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.

 

In U.S., 46% Hold Creationist View of Human Origins

page: 25
30
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Reflection
I hear this a lot from fundamentalist Christians, that Evolution is just another kind of religion.

NO IT'S NOT!

It is.. sorry to inform you. We "fundamentalist Christians" know what Faith is, and you're trying to tell us something that is clearly faith-based.. isn't? Good luck.


Religious beliefs require blind faith.

Science requires faith only in observation. Believing that what you observe is actually there.

Most people practice science for the majority of the day. They expect the ground to be there with every step they take. Why? Because they've observed and tested it in the past.

This is how the Evolutionist Religious Dogma works - they throw in a little bit truth, and mix it in with their bigger lies. Are you stating that Stellar Evolution is as observed and tested as walking on ground? Because if you are, you'd be dead wrong.


For whatever reason, when it comes to more complex processes, like the origin of life, a lot of people don't use the same kind of reasoning and critical thinking.

More "complex" processes? No one is debating how complex life is, YOU just believe that complex life came from SIMPLE organisms, yet evidence strongly suggests that life has always been complex, in the minimalist of forms, never simple.


I guess it's just much easier to believe a fairy tale, no matter how unlikely it is. Its also comforting for people to believe the answer has already been given to them. The unknown is one of the most frightening, although necessary, aspects to the human experience.

I suppose it's also easy to act like you know it all, when none of us do. There are always at least two sides to every story, but only one truth. No matter how unlikely it is?

You believe we came from rocks after it rained on them.
You believe in the primordial "soup" - My great grandpa wasn't Campbell's chicken soup, I don't know about yours though.
You believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen and that you can fuse past iron.
You believe that over "millions of years" a species can evolve into a new species.
You believe in carbon-dating, never questioning it despite all the evidence that it doesn't work.
You believe in a geologic column.. which doesn't exist.
You believe the Colorado River flowed upstream and carved out the Grand Canyon.

You believe in so many things that require BLIND FAITH and you don't even realize it - and if I am wrong, and you don't believe in any of the above - why do you say you believe in the gods of "time" and "chance" of Evolution?


Religion is an easy way out. Basically the opposite of critical thinking. Science is much more difficult to embrace.

If narrow is the way, then ironically, science is the way.

Folks - the rest of you reading - he is basically saying here, "I'm smart, you're dumb. I'm right, you're wrong." and just because someone doesn't have a science degree means they are incapable of critical thought.

Darwin only had a Theology Degree, after all.
edit on 6-6-2012 by Lionhearte because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:36 PM
link   
What's funny is most creationists and evolutionists have the same problem. Most of each group only know 'half' of what they think they know. They can speak on a few points that solidifies their own views and they ignore the rest. Of course the points they can speak on are those that support their chosen belief. And if one dares to challenge them on a point they chose to ignore, the attacks begin. Don't you dare try to provide updated evidence of any kind because it will be ignored as well, as people have already made up their minds. It's also funny how minds change when one knows death is near.

Gotta love division and denial.

and theories
edit on 6-6-2012 by six67seven because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 09:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by six67seven
What's funny is most creationists and evolutionists have the same problem. Most of each group only know 'half' of what they think they know.

I know I don't believe in ancient myths. I know I believe in science. That position doesn't win me friends, but it keeps me sane.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 


Obviously Darwin, with his theology degree wasn't hamstrung by the "doctrine" of Biblical infallibility, the Bible itself doesn’t state that it's verbatim God inspired. In fact, there are only two vague verses out of over 33,000 used to justify this core doctrine.

