Question for Evolutionist's

reply to post by Dashdragon


I am not actually calling macro evolution impossible. You may be correct that evolution is the correct explanation for what we see today. I am saying that from what I read and see, and I have read it all of the posts. I am not convinced that evolution from one kind to another happens. I used to believe this years ago, before I started reading. I think it is a mistake to eliminate God all together because their is no evidence to support life from no life. So not believing in a creator must be faith.

And I still challenge all of you to read or listen to the bible from start to finish before you call it a fairy tell. The bible is just a history book full of lessons that most non believers believe as moral standards. Many take the old testament out of context. You would need to investigate history and what people were doing, child sacrifice ext to understand why some laws needed to be harsh. And realize that Christ came to bring love and abandon the harsh laws that were no longer necessary.

Your belief in Macro evolution is based on how you perceive the information you have. But is still a faith in science and yourself.

My belief in God and a young earth is based on how I perceive the same information. I choose not to put my faith in men and myself because i know we are not as smart as we might think. Our views change everyday. The bible does not. When I saw the dead sea scroll exhibit for myself I was blown away with just how old our bible was.

reply to post by sacgamer25
Please enlighten us on what future "kinds" will exist. What future animal will a rabbit turn into?

These are silly and troubling inquiries. You are making up your own theory of evolution in order to refute it.

BREAKING NEWS!!!! To all the Evolutionists who believe we evolved from monkeys, read this: www.answersingenesis.org... This proves first, that scientists do not have facts, they use their opinions. None of their scientific studies prove evolution of humans from chimps as fact. They are now saying that chimps are not as close genetically to humans and may be a completely SEPARATE SPECIES ALTOGETHER.! Read and be humbled. By the way, I went to work and my chihuahua was a canine....now that I am home, I was greeted by a walking fish...Evolution?

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by infinitecuriosity

 

This is a reply to all who believe that man evolved from a simple life form as a fact. Many of you also believe that life formed from no life. This is the one part I just cannot see as intelligent.

Sorry I guess I lied about that being my last post.

This is the part people have been trying to explain. Man did not evolve from a simple life form in the manner you seem to think. Life evolved until one day, one of the creatures up and started calling itself Man. What came before it was relatively the same, and so on, but going further back all of those little differences add up until you get back to that simple life form.

Speaking of how life originated - that is something that science cannot answer right now. There are several theories that you can feel free to read up on. Abiogenesis, Panspermia, Biogenesis, etc. We do know that most amino acids that are considered the building blocks of our life can arise out of natural chemical processes.

What I can't fathom is why some find it so contradictory to the concept of faith in a Creator/God that God might have, instead of just plopping us all down here 'as-is' to live until the end of time, chose to construct a vast and wonderously complex system that would allow for the rise of life to develop and grow. Something that would become increasingly more complex and wonderous as time went by.

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by Dashdragon

 

because their is no evidence to support life from no life. So not believing in a creator must be faith.

Quite a definitive statement without doing much research. Google is your friend

I find it hard to believe you have read little but Christian drivel on what evolution actually is.

I think I'm gonna give up..after 30 pages of providing proof beyond any doubt. From visible bacteria who evolve in front of our eyes, up until the lovely Yorkshire terrier which evolved from a wulf, whith mens help. But without understanding evolution we would not have been able to.

From a Scientific viewpoint it's irrefutable. Just take a petri dish full of bacteria and subject them to just enough toxin to kill 99.999% of them then keep applying the toxin. Pretty soon you'll have a whole population of bacteria that can live in the toxin. You have selectively "Bred" toxin loving bacteria. These new Bacteria will differ from the population you started with (probably smaller and more robust).
Look at "purebreds" Like dogs and cats. These animals were artificially bred to "Selectively" "Bred in" or "Bred out" certain genetic traits. By doing this we are just exploiting the "Natural Selection" of the Evolutionary process, since in the wild, Nature (the forces of the surrounding environment) provide the "Breeding" of Natural Selection. You can see this quite clearly in natural species that get isolated. Isolated groups of animals will almost always develop differently than their none isolated counterparts. Look at any group of animals that get isolated on islands and you can see the differences from their mainland counterparts quite readily. Darwin observed this process in all it's glory on the Galapagos Islands. He saw it first hand and the rest is history.

