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.
Originally posted by RebelRouser
so in other words. because stuff is diverse and different from each other,. there is no God? how do u come to that? how do you know thats not what it planned it to do.
the fact is. you can tell me all day about evolution. but if it can just appear from thin air as you guys so surely believe. why can it not be duplicated? (without taking it from something already here). through years of research and trying to figure it out, why cant we do it?
but you blindly put ur faith in the stuff just happening on its own like magic.
there has to be something that started it. something cant just come from nothing..
btw dont u think if we were all little organisms like omeba (that dont differ from eachother), just decide they weren't feeling being identical to its amoeba brothers so it just decided to be something else on its own. like a tree instead of a fish. why wouldn't it be the same? or maybe just trees and people. why would it decide to be animals and insects and every crazy thing in between? its so complicated you cant even begin to understand it so u just force it to work by being blind.
I think there is just as much objective evidence behind god being a space alien. Only microevolution has been observed and this does not prove macroevolution. I would believe in the process if the timeline were in the trillions of years. Unfortunatly that isn't possible on earth because earth is only 4 billion years old.
Nope. I never said that. Evolution and a creator could easily both be true, but thus far only 1 has objective evidence behind it. I'm saying that evolution is true, regardless of whether or not there is a creator. Most creationists in this thread seem to think that evolution goes against god, and automatically dismiss it, but why assume that? The only thing evolution rules out is the literal genesis 6 day creation story.
It's a valid argument, and there is no excuse. Scientists have been observing microevolution but it appears that those changes are all within acceptable tolerences of the species. Like brown eyes, blue eyes, green eyes etc... anyhow, a species has NEVER been observed just changing into another species, not even gradualy and any type of severe changes kills the species. I would like to point out that if macroevolution were real we would have many sub species of many species. We don't have a single evolved pair out of 5 million species on this planet. Interesting huh?
the fact is. you can tell me all day about evolution. but if it can just appear from thin air as you guys so surely believe. why can it not be duplicated? (without taking it from something already here). through years of research and trying to figure it out, why cant we do it?
Scientists have allready admitted though quantium physics that there is some type of intelligence behind it ALL. Now with that they aren't saying it was god, or trevor the giant celestial squid, but there is something out there. It would appear that every planet is formed and automatically has life on it, and is a balanced eco system.
but you blindly put ur faith in the stuff being created by a deity like magic. Please show me the magic involved in evolution. That's a new one to me.
You guys need to read the wiki page on mtDNA en.wikipedia.org...
It really makes you wonder, doesn't it? This is the reason I'm not close minded about the concept of god or a creator. It has nothing to do with evolution, though.
which in my opinion is purely subconscious. you dont want to have to feel responsible for doing anything bad, or feel like you should even strive to be good, and by good, i mean things like going out of your way to help people or along lines like that. its much easier to accept a more comfortable belief and connect the dots you want. but when you do that you are cheating yourself. you will never see the big picture.
why can it not be duplicated? (without taking it from something already here). through years of research and trying to figure it out, why cant we do it?
Does it mean if you don't understand something, and the community of physicists don't understand it, that means God did it? Is that how you want to play this game? ... If that's how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on. ... I don't even care if someone wants to say, "You don't understand that, God did it." ... What would bother me is if you were so content in that answer, that you no longer had curiosity to learn how it happened. The day you stop looking because you're content God did it ... you're useless on the frontier of understanding the nature of the world.
Originally posted by RebelRouser
so in other words. because stuff is diverse and different from each other,. there is no God? how do u come to that? how do you know thats not what it planned it to do. the fact is. you can tell me all day about evolution. but if it can just appear from thin air as you guys so surely believe. why can it not be duplicated? (without taking it from something already here). through years of research and trying to figure it out, why cant we do it? but you blindly put ur faith in the stuff just happening on its own like magic. there has to be something that started it. something cant just come from nothing.. btw dont u think if we were all little organisms like omeba (that dont differ from eachother), just decide they weren't feeling being identical to its amoeba brothers so it just decided to be something else on its own. like a tree instead of a fish. why wouldn't it be the same? or maybe just trees and people. why would it decide to be animals and insects and every crazy thing in between? its so complicated you cant even begin to understand it so u just force it to work by being blind.edit on 5-12-2011 by RebelRouser because: (no reason given)
Please give a link. Some proof scientists admitted some sort of 'divine power' exists
scientists have allready admitted that some type of divine power must have been present to make all of these creations
How many bleeding times do you have to be told that evolution has nothing to say about how life started. Say after me 'evolution does not explain creation'. Keep repeating it until it sinks in.
