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.

 

why I hate evolution..

page: 9
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


No.... I think your just tailoring the facts to your argument. There are certainly dogma's within science. Like: nothing can go faster than the speed of light. The universe was created by the big bang.

Are these not just replacements for religious dogma's? Would there not be equal amount of upheaval about discrediting these than there was when it was announce the earth wasn't the center of the universe?




posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


No.... I think your just tailoring the facts to your argument. There are certainly dogma's within science. Like: nothing can go faster than the speed of light. The universe was created by the big bang.

Are these not just replacements for religious dogma's? Would there not be equal amount of upheaval about discrediting these than there was when it was announce the earth wasn't the center of the universe?


That's what I'm saying, but the dogmas based on observation, re-observation and the scientific method hold more validity than anything based on the guesswork of ancient peoples.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 12:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


No.... I think your just tailoring the facts to your argument. There are certainly dogma's within science. Like: nothing can go faster than the speed of light. The universe was created by the big bang.

Are these not just replacements for religious dogma's? Would there not be equal amount of upheaval about discrediting these than there was when it was announce the earth wasn't the center of the universe?


Religious dogma has ZERO objective evidence behind it, while scientific theories do...they are not "theories" like we use in slang. They are based on scientific method.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:01 PM
link   
Ok, before this goes any further, I suggest those criticizing evolution watch the follow video:



It's part of a whole series which can be found here: LINK

The series goes over many of the points mentioned in this thread....points against evolution that have been debunked for years. So if you care about not looking stupid, and if you want to do me a favor and don't force me to type massive walls of text highlighting just how wrong you are...watch it!!



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by iWantToBeelieve
 

I do not believe calling people who believe that way retards in any way has something to do with my religion. In these "books" you speak of, it does say the tongue is as sharp as the sword, but I did not wish harm nor death upon anyone, so your little bit about reading my own religions books, is invalid. Then you go on to say how we "creationists" call you "evolutionists" well sorry to say, you just bit your own ass there. That's a paradox, by doing exactly what you said you do not like, "Creationists" calling you evolutionists, then in turn you call us creationists, lol. Also, as for your little quip about "our dualist ways of thinking" it is not always one or the other, there is a gray area. So don't be so blinded by what your mind makes up as a general "christian". As far as you saying you let your knowledge evolve, do not most people do that? As you learn you learn past things may have been incorrect, so your education evolves. You're not special in that way. Thanks for your attempt at a response though ; )

It's quite remarkable just how much of my relatively short post you didn't get.
I have to question whether English is your first language or that you just can't read properly.
Your first paragraph makes very little sense indeed. Calling anyone a "retard", either via speech or using the written word, is defamatory and I take great offence at that. Again, that is not Christian.

My point about creationists calling every non-creationist an evolutionist went straight over your head. The fact is that I and a lot of non-creationists aren't ALL evolutionists. As I said some of us will keep an open mind until we are at the very least 99.9% sure of something and not just be a sheep. I also said that I enjoy being called an evolutionist, not that I didn't like it. If you believe in creationism ergo you are a creationist and the same for evolution. Unfortunately I don't subscribe to either, I may lean more one way than the other but I have my doubts.
The dualist remark was made in respect of the point above. I really shouldn't have any need to explain it further.

As far as letting my knowledge evolve, no I don't think everyone does that as, to repeat myself yet again, some people think a thought and stick to it. That isn't evolving.
I certainly don't feel I'm "special" as you put it. I'm very believably normal.


I would reciprocate and say thank you for your attempt at a response but quite clearly since you have not read my post correctly and only seen what you believed I was writing then yours wasn't really a direct response to my post.
Just a barely legible babble.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by AwakeinNM
S&F my friend. I hope English is not your first language, by the way. Please say it isn't.


I grew up in a ton of different countries, and I'm weird when it comes to languages. I had flatmates where we switched between English, German, and French...sometimes in the same sentence. Most of the time I post on ATS really late, so my "choice of words" and grammar probably isn't the best



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by Barcs
 


Why do you assume Science and Religion can't co-exist? Seems like a VERY narrow minded view of both.

Science isn't strong enough to stand on its own weight if a Creator is introduced?

