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.

 

This is why I don't believe a "god" created us.

page: 10
9
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 09:54 AM
link   
reply to post by defcon5
 


If we are made of stardust, then the bible creation story is not true anyway.

It says that God made human from the dirt of the earth, not of stars...


Also, 98% of DNA is shared with chimpanzee, so did god make them out of dirt too?

Obviously god made monkies and chimpanzees first since animals came before humans according to bible...

Some of the bible does seem like evolution. It agrees with evolution on some things:

first there was light (energy), earth without form (void/universe/space),
the heaven (atmosphere), earth (dirt/dust)
plants, then, animals, then finally humans

In fact, wasn't the guy that created the theory of evolution was a Christian Priest, right?

But somehow people call it an atheistic idea.




posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 04:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by arpgme
If we are made of stardust, then the bible creation story is not true anyway.

It says that God made human from the dirt of the earth, not of stars...


Well, the dirt of the Earth is made from star dust (any element heavier than Hydrogen, Helium, and Lithium was made inside stars). So, yeah -- if man was made from the dust of the Earth, then he was made from the stardust...

...Not that I am a religious person who necessarily believes in a God of creation, but I'm just saying, almost everything you see around you -- including yourself, and the dirt and rocks on Earth -- were once part of a long-dead star.


edit on 9/6/2012 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 6 2012 @ 05:45 PM
link   


Wow! I'm amazed that I understood all of it. You have great writing skills.
And I agree with it. Good job!


Cool. I'm glad my explanation made sense
I wasn't sure if it would or not since it's highly abbreviated and condensed.

If that made sense to you, there's a book you might be interested in reading. It's called "Flatland: A Romance of Many Dimensions". It was written by a school teacher named Edwin Abbott Abbott (yes...two "Abbotts"..it's not a typo) in 1884 and it is one of the most unique and peculiar texts ever written. There are really two stories being told at the same time. The first is a satirical treatise on the social order of the Victorian era and the second is a thought-experiment about what it would be like if we were two-dimensional creatures.

It should be noted due to the physics of the day Abbott is erroneously speaking from the perspective that humans are three dimensional beings instead four dimensional beings...but it's still an excellent read. And is exceptionally useful when attempting to understand things in the higher dimensions which we cannot readily perceive, but which mathematically we know exist.

In fact, Salvador Dali went through a phase where he was fond of depicting tesseracts (a cube existing in four dimension instead of 3) and used Abbott's ideas to produce a three-dimensional representation of what a four-dimensional tesseract would look like if it was "unfolded".

Check it out...I think you'll like it.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
you are assuming god created our physical bodies. That makes no sense to me. I think god exists as some sort of energy with a consciousness, just as we are. Maybe when we all die, alien or not, we all go back to be part of this energy. My question will be, what is the purpose of all these? If everything is created, then who created the creator? Maybe we are just limited by our own brains and are simply unable to understand the concept.



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:24 PM
link   
Creationists theory: An All-Mighty God (albeit a murderous one) made Adam and Eve by raising his finger (not in the way your thinking you pervert) and in 7 days made the Earth and all living things therein but soon regretted or must have found him a space or earthly wife and forever departed away only to be called the invisible man and creationists being ridiculed.

What's wrong with the above? Everything.

Evolution theory (emphasized for satirical reasons): Once upon a time a mega sized space nuke hit a star that went supernova, immediately after that a gigantic explosion ensued that would be known as "Big-Bang" (OFFTOPIC: Big Bang is a very popular term in the pornography industry which signifies sexual intercourse between groups of people, I wonder what on earth was the person thinking that named it "Big-Bang"), somehow life sprung from the explosion as life is sprung from a women and millions of space eggs with life bacteria and other materials were thrown into the vast areas of space.. the inexplainability and lack of evidence regarding this event has led to the conclusion that humans are one hell of a Cosmic Accident. Hail Big-Bang!

What's wrong with the above? Everything.

Ancient Astronaut theory: 400,000 years ago ancient astronauts known as Annunaki landed on planet Earth to mine for gold in order to stabilize their own homeplanet dying atmosphere. After a certain amount of time, certain members of the Annunaki rebelled given the conditions they were working in and soon a demand for slave workers was taken to the Annunaki scientists. The demand was heard, and so the Annunaki abducted some of the existing primitive species at the time (homo sapiens sapiens) and taken to the Annunaki labs where through advanced genetic engineering Adam and Eve were born after many erroneous trials. Seeing the success of the newly created species and it's ability to perform tasks and do what was told, the Annunaki soon eradicated the primitive homo sapiens sapiens and the dinosaurs which proved to be a far greater threat to the existence of the newly created species.

What's wrong with the above? Nothing, imo. It makes much more sense than evolution and creationism combined.