I have come to a conclusion. Evolution is not the only answer because we all would have had to come from slime, and where did the slime come from?
Dont care. This thread is about you explaing diversity not us explaining your creator
If a creator or many creators are the answer, then who made the creators?
Have you got a thing for slime? oh yes your 30 years study of the supernatural would have included ghostbusters
I don't think humans could evolve from slime in zillions of years so there is a big problem.
First show me where it is said anywhere that each planet is formed with life on it.
It would appear that each planet is formed with life on it, in a balanced eco system. A good example is how humans don't fit in on earth. We are not part of any cycle of life on this planet, and in fact the planet is rejecting us. This is why I say we must have de-evolved because we were better off as primates.
I'm sorry but that link you provided seem to be offering more against speciation then for it. If there was a specific part you liked can you highlight it and send it to me.
Did you miss all the times in this topic where examples of observed instances of speciation were provided? Here, I'll provide the links again despite the fact that opponents to evolution never actually read the pages and continue with their false claims.
Observed Instances of Speciation
Some More Observed Speciation Events
As for your reasons why humans don't belong on Earth... The Earth doesn't provide those things for any other animal so why do you expect it to provide it for humans? Other species have individual die from starvation. Other animals affect their environment in ways that can be seen as detrimental, such as a beaver knocking down trees to build a dam or a lion killing a gazelle for food. The environment is not tailored to one specific species and that is what drives evolution. Every species changes their environment, but at the same time the environment is changing every species. Humanity does what every other species on the planet does, just on a much larger scale as we are capable of adapting to any environment.
If that's how you want to invoke your evidence for God, then God is an ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance that's getting smaller and smaller and smaller as time goes on
Well survival of the fittest for sure. You totally missed the milk reasons. Yes your most likely right about it only being needed for kids. The point was, why are we drinking it from cows rather than from our mothers? It's very complex but I'll break it down. She isn't getting the milk she needs to produce it to feed it to her babys. We have relied on milk from our existence here on earth. It's not a match made for us, to be drinking milk. Lactose is just a 4th process and isn't even required for most peeps. The reason why we are drinking milk is because there is something that is missing in our INTENDED diet. We use processing or adaptation to allow our use of it. It's a cold dose of reality thats easy to miss.
Actually, there's no good medical reason for us to be drinking milk past infancy. They say it's for calcium and Vitamin D, but getting sun exposure will generate Vitamin D. Your skin tone is dictated by how much sun you and your recent ancestors got. Sounds like adaption to this planet if you ask me. We thrive on animal fat, marrow, and vegetables. We are scavengers, and we have the ability to run, climb, sneak, and build tools to make up for a lack in strength and agility.
There's no reason to assume we didn't adapt to this planet, just like every other organism. The reason they seem "provided for" is because all the ones who couldn't survive their environments died. Only the ones who had the most stable lives survived and spread their genes. This means that only the organisms which "fit" their environment will live.
The first link was doing nothing but dissproving speciation. I wonderd if you just had the wrong link. Speciation has never been observed in humans, maybe that will settle that.
I fail to see how those links disprove speciation when they are giving observed examples of speciation. As for your milk comment, you couldn't have picked a worse example. The truth is the ability to process lactose is relatively new for humans, which is why there is such a high prevalence of lactose intolerance. It is through evolution that we are capable of consuming lactose at all. Furthermore, milk can be consumed without being processed. The primary purpose of those processes is to extend its shelf life, so instead of milk going bad after a few days it can last weeks.
Sounds like there is some intelligence in the choice here. So its because of necessity. So it was necessary for us to scientifically figure out how milk needed to be processed for a longer shelf life, rather than our bodies adapting? Are you trying to say that adaptation is a form of specieation?
Your final statement also shows that you still have no idea what evolution is. Evolution is not a conscious process for the most part. No species is evolving because of desire but because of necessity. When an environment changes individuals of a species will seek out a mate who are better adapted to surviving the new environment. The hope is that these traits will then pass on to the offspring giving them a better chance at reaching maturity and producing offspring of their own. As this continues new traits will become prevalent in the species until the point where they would be no longer able to mate with those individuals who existed before the change in environment. This is speciation or, as Creationists like to refer to it, macroevolution.