The Bible doesn't say HOW God created the universe, life, etc. your just assuming He wasn't responsible for what you call science...


at so many people jumping down my throat for defending science from ignorance. I never once said science and religion can't coexist. I have called for this dozens upon dozens of times, but creationists won't stop attacking science and evolution. THEY think it can't coexist, not me. I'm saying that religion and science are separate things. One is faith based, one is fact based. You can't say science is religion or that religion is science. The very nature of those concepts goes against it. Acknowledge science and faith for what they are and stop thinking in absolutes.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by iWantToBeelieve
 


You did exactly as I knew you would and created a strawman based on what YOU THINK (or creationist sites think for you) evolution is. Like I said, please link me to the science behind evolution that is wrong, instead of over generalizing concepts and blanket statements that have nothing to do with the actual theory or process of evolution. Where is the science that contradicts evolution? Where is the science that shows creation? Logical fallacies will get you no where. I could pick apart your list piece by piece but I've already done that 100 times on this site. Post science and sources or it didn't happen. That stuff about the geological column is laughable.
edit on 19-6-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


God Bless You



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by iWantToBeelieve
reply to post by Barcs
 


God Bless You


And you as well. It's funny how you assume I'm an atheist because I defend science. An interesting world that you live in, I must say.

You should know that:

1. Genetic mutations can be measured from generation to generation in any creature on earth.

2. Natural selection has been observed in a lab and in nature.

3. Speciation is a scientific fact and has been observed in a lab AND in nature.

Those 3 things define evolution (3rd not directly, but it is measurable for 'long term' change), and neither go against god.

Good luck to you.
edit on 19-6-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:34 PM
link   
Those who think that species have remained static through-out times, please answer the following simple question. Why is it, that not a single clearly ancient fossil representing a contemporary animal like a bear, a human, a giraffe, a rhino, or a seagull, has ever been discovered? It's like these species never existed, yet here they are. If you have the energy, also explain, why we only find fossils that clearly represent transitional species, e.g. no fossils representing contemporary humans, but a ton of fossils that represent species that looked like half human, half ape, in many respects. And the younger these fossils, the higher the resemblance to modern man. How is this possible?
edit on 19-6-2012 by rhinoceros because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by iWantToBeelieve
reply to post by Prezbo369
 


My god you people on this site really are offended by this huh? Just to say for fun, THERE IS A GOD, and when you die he says You did not know me, I do not know you, then you spend eternity in hell. That would just be so damn funny. (Not saying this from a religious point of view) The Irony would just be great, if only I could see that. The looks on your faces would be priceless. Then you see ole "IWantToBelieve" strolling on bye, whistling a toon, balling his eyes out laughing on this situational Irony. Gosh isnt it great to dream....


While I agree with your take on the creation of life, your understanding of what scripture says regarding life, death and what occurs afterwards is not scriptoral at all.

If you believe God exists you will be wise to study the word and understand this future wish of yours is something God would never allow in His perfect plan for the salvation of mankind, and your attitude behind it is evil.

-The Earth is older then 6000 years (however its current form is not).
-Micro-evolution is fact and occurs all around you every day. (Macro-evolution is false and has never occured)
-There is no hell is the traditional christian interprretation hell = greek hades or hebrew shoel and it translates simply to grave.

This is the word of God if understood properly and studied fully, your reaction to those that have never known God is not merciful or compassionate and shows a lack of love toward those who oppress you; those traits are not indicative of God dwelling in you.

God Bless,



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by iWantToBeelieve
reply to post by Barcs
 


God Bless You


Ah, the last refuge of the ignorant.
May your god bless you too.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


No.... I think your just tailoring the facts to your argument. There are certainly dogma's within science. Like: nothing can go faster than the speed of light. The universe was created by the big bang.

Are these not just replacements for religious dogma's? Would there not be equal amount of upheaval about discrediting these than there was when it was announce the earth wasn't the center of the universe?


Religious dogma has ZERO objective evidence behind it, while scientific theories do...they are not "theories" like we use in slang. They are based on scientific method.


....Yeah..... Until they are proven just as silly as religious dogmas. Scientists also believed the world was flat just not crazy religious folk.

My point is we should be as skeptical of "scientific" claims as any other. Almost all of our great scientific theories by people like Newton, Eistein, etc. are almost daily being proven untrue, or not complete....



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
Evolution is honestly the most dumbest thing i have ever heard of. Scientists have no idea how we got here and just propose a theory , however , they base almost ALL science around the idea of evolution.