Evolution today:
ScienceDaily (Jan. 24, 2009) — Penn State Assistant Professor of Biology Tracy Langkilde has shown that native fence lizards in the southeastern United States are adapting to potentially fatal invasive fire-ant attacks by developing behaviors that enable them to escape from the ants, as well as by developing longer hind legs, which can increase the effectiveness of this behavior.

"Not only does this finding provide biologists with an example of evolution in action, but it also provides wildlife managers with knowledge that they can use to develop plans for managing invasive species," said Langkilde. The results have been described meantime in a paper, published two years ago in the journal Ecology.

I think it's brilliant we have more evidence for evoultion. Evidence we can see and test in our own lifetimes that theists can't cast any doubt upon.

conclusion:
You will never find a tree grow limbs or a whale for that matter..He just got rid of them. Evolution is a long term process also mentioned 35 times..But as a true believer: Just not willing to open your mind for other opinions.

Originally posted by sacgamer25
And realize that Christ came to bring love and abandon the harsh laws that were no longer necessary.

Why was it necessary to begin with? Why wasn't Christ introduced to the world right after Adam and Eve sinned? Why wait thousands of years?

Originally posted by malachi777
BREAKING NEWS!!!! To all the Evolutionists who believe we evolved from monkeys, read this: www.answersingenesis.org... This proves first, that scientists do not have facts, they use their opinions. None of their scientific studies prove evolution of humans from chimps as fact. They are now saying that chimps are not as close genetically to humans and may be a completely SEPARATE SPECIES ALTOGETHER.! Read and be humbled.

By the way, I went to work and my chihuahua was a canine....now that I am home, I was greeted by a walking fish...Evolution?

edit on 16-9-2011 by malachi777 because: Adding fun.

That article was written in 2003. It states that we are related to chimps with 95 percent the same dna, instead of 98 percent as previously thought. I've been saying 94 percent all along. I was one percent off.

The way you talk about evolution, it is apparent that you are either ignorant of how it works, or you're a troll.

Now, explain why all animals share similar dna if evolution is false. Next, say evolution is false, prove creationism to be true.

Originally posted by malachi777
BREAKING NEWS!!!! To all the Evolutionists who believe we evolved from monkeys, read this: www.answersingenesis.org... This proves first, that scientists do not have facts, they use their opinions. None of their scientific studies prove evolution of humans from chimps as fact. They are now saying that chimps are not as close genetically to humans and may be a completely SEPARATE SPECIES ALTOGETHER.! Read and be humbled.

By the way, I went to work and my chihuahua was a canine....now that I am home, I was greeted by a walking fish...Evolution?

edit on 16-9-2011 by malachi777 because: Adding fun.

Did anybody ever told you on this forum that we evolved from chimps? Where can I find that wonderful info online?
Chimps, Gorillas are related to us, nothing more and nothing less..

We do have the same ancester though!!

Hope your fish was able to breath with his gills, or did the fish have lungs? Like the lungfish perhaps?

Originally posted by sacgamer25
reply to post by Dashdragon

 

Your belief in Macro evolution is based on how you perceive the information you have. But is still a faith in science and yourself.

My belief in God and a young earth is based on how I perceive the same information. I choose not to put my faith in men and myself because i know we are not as smart as we might think. Our views change everyday. The bible does not. When I saw the dead sea scroll exhibit for myself I was blown away with just how old our bible was.

I applaud your statement that you are at least open to the idea. However, to call it a 'belief' is an error. As the example I provided explained, macro evolution is the sum of countless intermediary stages of micro evolution. If you can accept that small changes do occur in species over time, then you must also realize that over millions of generations, that you would end up with something that looks almost nothing like how it started.

We are getting smarter all the time, this is why our 'views' as you put it change. As we learn more information, we revise theories and things that we weren't able to test for previously get verified or thrown out. That's the nature of the scientific method.

The bible, however, does indeed change and has changed many times, though - not being a theology expert I cannot cite a specific example, but I imagine most everyone knows about the story of King James when he commissioned his translation. What's more is that man's interpretation of the bible has changed drastically. Many devout Christians of today would be executed as heretics (thou shalt not kill? we're still not sure on that one) if you dropped them back during the crusades or inquisitions. Hell, most of the girls I knew growing up would be running around with a big fat A branded into their skulls. "What cute kids! Where is your husband, my lady?" - "Oh, I ain't never been married" - *THWACK*

I've pointed out several instances of sanctioned or religiously supported examples of what the bible touts as the seven deadly sins, but evidently sometimes they're ok I guess?

