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.

 

Can you prove evolution wrong?*

page: 9
31
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by k0mbination
reply to post by vedatruth
 


Evolution. The act of evolving. Something that everything in life does. It has no choice. Life evovles or it stops. Who is to say god dosnt direct evolution? Perhaps god created life to understand itself in which case life is god and god is evolving as well! Who knows and really why does it matter? All that really matters is who are you? Are you happy with your life and what can you do to be better at it.
But then that's just a part of my take on it


1. A human body as well as an animal body is capable of adjusting to the environment.
2. I meant 'Darwin's theory of evolution' that living people and animals evolved from chemicals, and that is against living having a soul.
3. I think you mean 'progress' in the context of 'evolution' That was not what I was talking about. I was talking about Darwin's theory of evolution.

The God, soul, and why God created life is a separate and vast subject. We can talk about it but preferably in a separate thread.




posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:14 AM
link   
Originally posted by colin42



Vedatruth: Been down this path before. If you can give me a definitive description of what a soul is then I will tell you if I believe I have one.

Yes, I can give you a description of the soul. The first thing I can tell you is you cannot see the soul with eyes that God placed in your body. You cannot see a soul by any scientific contraption as well.

Why? Because soul is made of what Veda calls 'subtle matter'. Humans have no perception of it, as it is different from 'gross matter' that makes up our bodies as well as visible universe.




Someone accused evolution of being immoral as it promotes 'superiority.' I totally dispute that. Evolution describes how an organism survives long enough to breed and pass on its genes.


Each human/animal's body can adjust to environment to some degree. For example if you relocate to another planet with a different degree of sunlight and oxygen, your body will most likely adapt.

However if you think a monkey will become man after one million years - that is unlikely.



I would also like to point out that many if not all religions promote elitism. So the implementation of how evolution or religion is misused is down to individuals using these to promote their own agendas.


It is not true of Vedic religion.



A creative force is undeniable whether that force is chemistry/god/aliens is not for me to say as I have no idea what it is just know that it is. Of course it is not Evolutions place to explain this either as it cannot.


Veda says God creates, sustains and destroys the creation (universe). So it is just not a creative force.

Thanks for asking and my best wishes to you.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by vedatruth
 


Actually this is a misquote as well. Darwin never proposed this. His Theory of evolution is only that a species does not “change” into a new one, but that it splits and both may coexist. So they have common ancestors, but are not mutually exclusive. He never looked as far back as the origins of man, and certainly not as far back as chemicals. This is all extrapolated works by people later extending his works to further and further reaches of the past. In fact he specifically stated that due to the controversy of the topic he would not do any research in the field of the origins of man.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:23 AM
link   
I have one belief how we were all created.

Molepeople


But really, evolution is the way everything was created. Thats my other belief



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:27 AM
link   
Originally posted by colin42
Oh boy do some of you only read the title?

Please read my OP. The title is not misleading and I am not out to disprove Evolution so if you have nothing more to add SHHHHH!!!!

Let the oposing views have a say for a while [/quote

Let the opposing views have a say for a while


That's half the problem, they've spent the last 2000 odd years trying to convince us they are right and some omnipotent being created us and only us on this plane, I think they've had enough airtime thanks



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:40 AM
link   
i believe the concept of evolution to be sound, however what traits are most advantageous ? Of course the traits that allow you to survive.....this is Darwins mistake, he says evolution is 'survivors surviving' ..which is a circular argument (the main criticism of religion)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:41 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


I'll go with you on evolution until the "how the world began part" Big Bang doesn't makes sense, but a spirit moving and creating different things within a "Flower of Life" sequence. Yeah that makes more sense to me. I believe God created the Earth animals, man ect... but evolution is how we got to be today there's to much evidence for evolution you can't deny it.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 06:59 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


So where is this proof? Proof of anything would be nice but there is noting at all. What a shame, another person thinks they have to mislead people just for a S&F.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by byeluvolk
reply to post by vedatruth
 


Actually this is a misquote as well. Darwin never proposed this. His Theory of evolution is only that a species does not “change” into a new one, but that it splits and both may coexist. So they have common ancestors, but are not mutually exclusive. He never looked as far back as the origins of man, and certainly not as far back as chemicals. This is all extrapolated works by people later extending his works to further and further reaches of the past. In fact he specifically stated that due to the controversy of the topic he would not do any research in the field of the origins of man.


Thanks for your comment. My view is monkey will not branch into human after a million years as well.

There are limits to even how you can mix two species of animals. You can only mix two closely related species like a horse and a donkey. But a cross of man and monkey will not work. The conception will not happen.

DNA and RNA are chemicals no doubt, but chemicals which form under the power of life force you call soul. Playing with them can give you unpredictable and dangerous results.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:36 AM
link   
not sure really about this one.i think maybe they have got it wrong about evolution,i dont think we come from ape to man as we still have apes along side us today and they not evolving and we are not evolving either we benn around for so many years nothings change us or the apes and there not going too either full stop..