Peace.
edit on 7-9-2012 by shenk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 05:50 PM
link   
reply to post by shenk
 





Ancient Astronaut theory: 400,000 years ago ancient astronauts known as Annunaki landed on planet Earth to mine for gold in order to stabilize their own homeplanet dying atmosphere. After a certain amount of time, certain members of the Annunaki rebelled given the conditions they were working in and soon a demand for slave workers was taken to the Annunaki scientists. The demand was heard, and so the Annunaki abducted some of the existing primitive species at the time (homo sapiens sapiens) and taken to the Annunaki labs where through advanced genetic engineering Adam and Eve were born after many erroneous trials. Seeing the success of the newly created species and it's ability to perform tasks and do what was told, the Annunaki soon eradicated the primitive homo sapiens sapiens and the dinosaurs which proved to be a far greater threat to the existence of the newly created species.




What's wrong with the above? Nothing, imo. It makes much more sense than evolution and creationism combined.


I'll tell you whats wrong with it , its a nice story but there is absolutely no evidence for it , at least the Bible has some basis in fact and evolution is supported by scientific evidence ... the Annunaki ...well that's a belief structure in itself .



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 07:54 PM
link   
in spite of being a movie The Matrix always intrigued me.

Personally i believe in a GOD creator of all things, but we are only indirectly one of his many creations. Perhaps we are just lab rats in a maze and we didn't left the Garden Of Eden at all. Maybe the Garden of Eden is just the place / game where this virtual reality that seems so real to our eyes is taking place.

It may seem far fetched, but what we believe to be ufos, shadow people, paranormal events are just glitches in the matrix, errors in the code, because no computer program is 100 % bug free.

Honestly Darwin's theory is so full of holes it can be taken seriously in plain XXI century. Some guys here abuse of the occams razor.The most logical explanation is NOT ALWAYS the right one.
edit on 7-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 7 2012 @ 08:07 PM
link   
Darwin's Boat Full Of Holes

Hole Nr 1: The fossil record does not support the theory of evolution. The fossil record shows that species abruptly appear and disappear, almost as if they were created.

There is absolutely no evidence in the fossil record of species gradually changing into different species. Darwin himself said that these revelations in the fossil record could be used as the most compelling arguments against his theory.

Hole Nr 2: In order for Darwin's theory to be plausible, it needs vast amounts of time (thus, evolutionists claim that earth is millions and millions of year old). But for the earth to be old enough to accommodate Darwin's theory would be impossible. The intensity of the electromagnetic sphere around the earth steadily and consistently decreases by seven percent about every one hundred years.

When we look back in time and calculate the intensity of the electromagnetic sphere by adding seven percent every hundred years, we find that the electromagnetic sphere was so intense just twenty thousand years ago, that it would have literally dissolved the core of the earth. How then can the earth be billions of year old?

Hole Nr 3: Darwin made his theory in the 1800s. Science has grown by leaps and bounds since then, so the theory is obsolete.For example, Genetics didn't exist at the time as a science. While Darwininan theory does not directly discuss the origin of all life, the question still remains of where did the original genetic material come from, and how did it replicate itself?

Many amazing discoveries have been made since Darwin's passing. For lack of a better term this theory is full of assumptions and we all know assumptions are the mother of all fu**ups. The more we learn, the more we fill in the holes Darwin was unable to fill himself, lacking the technology and the 160+ years of research now available at any public library.

edit on 7-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)

edit on 7-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 07:29 AM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 




I'll tell you whats wrong with it , its a nice story but there is absolutely no evidence for it , at least the Bible has some basis in fact and evolution is supported by scientific evidence ... the Annunaki ...well that's a belief structure in itself .


"Empirical data are data produced by an observation or experiment... A central concept in modern science and the scientific method is that all evidence must be empirical, or empirically based, that is, dependent on evidence or consequences that are observable by the senses. It is usually differentiated from the philosophic usage of empiricism by the use of the adjective empirical or the adverb empirically. The term refers to the use of working hypotheses that are testable using observation or experiment." from wikipedia

That said I always find the words "scientific evidence" to be a loose term, science itself is limited in regards to evidence by what you can observe and experiment therefore your statement that Evolution is supported by scientific evidence is completely false. No one saw it happen, it is purely based on belief, Evolution fits more into religion than science itself.

Belief structure? Absolutely no evidence? The evidence is right around the world but out of your own ignorance you choose to ignore as thousands of other people do.

People have to be really courageous and audacious or incredibly stupid to even come up with the idea that the Giza pyramids, Easter island monuments, Puma Punku, the Nazca Lines, Chichen Iza, Teotihuacan, Baalbeck and many many other ancient sites were built by our ancient ancestors using primitive tools and wooden carts carrying stones weighing up to 200 tons and more crossing rivers and hills from hundreds of miles of distance from the nearest quarry to the consctruction site.

Believe what you will, but the TRUTH still remains, space civilizations had a role in creating us, helping us advance technologically, it is the so called missing link that most don't dare to accept and by the time they accept it it will probably be too late.
edit on 8-9-2012 by shenk because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-9-2012 by shenk because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 06:14 PM
link   
So, what do you believe?



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by shenk
 





No one saw it happen, it is purely based on belief, Evolution fits more into religion than science itself.

