Compelling and Convincing Evidence that Life was Created! What Say You?, page 3

privacy

Pages: << 1 2 3 4 5 6 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 32 times

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:32 AM by Kryties

Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by Kryties

Typical response - is your belief (evolution) iso weak that you have to resort to unintelligent response?
Common I hope you're better than that.

Mate, I've seen this argument come and go a billion times since I first joined ATS several years ago. It always ends the same....here...this image sums the outcome of these threads quite well methinks.....(also, I happen to know a little bit about the inner working of certain massive Aussie churches straight from the horses mouth - it's nothing but a giant con.)....anyways....the image....

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:33 AM by edmc^2

reply to post by Kryties

Typical non response to a question
.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:35 AM by Kryties

reply to post by edmc^2

Wrong. Its a response that is on topic and to the point.....you just don't like what I am saying.

You cannot just make a thread then ostracise everyone who disagrees with you, you do know this don't you?

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:37 AM by MrXYZ

Originally posted by edmc^2
reply to post by ChaoticOrder

Can you show me a program that does not require a programmer?

Seriously I'd like to see it.

Last I checked computers aren't alive

And again, no one's saying it was "chance", no matter how often you keep on repeating that nonsense.

"Look at all the things outside...how can that not be the result of a creator?" isn't objective evidence, it's pure speculation not based on logic, rationality, or objective evidence. And hell, we can explain perfectly fine how humans evolved from single celled organisms...no need for a creator.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:42 AM by Kryties

reply to post by MrXYZ

Christians (and other religions) fail to see that chance could not happen in evolution by it's very definition simply because they do not understand what they are talking about. It's like asking a 6 year old to explain Quantum Physics. Not only do they not understand it, they refuse to learn it because it goes against the very belief system that causes them to misunderstand it in the first place.

Yes, it's rather confusing I know, but there you have it. I've lived and breathed it with my mother (who ended up going bat# crazy - she was perfectly fine before the church got their filthy hands on her) so believe me, I know what I'm talking about.

edit on 16/11/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:48 AM by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by Kryties
See what I did there too?

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:51 AM by Kryties

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Epic Fail.

There are MANY MANY who are still alive, that image just chose some of the more famous ones. How about Seth Shostak for one? In fact, how about every single person in the world who has a science degree (or a degree of common sense)? Does Steven Hawking ring any bells (not church bells, get your mind out of the gutter....)?

You really are clutching at straws mate, and not very well either.

edit on 16/11/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:56 AM by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Epic Fail.

There are MANY MANY who are still alive, that image just chose some of the more famous ones. How about Seth Shostak for one? In fact, how about every single person in the world who has a science degree (or a degree of common sense)? Does Steven Hawking ring any bells (not church bells, get your mind out of the gutter....)?

You really are clutching at straws mate, and not very well either.
edit on 16/11/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

Wow! can't take a joke I see. If you think I was using that as an arguement......ouch, I feel sorry for you people.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 09:58 AM by Kryties

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

You never can tell. I've been hoodwinked before, apologies if I got you wrong. Perhaps, from now on, to avoid error you may want to add a few smilies? Or a disclaimer?

Your photoshopping is completely wrong though, that point stands

edit on 16/11/2011 by Kryties because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:11 AM by CastleMadeOfSand

Here is a simple question:

What percentage of knowledge has science (to date) accumulated to explain all there is to know?

It surely can't be 100%, let alone even 1%. It's more like .000000001%. So how can you vehemently deny claims like the OP's when you don't even know 100%? Let alone 1% of all there is to know?

You can't prove/disprove things which you don't even know about yet.

edit on 11/16/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:16 AM by Kryties

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Science has never claimed to know everything, unlike religion. In fact the very premise of science is to formulate theories based on evidence then prove or disprove them using rigorous techniques. Finding out they are wrong about something is just as exciting as finding out they are right.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
You can't prove/disprove things which you don't even know about yet.

Says the person who seems to think that a book written thousands of years ago proves the existence of an invisible man in the sky who can make rainbows on command and, quite frankly, treats his 'followers' like a tyrant would his slaves.

As I said before, Science has NEVER claimed to know everything, far from it. The very premise of Science is to FIND OUT that which we don't know.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:17 AM by MrXYZ

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Here is a simple question:

What percentage of knowledge has science (to date) accumulated to explain all there is to know?