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:44 AM
link   
So 9 pages and not one person has debunked evolution or offered an objective, rational, logical alternative...what a suprise


For those still believing in the flawed belief of "intelligent desing"...you might wanna define "intelligent", because if the goal was to harbour life, it's a bit of a failure



edit on 22-9-2011 by MrXYZ because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:52 AM
link   
What if it is proved 50% wrong?

Obviously, there is natural selection but that doesn't really explain everything. If you look at how evolution is justified, it relies on incredible odds and bend over backwards to fill in gaps in the logic.

Just as in recreating a crime scene won't always give the most accurate details neither will looking at a few bones.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by vedatruth
 


Regarding soul

As you say humans have no perception of it, as it is different from 'gross matter' that makes up our bodies as well as visible universe I find it strange that you ask me if I believe I have one.

Evolution does not say a monkey can become a man. If you mean that we could not have evolved from a common ancestor there is overwhelming proof that we did.

You could argue that a deer could not become a fish and you would be correct. It can however evolve into a whale which is pretty fish like and not at all like a deer.

You say that Veda says God creates, sustains and destroys the creation (universe). So it is just not a creative force. I could say the same about the Sun, fire, Water. There's a ying to every yang



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 07:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Daughter2
 





Obviously, there is natural selection but that doesn't really explain everything. If you look at how evolution is justified, it relies on incredible odds and bend over backwards to fill in gaps in the logic.


Actually, we can accurately PREDICT outcomes based on the theory of evolution, we are using it in modern medicine!! If as you say the math doesn't stack up, we wouldn't be able to do that. In short, you are wrong I'm afraid



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:00 AM
link   
OP I understand what you are trying to do but don't be surprised if your thread becomes full of...

"God did it".



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   
reply to post by camaro68ss
 



Fossils are made by a rare process and occur only under certain conditions. Not every bone will become a fossil, in fact most will not survuve that long at all.

This is why there arn't fossils all over the place as only a small % of bones become fossils



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by vedatruth

Originally posted by k0mbination
reply to post by vedatruth
 


Evolution. The act of evolving. Something that everything in life does. It has no choice. Life evovles or it stops. Who is to say god dosnt direct evolution? Perhaps god created life to understand itself in which case life is god and god is evolving as well! Who knows and really why does it matter? All that really matters is who are you? Are you happy with your life and what can you do to be better at it.
But then that's just a part of my take on it


1. A human body as well as an animal body is capable of adjusting to the environment.
2. I meant 'Darwin's theory of evolution' that living people and animals evolved from chemicals, and that is against living having a soul.
3. I think you mean 'progress' in the context of 'evolution' That was not what I was talking about. I was talking about Darwin's theory of evolution.

The God, soul, and why God created life is a separate and vast subject. We can talk about it but preferably in a separate thread.





If you take your second point about evolution from chemicals and amino acid groups and carbon life forms ! , then you maybe incorrect about us not having a soul.

research by Dr Rick Strassman into the molecule '___' - Dimethyltryptamine , has yeilded results which could point towards this molecule being the link to the human soul , in chemical format.
So there is yet more evidence that the human soul does exist and is triggered in some way by the release of '___' into the brain , upon birth and death.

Also '___' is present in all living things in trace amounts



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:18 AM
link   
reply to post by blangger
 


Just incase you forgot to read the OP text and just the heading. I asked if Evolution is not the answer to the diversity we see on earth please explain what is.

The idea was to change the cycle of the evolutionists defending and give us a chance to challenge others views and maybe learn a little at the same time.

I may be deluded but I think to some extent that is being achieved. Sorry if that upsets you.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by camaro68ss

Originally posted by micmerci
I have a question for the pro evolutionist. I think that mathematically speaking, the population of the earth would be far greater than 7 billion if man has been here reproducing as long as the theory of evolution claims we have. Can someone validate/refute this mathematically?


just like i posted below. where are the billions of "man" bones that should litter the planet with each step of evolution?


Perhaps first you should have asked, well then where also are the billions of bones from the animals that have been living side by side with us? Well, they too are in the ground, if they managed to survive the test of time and did not erode into dirt. Also you have to realize that until the last couple of thousand years mankind was not at the top of the food chain and we've never until recently had massive populations.



posted on Sep, 22 2011 @ 08:32 AM
link   
So Evolution is wrong... but magic is real???

Interesting... I guess a world of wizards, witches, angels, demons, vampires, werewolves, gods and goddesses are much more exciting than science... I suppose Magic fits in better when participating in the Massive Offline Multiplayer Game known as Religion. Science tends to give too much of a dose of reality and in doing so ruins the whole experience.

Religion is the ultimate form of LARPING.
edit on 22-9-2011 by DJM8507 because: (no reason given)



new topics




 
31
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join