15 Questions For Evolutionists

page: 2
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 09:49 AM
link   
They think atheism is a belief system or religion too.




posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 10:55 AM
link   
reply to post by definity
 


Seriously...

You should really flip your words around and hear how your argument can also be placed against YOUR own beliefs.

Science is just as faith based as religion. Another thing - why don't you just say "Christianity" instead of religion, because there are far more religions than just Christianity, but your arguments are only for one. Why don't people pick on Taoists or Scientology? They have different principles but they are also based on faith.

First off - you need to actually pursue Christianity, with a serious mind, before you can bash talk it. I've pursued both Christianity, AND I'm a firm believer in science, but personally I am sick of the arguments that are used from the "ATHEIST SCIENTIST" group. You just believe internet posts and books that are written from people you never met as well. Have you actively been a part of the theories that you read about to prove to me that they are actually the damn truth? I highly doubt it. But somehow that gives you the right to shove atheistic views down religious peoples' throats.

When will people start realizing that part of existence is just picking a faith and going with it. Who the hell knows what is actually real about our reality?????? We are given so many different views, all just as conceivable as the next, and unfortunately some don't cross check. Those views will be more understandable to others while some may not like that. I believe that all of us are right and wrong in some way, but ultimately we will never know, and hell, we might not even know after we die


So why don't we dip from both tables? Take from tangible scientific views to attempt to comprehend the "how's", and take from the intangible religious views to try and comprehend the "why's". Understand that we will never know the ultimate truth, and call it a fricken day.

Peace



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:25 AM
link   


1. Why are there no 100 million year old fossils of contemporary animals (give or take the few living fossils)?


No specifics are given for the beginning of all ages. It is taught as to why, and the amount of time for creation, but there isn't a stated start date. So this can be supported in creation.



2. Why does all the evidence uncovered point to the natural phenomenon of evolution having created all the biodiversity?


Evolution created biodiversity, but evolution didn't create existence. Evolution exists, but doesn't answer the universe's creation question(s).



3. Why are there reduced alphaproteobacteria (mitochondria) inside basically all our cells?


Arbitrary question. With creation one could say because that was the plan - with evolution one could say that's how it came to be.



4. Why are there reduced cyanobacteria (chloroplasts) inside all plants?


Arbitrary question. Same answer.



5. Why does it appear as if about 1/3 of our genes come from bacteria, 1/3 from achaea, and only the rest are specific to eukarya?


See above 2 answers.



6. Why is the human genome almost identical to the chimpanzee genome?


Why isn't it exact? Almost identical such as 99999800 out of 120000000 possibilities? That's still pretty far off. When it comes to genomes, they are more complex than 4 to 5 possibilities.



7. Why do non-African human genomes include genetic material from the Neanderthal genome?


Could be another one of the 99999999 possible matches.



8. What kind of force prevents mutations from accumulating and causing speciation given reproductive isolation of populations?


Design



9. Why is about 50% of the human genome clearly made from viral material?


Design, science can help understand how it happens



10. Why is it that we can take a human gene and put it into a mouse and in almost every case it works inside the mouse?


Why not?



Had to play devil's advocate with you



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 11:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by Myollinir
reply to post by definity
 



Science is just as faith based as religion.

Peace

This is demonstratively false. The fact that you cannot distinguish between the two makes the possibility of intelligent discourse rather slim.



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by havok

I honestly feel that those people who think that everything originated "out of luck" have alot to learn.

luck has every thing to do with it. It was luck that our planet is just the right distance from the sun. It was luck that just the right mixture of gasses was present to allow life to form. And as far as evolution is concerned it was luck that the prehistoric mammals lived under ground which mostly sheltered them from catastrophic events sutch as the asteroid that wiped out the dinosaurs pathing the way for mammals to evolve and lead to the Dawn of man.

I'm open to your theory of how luck wasn't involved...



One love....



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:47 PM
link   
Havok don't no how that happened but you can see what I'm trying to say
edit on 27-7-2012 by KtruthD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Myollinir
Science is just as faith based as religion.

You just believe internet posts and books that are written from people you never met as well. Have you actively been a part of the theories that you read about to prove to me that they are actually the damn truth? I highly doubt it. But somehow that gives you the right to shove atheistic views down religious peoples' throats.

Um, science is based on tangible evidence and repeatable experiments that have been peer reviewed and confirmed by multiple sources. It's not just a blind belief in an ancient scripture. It updates and evolves constantly and teaches us how things work. If you do not believe it, you can run the experiments for yourself. It doesn't conflict with any religion or belief system, unless you take the holy book 100% literally. Sorry, but religion and science are not even close to the same thing. They can easily coexist, but creationists keep on attacking it without substance.

In the OP, not one question was related to the actual theory of evolution. Not a single one. This thread is a pitiful attempt to attack evolution, so equating it with atheism is a fallacy. Many scientists are religious.
edit on 27-7-2012 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 27 2012 @ 12:55 PM
link   
I am way too distracted by that guy's choice in sweaters to be able to be coherent enough to answer anything.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Barcs
 


You tell me to run the experiments myself, I do.
Now I tell you to practice what religion of choice tells you to do, and to yield the results they project.
Only then will any of thes arguments be valid.



posted on Aug, 17 2012 @ 12:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Myollinir
reply to post by Barcs
 


You tell me to run the experiments myself, I do.
Now I tell you to practice what religion of choice tells you to do, and to yield the results they project.
Only then will any of thes arguments be valid.


Huh? Religion = faith, science = method of fact gathering. You are denying this? If so I'd like to hear the justification. I followed religion for the first 20 years of my life. There were no tangible results, no verification that it was real, nothing positive came out of it, only misplaced hope.





new topics

top topics



 
3
<< 1   >>

log in

join