How did whales get here? Well , they walked on land for a bit , and decided to back in the water to live. I mean what the hell.

I swim in water all the time , i scuba dive all the time , i LOVE swimming in water. I swim 3 or 4 times a week. Guess what? Still havent turned into a fish. My diving instructor still hasnt turned into a fish , his children arent fish , he just had a kid 2 weeks ago , guess what , he isnt a fish and doesnt have any problems.

Hmm , so how the hell do i evolutionize to turn into a whale or survive permanently in the water? Damn.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Barcs

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by Barcs
 


Why do you assume Science and Religion can't co-exist? Seems like a VERY narrow minded view of both.

Science isn't strong enough to stand on its own weight if a Creator is introduced?

The Bible doesn't say HOW God created the universe, life, etc. your just assuming He wasn't responsible for what you call science...


at so many people jumping down my throat for defending science from ignorance. I never once said science and religion can't coexist. I have called for this dozens upon dozens of times, but creationists won't stop attacking science and evolution. THEY think it can't coexist, not me. I'm saying that religion and science are separate things. One is faith based, one is fact based. You can't say science is religion or that religion is science. The very nature of those concepts goes against it. Acknowledge science and faith for what they are and stop thinking in absolutes.


If you want to put those two in separate boxes to keep them straight thats up to you. I'd say a more intellectual argument would be able to combine the two.

Why couldn't God have created DNA? Why couldn't evolution have been guided by God?

These questions are valid. And separating religion and science does both a disservice. And doesn't let BOTH live up to their true potential.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by KnawLick

Originally posted by MrXYZ

Originally posted by KnawLick
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


No.... I think your just tailoring the facts to your argument. There are certainly dogma's within science. Like: nothing can go faster than the speed of light. The universe was created by the big bang.

Are these not just replacements for religious dogma's? Would there not be equal amount of upheaval about discrediting these than there was when it was announce the earth wasn't the center of the universe?


Religious dogma has ZERO objective evidence behind it, while scientific theories do...they are not "theories" like we use in slang. They are based on scientific method.


....Yeah..... Until they are proven just as silly as religious dogmas. Scientists also believed the world was flat just not crazy religious folk.

My point is we should be as skeptical of "scientific" claims as any other. Almost all of our great scientific theories by people like Newton, Eistein, etc. are almost daily being proven untrue, or not complete....


Yes but science willing to adapt. Religion is not. That's the beauty of the scientific method. If religion did the same as science, they'd be all about the theory of evolution.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 01:52 PM
link   
What I always hear evolutionists say is the theory of Evolution does NOT address how life first started, only how life evolved into all the animals and plants we have today. Basically avoiding the question of how life started.

I'm sure many are more able to believe a story about aliens starting life on our planet rather than an almighty God.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by LesMisanthrope
 


What is there to adapt to?.... The Bible says God created life. THATS IT


The Bible doesn't say how, or why, or when.... So evolution is just as plausible under the Bible as a man sitting on a white cloud.

Don't confuse ancient catholic dogma's with what Christians Holy book actually says.

Honestly though, I blame Christians for arguing points they don't need to. Evolution in no way discredits the Bible. And the Bible in no way discredits evolution.



posted on Jun, 19 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by milkyway12
Evolution is honestly the most dumbest thing i have ever heard of. Scientists have no idea how we got here and just propose a theory , however , they base almost ALL science around the idea of evolution.

How did whales get here? Well , they walked on land for a bit , and decided to back in the water to live. I mean what the hell.

I swim in water all the time , i scuba dive all the time , i LOVE swimming in water. I swim 3 or 4 times a week. Guess what? Still havent turned into a fish. My diving instructor still hasnt turned into a fish , his children arent fish , he just had a kid 2 weeks ago , guess what , he isnt a fish and doesnt have any problems.

Hmm , so how the hell do i evolutionize to turn into a whale or survive permanently in the water? Damn.


I really hope youre being ironic but something tells me youre not.

Please tell me you're not a teacher, you know, someone who schools people less knowledgeable than themselves.
In anything at all, ever.

Just because you can't understand science and have to drag it down to a level I'd be ashamed of my 6 year old doing, doesn't mean others don't.

Oh, it's EVOLVE not evolutionize.
And whales aren't fish.



new topics

top topics



 
11
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join