The doctrine of Biblical infallibility was not a central tenet of Christianity until early in the 20th century when the theory of evolution began to be taught as fact in classrooms. It was then that the Christians countered with this doctrine. Not only did it protect Christian tenets from the "danger" of Darwinist teachings, but it served other purposes as well. Without the doctrine that the Bible is infallible and that every word of it is of God, it would put question marks on every verse.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:12 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 


You don't understand how science works, do you? There's not much "blind faith" involved.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe we came from rocks after it rained on them.
You believe in the primordial "soup" - My great grandpa wasn't Campbell's chicken soup, I don't know about yours though.
You believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen and that you can fuse past iron.
You believe that over "millions of years" a species can evolve into a new species.
You believe in carbon-dating, never questioning it despite all the evidence that it doesn't work.
You believe in a geologic column.. which doesn't exist.
You believe the Colorado River flowed upstream and carved out the Grand Canyon.


I take nothing on faith. Science has released man from any need to believe in anything.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by RealSpoke
reply to post by SplitInfinity
 


lol, I'm not, I was just talking nonsense. And yeah, Ohio does suck.


LOL! I hear THAT! Split Infinity



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe we came from rocks after it rained on them.


An attempt to ridicule abiogenesis, what a great way to debate.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe in the primordial "soup" - My great grandpa wasn't Campbell's chicken soup, I don't know about yours though.


Again, an attempt to ridicule. Are you a child? You certainly post like one.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen and that you can fuse past iron.


Yes, yes I do. You believe a magical man made all of uranium? Okay, so God made an element specifically designed to incite radiation among the environment. What a terrible God, I certainly wouldn't worship a God like that.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe that over "millions of years" a species can evolve into a new species.


Indeed it can. The problem is that when you think of mutations, you are picturing an orangutan giving birth to a human or something silly such as that. It doesn't work that way and you should stop pretending it does.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe in carbon-dating, never questioning it despite all the evidence that it doesn't work.


I would love to hear why science is all wrong about half-life. Enlighten me, if you will.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe in a geologic column.. which doesn't exist.


Right, because the Earth is only a few thousand years old and completely designed by a magic man. Again, I would love to hear why you believe this to be true.


Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe the Colorado River flowed upstream and carved out the Grand Canyon.


I am certainly no expert in the geological activities of the Grand Canyon, so I am going to refrain from commenting here.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 

"Evolutionist"?! What's that supposed to mean? Afaik, there is no such thing as an "evolutionist"...
I think your brain is overtly "concussionalistic" as a result of practising too much radical "gravitationalism".

Oh, and you mixed up evolution and abiogenesis by the way.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by ColCurious
reply to post by Lionhearte
 

"Evolutionist"?! What's that supposed to mean? Afaik, there is no such thing as an "evolutionist"...
I think your brain is overtly "concussionalistic" as a result of practising too much radical "gravitationalism".

Oh, and you mixed up evolution and abiogenesis by the way.


Did you seriously just say "evolutionist" is not a word and then smugly attempt to sound intelligent? Wow..



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ElohimJD
 

I noticed you did not dispute the FACT that Moses and his followers crossed the REED SEA and Moses did not part the RED SEA. So you feel to keep a lie perpetuating itself is a GOOD THING?

As for the rest of your counter arguments....what you have done is used what something tells you what is to try to disprove what is.

DNA is a Molecule...it is not life. But DNA is the encoding of how life develops as well as being able to exist in a Non-Living Molecular Form known as a Virus. I could go into the concepts...but you would use something without any proof to argue. Split Infinity



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 10:57 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 
I would also add to this that the claim that the old testament is all wrath and the new testament is all grace is very far from correct, as well.

By volume, the new testament very possibly exceeds the old in its promises of wrath and judgement, while the old testament speaks quite profusely about the grace of god and the promises he makes to those who walk in righteousness.

Excellent job on this thread otherwise, keep up the good work. For one side or the other to claim the matter is settled is nothing short of very wrong, and both sides are indeed very religious in their natures, despite one seeking to be purely naturalistic.

Take care.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 

Well, does it in the U.S.?
Do you seriously call people who "believe" in the theory of evolution "evolutionists"?
We just call them educated here.
Do you also call people who "believe" in the newtonian theory of gravitation "gravitationalists"?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   
I would love to know the demographic of these figures.

