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 swan001
reply to post by GD21D
I am a kinda hard-core atheist, but I science just can't explain why life has appeared. So I also believe in intelligent design, that is, that something intelligent (a new neuron-like mathematical equation, perhaps?) created life.
Originally posted by Helious
I'm sorry but frankly speaking...... Evolution is just as absurd as religion and both are broken theory's as it pertains to our sorted past.
Originally posted by Titen-Sxull
reply to post by blueorder
That's why we white folks are, well, white, we adapted to our environment.
One example of remarkable human evolution - Tibetans have been found to carry special genes that allow them to survive in altitudes the rest of us would find extremely inhospitable. Rather than being a problem for evolution this actually supports it.
Originally posted by Malcher
Using adaptation as an example or proof of evolution is disingenuous since you know evolution relies on one species changing into another.
Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by rhinoceros
If you think that science doesn't care about "why", then obviously you never studied science or physics.
Originally posted by GD21D
We're still coming back to the same situation. There a definitely some holes in our understanding of the human timeline.It is believed that the great Sphinx was constructed somewhere around 2,500 B.C. It is also believed that the last significant span of rainfall in the Nile Vally ended approx 4,000 B.C. So how do we explain the water erosion on the Great Sphinx? Just look at it, it's clearly water erosion.It's an example of science forcing a square peg in a round hole to make the story fit. So why maintain the same ideas if the science doesn't work? It appears as if they're committed to the idea regardless of the facts. I'm definitely more of a scientific mind than a religious one. There is nothing I want more than for science to prove religion wrong, as I feel religion has caused much hurt in the human race. But don't tell me one thing when clear evidence is saying another, it goes against the logic behind science. Just look at the erosion, that is definitely not wind and sand erosion.
Originally posted by rhinoceros
Originally posted by Malcher
Using adaptation as an example or proof of evolution is disingenuous since you know evolution relies on one species changing into another.
Please explain this further. According to you and your knowledge of modern synthesis, how does speciation happen?
SOURCE Yes sir, around 2,500 B.C.
* The traditional and probably still majority view is that the Great Sphinx was built at the same time as the nearby Pyramid of Khafre (Khaf-Ra, Chephren) in about 2540 B.C.E. The face of the Great Sphinx has been thought to be Khafre's, though recent evidence casts doubt on this notion (see below).
A geologist asserts the fact that the water erosion was present. Are you sure you visited Egypt? The Nile Valley is still a dry climate, not sustaining enough rainfall to give the sphinx the type of erosion clearly evident. Spare me the credible scientist nonsense. You can find these facts simply by looking for them. Why does this have anything to to with the theory of evolution? It proves that science is not infallible and can be corrupted just like religion. If what John West asserts is true, than it throws our whole understanding of Egyptian society,and human history out of the window. I'm not going back and forth with you on this. Enjoy what you believe to be true, just as I will.
However there has been lively debate in recent years arguing that it may be anywhere from two to four times that old. John Anthony West first noticed weathering patterns on the Sphinx that were consistent with water erosion rather than erosion produced by wind and sand. These patterns were not found on other structures on the plateau. Geologist Robert Schock agreed that water erosion was in evidence.
Originally posted by swan001
reply to post by rhinoceros
I understand what you are trying to say. But Physics is VERY interested by the "why", believe me. A lot of important questions are still not answered, and that bothers ALOT scientists. The Anthropic Principle is something that perplexes every physicist. The reason why life seems to be the only thing that escaped entropy also stays a mystery, and scientists are still searching for the LAST truth, the real truth. Science, religion, Illuminati, EVERYBODY is trying to figure out the big question: Why?
Why are we here? Why is our universe so fine-tuned? etc.
Peace, mate.
Originally posted by Malcher
Why would one species change into another? Can you answer that?