Originally posted by Questionablesanity
I do not understand why Christianity and science are always seen as mortal enemies. I for one am a proud Christian, however, I have no problem with evolution and believe that anyone who postulates the universe is only a few thousand years old is a testament to our broken school system.

I completely agree. Christians are often wrongly portrayed as fundamentalists. Most Christians I know are rational people that agree with science and evolution, they just don't interpret the bible as absolute 100% literal as there is no reason to. God + evolution do not negate each other in any way whatsoever. They are completely different things.

Evolution asks, "How did life on earth become so diverse?"
Religion asks, "Why are we here? What is our purpose? What is the meaning of life"

Very different questions with very different answers.

This is actually a great thread and the original article is well worth reading!

Okay, someone clear some things up for me.

The ruins located in Jordan seem to be in almost the exact same area as Petra; at least that's what I can tell from my google researching and the fact that when I search the name(Wadi Faynan, Jordan) in Google Earth it takes me straight to Petra. lol So, is it near enough to the Petra site to actually be considered part of it or is this just a general lack of information on exact location for non-professional sources? However, I'm going to do a little spitballing based on the first possibility if no one minds...

Now, according to the sources I've read Petra was supposedly created by the Nabataeans somewhere in the general time frame between 1550-1292 BC. Just wondering, could there be a connection? Like maybe, at least some of Petra was actually older ruins from these "original' creators of the site and the newbies just moved in later and set up shop(like with Lixus or Baalbek). Or maybe a more direct connection like the site has always been occupied by pretty much the same people who ended up adopting the architectural styles of neighboring civilizations of their times. If so, that would make it one of the longest used settlements in known human history.

Anyway, I digress. S&F for the OP.

Originally posted by randomname
the only mystery i see is why people are still trying to find a missing link.

where's the alligators missing link. or for that matter, where's the chimpanzee's missing link. or the eagle, or the ant's or the any of the other billions of distinct species on earth.

if i told you crocodiles used to fly and had fur you'd laugh.

but there's as much evidence to prove that as there is to prove man was an ape.

to say man was an ape, used to have fur and swung from trees is ridiculous.

every species on earth is completely taken care of. no animal has to manufacture it's clothes, has to go to work 40 hrs a week, has to pay a mortgage etc.

i've seen horses in -25 degree weather gallop around like it's hawaii. all it has is short coarse hair for warmth.
i had multiple layers of sweaters and a thermal insulated jacket and i had to go inside after 10 mins.

and horses aren't native to north america.

the people who believe in evolution say that a species always evolves for the better.

how is it better to be completely naked. man is the only creature on earth that has to clothe himself or die from the elements.

man has to cook most of his food or risk death and illness from parasites and bacteria. again the only creature that does this.

man has to build houses to have shelter. most creature's just lay in a bush and sleep. and the ones that do build shelters, like beavers, build it in a few days and don't have 30 year mortgages. they also don't need power tools, electricity, and a trip to home depot.

then there's music, art, sports, emotions, love, crying, sadness. all these things are beyond any evolutionary necessity.

if anything, if you believe in evolution, it points to simplicity and efficiency.

the fact that we are so contradictory to the theory of evolution should at least spark a sliver of common sense that somethings not right there.

the theory of evolution doesn't explain why 2 hydrogen atoms and an oxygen atom makes water. or why even water exists. our existence depends on much more than the ability to spark a fire. it takes the harmony of the entire universe to sustain our existence.

we look for proof of God. we are proof of God.

edit on 21-12-2011 by randomname because: (no reason given)

we have only looked in 1% of the earth for fossils and look at how much we know and as we uncover more there will be more and more evidence for evolution because if at 1% we think evolution is right im sure were right