I have heard that atheists tend to be urbanites...
...few rural people are atheists...
...some might argue this is because of the naturalistic philosophy of education...
...others think it is because living in and working with the natural world trends against atheism.

Anyone got some actual data/analysis?



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lionhearte
You believe we came from rocks after it rained on them.
You believe in the primordial "soup" - My great grandpa wasn't Campbell's chicken soup, I don't know about yours though.
You believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen and that you can fuse past iron.
You believe that over "millions of years" a species can evolve into a new species.
You believe in carbon-dating, never questioning it despite all the evidence that it doesn't work.
You believe in a geologic column.. which doesn't exist.
You believe the Colorado River flowed upstream and carved out the Grand Canyon.


Yeah, and.....why is this a problem?

You seem to want an admission of faith from those who believe in evolution.

I have faith in science. I have faith that evolution is fact.

Last time I checked that's ok. Besides if God wants to punish me for living a good, kind life simply because of this, he really isn't worthy of worship, because if this is the god that's out there I would rather spend an eternity in hell than spend a moment in his presence.

With that said, you are free to believe in God, and I am free not to.

To both sides of this fight.....no one wins. It just causes needless anger.

Can we all start having conversations with a modicum of maturity please?

Or everyone can continue to be d-bags about the subject, because that really fosters the free exchange of ideas.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:03 PM
link   
reply to post by jiggerj
 
Better example there would be bacteria and possibly various other microorganisms that reproduce significantly faster. Yet they are what they are.

What makes them so evolutionarily perfect and suited to their environments that didn't also apply to the supposed ancestors of the rest of us? Or the Great White, or crocodiles, for that matter?

Darwin himself admitted that his theory would stand or fall on the fossil record - and that has only gotten worse for his theory since his time. Instead of seeing any actual gradual procession, we see fits and starts, species appearing out of nowhere, remaining unchanged, and then vanishing from the record.

The debates between the various gradualists and the punk-eek supporters (Gould being one of my favorites) were always very enlightening as they all did a wonderful job at demolishing each other's arguments. Very much reminds me of "A house divided against itself cannot stand".

I personally don't have an ISSUE with evolution - I just can't support it at this time for these and various other reasons that as yet remain insurmountable as far as I can tell.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:04 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 

In response to your...absolutely illogical statement that I am comparing a Virus' existence with Complex life Evolving from Simple Life...even though that is true...I was conveying that a Virus is an example of Complex Molecular Chains being able to EVOLVE even though they are not considered life.

Split Infinity



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:07 PM
link   
reply to post by steve1709
 
That's actually micro-evolution, better called natural selection there, champ - variation within the existing genetic code.

And guess what? Those viruses and bacteria still remain the same species, just different strains. Essentially they're like all the different breeds of dogs, which are all still one single species.



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by libertytoall
 

And your proof of this is....WHAT?
Split Infinity



posted on Jun, 6 2012 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by Lionhearte
 


Those are a lot of unfounded assumptions but my favorite has to be, "You believe that uranium evolved from hydrogen and that you can fuse past iron."

Actually, fusion of elements past iron occur in stars that go supernova if I'm not mistaken, which means we are all made of star stuff. Yet another blow to the creationist story of being made out of clay.

Also, believing in evolution doesn't mean I don't believe, or at least reserve the right to believe, in a creator. I just don't believe in the literal story in the Bible. Many great scientist, INCLUDING DARWIN, believed in some form of a creator.

I really don't mean to be condescending. I don't think I'm smarter than anyone. I just choose to put my faith in the scientific method instead of ancient ideologies.

But in all actuality, if anyone says "it's my way or the highway" it's religion.

That's why I choose to believe in science and my own observation. Not so I can know everything, but so I can QUESTION everything and DISCOVER truth instead of being told what truth is. If you can't question something you are enslaved to it. There's freedom in doubt and reserving the right to change your mind.



new topics

top topics



 
30
<< 22  23  24    26  27  28 >>

log in

join