It surely can't be 100%, let alone even 1%. It's more like .000000001%. So how can you vehemently deny claims like the OP's when you don't even know 100%? Let alone 1% of all there is to know?

You can't prove/disprove things which you don't even know about yet.
edit on 11/16/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

Well, at least we know how humans evolved (and that the Genesis account is 100% wrong)...but of course science doesn't have all the answers. But at least they're backing up their claims with objective evidence. Religion on the other hand is totally confusing "guessing" with "knowledge" and is often demonstrably wrong.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:34 AM by ManjushriPrajna

Does it really make a difference where we came from or how the universe was created? If you had access to a great and vast wealth of knowledge, say, your own Akashic Library, and by simply reading a page in a book, you would have the definitive answer to the origins of everything. You would know whether God created all of this, or all of this just happened to be happening.

Now tell me how that knowledge would bring you real happiness, or how that knowledge would bring peace and enlightenment for others.

It simply wouldn't.

Rise above and transcend religion and non-religion. How you came about doesn't matter. You're here now, that's what matters.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:39 AM by Kryties

Originally posted by ManjushriPrajna
Rise above and transcend religion and non-religion. How you came about doesn't matter. You're here now, that's what matters.

It's a little hard to rise above something that shoves itself in your face everywhere you go, along with creating more violence worldwide then any other cause or group. I will not stop until I have seen the scourge of religion and the lies, violence and brokenness it creates torn asunder and fed to the wolves.

But I do get what you are saying mate, I appreciate the sentiment - if only we all thought like that from the beginning - what a wonderful world we would live in now!

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:39 AM by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by Kryties
reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Science has never claimed to know everything, unlike religion. In fact the very premise of science is to formulate theories based on evidence then prove or disprove them using rigorous techniques. Finding out they are wrong about something is just as exciting as finding out they are right.

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
You can't prove/disprove things which you don't even know about yet.

Says the person who seems to think that a book written thousands of years ago proves the existence of an invisible man in the sky who can make rainbows on command and, quite frankly, treats his 'followers' like a tyrant would his slaves.

As I said before, Science has NEVER claimed to know everything, far from it. The very premise of Science is to FIND OUT that which we don't know.

Where did I mention the Bible? Where did I mention I was Christian?

As you said " The very premise of Science is to FIND OUT that which we don't know" FIND OUT. NOT RIDICULE.

edit on 11/16/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:41 AM by Kryties

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Come on mate, enough nonsense. You are arguing the Christian side, that is plainly obvious, yet you are deciding to play games and pretend you aren't.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:45 AM by Sparky63

Originally posted by Atzil321
reply to post by InnerstellarOne

If the earth and everything on it was totally destroyed today, the universe would continue to exist without us. The idea that it was created solely for us is absurd in the extreme.

Just to play Devils advocate:
If I built a doghouse for Fido. But then Fido was killed. The doghouse continues to exist without him. That does not change the fact that dog house was in fact constructed just for him.

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:46 AM by MrXYZ

reply to post by CastleMadeOfSand

Well, we're allowed to ridicule if something is simply incorrect...which the bible and pretty much all religious scriptures are

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:48 AM by Kryties

Originally posted by Sparky63

Just to play Devils advocate:
If I built a doghouse for Fido. But then Fido was killed. The doghouse continues to exist without him. That does not change the fact that dog house was in fact constructed just for him.

Ahh, but was the rest of the planet constructed just to house Fido's kennel?

reply posted on 16-11-2011 @ 10:49 AM by CastleMadeOfSand

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by CastleMadeOfSand
Here is a simple question:

What percentage of knowledge has science (to date) accumulated to explain all there is to know?

It surely can't be 100%, let alone even 1%. It's more like .000000001%. So how can you vehemently deny claims like the OP's when you don't even know 100%? Let alone 1% of all there is to know?

You can't prove/disprove things which you don't even know about yet.
edit on 11/16/2011 by CastleMadeOfSand because: (no reason given)

Well, at least we know how humans evolved (and that the Genesis account is 100% wrong)...but of course science doesn't have all the answers. But at least they're backing up their claims with objective evidence. Religion on the other hand is totally confusing "guessing" with "knowledge" and is often demonstrably wrong.