I won't knock you for believing in God in the slightest, but I think the bible is an ancient, archaic, and fear-inspired rhetoric that's only purpose when it was created was to use as a means of control on the population and even sometimes to justify the actions of those in power because they did it 'for God'. Even today, people let G.W. justify his invasion with it.

This is the same kinds of religion that would have one believe that a kind, gentle man, who lives out his life in peace, loves his wife and family and never does a single bad thing against anyone or anything his entire life, will go to Hell because he chose not to worship Jesus (Idolatry). Meanwhile a mass murdering psychopath gets to go to Heaven because he repented and received absolution prior to his execution.

reply to post by RevelationGeneration


I clicked on your link. It is pathetic. Derogatory, obnoxious and assumption based. It also shows a lack of understanding of the subject matter.

I've made several points to you, for some you have called me a liar. I have been proved correct by myself and others and you simply ignore everything. You do not even have the grace to apologise for your accusations (not just to me), accept you were wrong or even alter your pompous "my opinion and life is worth more than yours" rhetoric.

Again- everything you say is an attempt at self- validation. You try to belittle others opinions/ beliefs/ faiths/ best possible collection of evidence to simply persuade yourself that yours is 'the truth' and has more worth. You claim to know things and yet still gloat about your 'faith'- which is absolutely contradictory. You are self- righteous and unashamedly arrogant without even a stain of self- awareness or perspective.

If you are not a troll then you are a contradiction of christianity. (Or at least what it is claimed to be).

reply to post by yes4141


Yeah, he even wanted to know where it says in the bible that believers should eat crackers during communion. I showed him, and he hasn't mentioned anything about it. Also, he will not make any comment on whether or not he is afraid to ask god a question because he knows that he will not receive an answer. He will not admit it. He will not be honest with himself, or at least with us. Instead, he tells me to ask his god a question, me being a non-believer. Then he also said he didn't want to hurt his god's feelings by trumping his sovereignty by asking questions.

reply to post by Hydroman


I guess you skipped the part in the site where it stated we may not be related at all. Second, every single living creature on earth has some similar DNA, life is made up of the same ingredients. You can make bread, gravy, paste, rolls, pretzels, molds etc all with the same ingredients, yet they are not the same in texture, taste or appearance. It all depends on the amounts of each that makes all living things different. Why can't God use the same ingredients, in varying amounts, to create all He has created? I will make one last statement and it is a repeat. I had always wanted to believe in God, but couldn't get a complete understanding about Him and was still unsure. Until........in 2003, I went into cardiac arrest. My heart stopped for more than 7 minutes and this is when I learned the truth. You can believe me or you can deny the TRUTH. I saw the light of God, He spoke to me...not with words, but with emotion and He told me it was not my time. The love, peace, joy, and beauty was so overwhelming, it changed me from doubt, to belief. Our time on earth is fleeting, so make a decision now. Forget about scientific opinion and face the fact. If you can believe a scientists opinion, you can believe my experience. God is real and I will go to my grave proclaiming that. Again, I do not read the scripture and still do not attend church because many are teaching for the wrong reasons. Please believe me and change your belief's. I will not ask you to become a church member. I just want you to believe that there is a Creator and He loves us all. God wants you to understand that it is faith in believe in Him that will get you home. If you can trust a camera to hold your photos even when you cannot see them, you can trust that God is among us too.

reply to post by infinitecuriosity
Actually, my daughter does have a fish that breaths with its lungs, it is called a Beta or Chinese Fighting fish.

reply to post by malachi777


Whether God exists or not is not really the debate. Some would try to lump it in with this, but nothing science finds can ever disprove the existance of God. Just as nothing science or religion finds can prove it either. That is the fundamental nature of Faith.

The dispute is centered around those that would try to attack certain findings because it conflicts with their narrow-minded view of the world. That they 'believe' the Earth is not old enough for the timeline required by the theory of evolution for the existance and development of life because a book written by people long dead suggests a younger age. For some reason they pick evolution to attack rather than any of the other theories about the universe that state rather emphatically that things have been here for qutie a bit longer than 6,000 years.

