted on Aug, 31 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 




reply to post by Time2Think

Was that your impression? I thought the responses to the various questions all pointed to the same things: a widespread acceptance of the standard scientific view of the origins and evolution of life, lots of support for the possibility that there may be a God behind it, a fair amount of support for panspermia and alien involvement in human origins, and roughly 10% support for young-Earth creationism. All of which fits together to make a very coherent picture that is, apart from the surprisingly widespread rejection of Biblical tall tales, pretty much what I would have expected from Above Top Secret.


Yes, that was my impression

Percentages (Graphs) are based on the outcomes of a specific number of Data - in this case, users who took the polls.

While I have no idea how many people took the poll, the percentages are all over the place. Meaning the people who took the poll didn't really pay any attention to the questions, they just randomly picked whatever answers looked the best.

For example, how can a person pick something like "There is no 'superior being' it's all based on science" for one question and then minutes later pick something like "All of the science of evolution is based on the actions took by a 'superior being'". If people want to tear me apart for not going back and quoting the specific questions, be my guest.

The other part to these polls is that anyone can post anything up on the boards before the results are even in, meaning if someone goes out and takes the time to make a convincing argument they can persuade others to think the way they think.

It's funny to me.. that's all.

If people actually read the questions carefully, the majority of the answers should have been in the Neutral column. However, as the results show - the Neutral column was Neutral - doesn't make any sense, after carefully reading the questions being asked.

The results are contradicting themselves.
It all comes down to that last question...
edit on 31-8-2011 by Time2Think because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
82
<< 47  48  49    51  52  53 >>

log in

join