If you asked me what was old for a person, I'd say 60-70's was getting up there. A teenager would probably say I was pretty darn old at 33. If you went back to the time Jesus and told the people there that the Earth was 4.5 billion years old...most wouldn't even have a concept of what a billion is, so it's natural to assume that, even if 'God' did tell them, which I doubt He had anything really to do with that book, they could easily misunderstand it.

reply to post by UniverSoul


what's your simple question? and no deflection is necessary for my question , can you answer it? here it is again

you have a chunk of dirt 40ft x 40ft x 40ft. you've excavated it out in one big chunk, from a geological layer of clay like soil, that's been predated to, oh let's say 50,000 BC. inside that chunk of clay you find the following: the broken off blade of a forged steel dagger, a tiny fragment of a ceramic vessel of some kind, a bone, what appears to be a tab from the top of a soda can, and a small patch of woven fibers that look like tweed. is it safe to assume that the blade, ceramic fragment, tab like object, and small patch of woven fibers is contamination and doesn't require any empirical process other than the process of tossing them in the waste bin?

Originally posted by Hydroman

Originally posted by undo
that's likely because the text in genesis 1, verses 1 and 2, are talking about the creation of the galaxies, via super massive blackholes, and wormholes were associated with the gods, so the creation of the galaxies was associated with the gods.

How in the world do you come to that conclusion?

the original hebrew is alot more revealing than the greek--->latin--->english. back then they kept their notes on science in the same place as their genealogies, historical data and laws.

The Bible has not changed? Well then you are mistaken. Religion in all the sense has evolved with knowledge and has been changed and revised thousands of times. The Dead Sea scrolls do not represent the King James Bible nor do the Dead Sea scrolls represent the Koran. Religion is not to be taken as science and there is no science in the bible. There are no facts in anything when you break it down to its finest. There is a thing called logic as I feel is the basis of science not religion. Logic tells me that there are no talking snakes, horned devil, hell, walking on water, great floods, and women from a single rib and dirt. So then logic tells me that these are stories with a meaning. Problem with the texts of the bible are that they are a collection many clips put together with many errors in translation and contradictions which brings no understanding to a how things work stand point. I would not read the bible to learn about atoms or biology. There is a place for beliefs but when beliefs interfere with knowledge to understanding how, and then it is closing the mind. I believe that there are scientific facts and all are theories but, that doesn't mean there are not true or as we understand make the most logical sense.

Originally posted by malachi777
reply to post by Hydroman

 

God is real and I will go to my grave proclaiming that. Again, I do not read the scripture and still do not attend church because many are teaching for the wrong reasons. Please believe me and change your belief's. I will not ask you to become a church member. I just want you to believe that there is a Creator and He loves us all. God wants you to understand that it is faith in believe in Him that will get you home. If you can trust a camera to hold your photos even when you cannot see them, you can trust that God is among us too.

If there was a god and he is suppose to love us all, he better start loving the people on the African continent first, as they are in need of love, food and water.
Mostly the last two.
If he has any love left, he can come and knock on my door. I'll be there to open and give him a warm welcome. There are many more people left on this earth to give proirity to, until I see that happen don't expect something from me. To blindly have faith in a guy who is unwilling to help the poor, who instead helps out the people who do not need his help, sounds very selfish to me.

Originally posted by contradictory
how about this

Climate change is causing a breed of wild sheep in Scotland to shrink, according to research. Scientists say milder winters help smaller sheep to survive, resulting in this "paradoxical decrease in size". Classic evolutionary theory would predict that wild sheep gradually get bigger, as the stronger, larger animals survive into adulthood and reproduce. Reporting in Science journal, the team says this shows the "subtle interplay" between evolution and the environment. Scientists first began studying Soay sheep, on the island of Hirta in the St Kilda archipelago, in 1985. Since then, the sheep have decreased in size by 5% - their legs getting steadily shorter and their body weight decreasing. This strange phenomenon was first reported in 2007, but the reason for it remained under debate.

Link

I'm a christian myself, but I don't go around trying to 'prove' He exists. Evolutionists can point to all kinds of random mutations such as cancer which happens all the time, sure it kills everyone, but there's no reason why a 'perfect' mutation couldn't happen, such as lungs developing the ability to survive toxins, theoretically.

I would believe that would fall under Micro-evolution. However it is highly debated whether or not is is separate from Macro-evolution. Some state its one in the same and others state it is different, I guess it depends on what side of the fence you are on.