The evidence is there but you choose to ignore it as it shakes your belief that we were engineered by Aliens, your choice I guess .



People have to be really courageous and audacious or incredibly stupid to even come up with the idea that the Giza pyramids, Easter island monuments, Puma Punku, the Nazca Lines, Chichen Iza, Teotihuacan, Baalbeck and many many other ancient sites were built by our ancient ancestors using primitive tools

Stupid ? .. maybe ... but to believe our ancestors couldn't create the wonders they did without ET intervention denigrates their achievements and shows a lack if understanding as to who these people were , it also shows ignorance of the facts and an over reliance on TV entertainment shows like Ancient Aliens .

You don't know how it was done so it was Aliens , it couldn't of been those stupid Humans



edit on 8-9-2012 by gortex because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 07:30 PM
link   
reply to post by cconn487
 


God does exist and God is wonderful. Understand that most exploits of the bible are just built up out of misunderstandings. Remember there is a much bigger picture to God and to who we are. That picture is yet to be unveiled to you. There are forces beyond your understanding. Just love God and accept that you're apart of his world.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Picollo30
 


So... you agree that Darwin's ideas on evolution were incomplete. 150 years later, however, there is no dispute.

What was your point?

Or...

Are you a young earth creationist? Please say no....


edit on 8-9-2012 by BagBing because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by brighteyes777
reply to post by cconn487
 


God does exist and God is wonderful. Understand that most exploits of the bible are just built up out of misunderstandings. Remember there is a much bigger picture to God and to who we are. That picture is yet to be unveiled to you. There are forces beyond your understanding. Just love God and accept that you're apart of his world.


Screw your weird and nasty deity. God is a work of fiction. Deal with it...



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 09:47 PM
link   
reply to post by arpgme
 


Just because we share DNA with chimpanzees doesn't mean evolution is true. It's like computer code. you reuse efficient code between programs. Same with life on earth



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   
I think people need to chill out. Believe what you want, but remain open to all possibilities. We are never going to have the answer to this God VS Evolution theory simply because even if we did, there will always be a large number of people on this planet who disregard that evidence and steer the other way. If it is never 100% accepted by everyone, then we will always have this discussion/argument even if there is all the evidence in the world to prove God exists or that Evolution is correct.

Therefore, by partaking in this discussion you are merely running in an infinite circle. THAT is the definition of insanity, my friends.



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by BagBing
reply to post by Picollo30
 


So... you agree that Darwin's ideas on evolution were incomplete. 150 years later, however, there is no dispute.

What was your point?

Or...

Are you a young earth creationist? Please say no....


edit on 8-9-2012 by BagBing because: (no reason given)


just wanted to show that darwin's theory despite having it's merits has also it's flaws. the missing link is out there just waiting to be found.

No one believed in the homo floresiensis yet it has been found in 2003 in Indonesia. Who knows what amazing discoveries will see the light of day in years to come.

If by Young Earth Creationist you mean that i am one that believes that God created the Earth in 6 days (24 hours each), using a literal interpretation of the Genesis creation narrative as a basis then no, i'm not one. But i do believe that God exists, is there a problem with my belief system?

Believing in God doesn't mean that i believe in the bible whch by the way has been rewritten many times and it's meaning lost. Do you know if the Bible was describing a terraforming event?

I understand that you may believe Aliens did it. I dont discard that point of view on the contrary. But who created the Aliens? Other Alien species? But for the creation of those alien civilizations a higher power must have intervened. Is it so difficult to admit that?


edit on 8-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)

edit on 8-9-2012 by Picollo30 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 8 2012 @ 11:00 PM
link   
reply to post by SaturnFX
 

I think you're being a bit hard on the OP. Speculating is usually the sign of an active mind, not a lazy mind. Lazy minds want a bible to tell them what to think. They don't use their mind to think.

But your advice to read science books is great. Just don't tell someone to not wonder. Certainly, whatever we wonder or speculate is bolstered by good trustworthy information.

I'm assuming the OP has at least had some elementary science classes and has seen some science shows and has a basic grasp on the scientific method. If he/she is a teenager, they prolly do. Taking a biology or chemistry or general science class in gradeschool or highschool is just the beginning, but it shouldn't prohibit you from wondering what it all means. We all sometimes wonder...
edit on 8-9-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 12:45 AM
link   
reply to post by jonnywhite
 


Speculation and wondering is great.. but if you do not remain open to the possibilities on the other side of your belief/argument, then you are just speculating and wondering about things that only lead you down a path you want, not the path that will lead to the truth. Who knows.. maybe you are on the right path (in reference to the OP) but what if you aren't.

Remember, remaining objective is key.
edit on 9-9-2012 by FightClub because: typo



posted on Sep, 9 2012 @ 11:15 AM
link   
reply to post by FightClub
 

Objective (n):
1. Undistorted by emotion or personal bias; based on observable phenomena.

I agree that being objective is how we develop our sciences and obtain good information.

But wonder and speculation will always happen, it's human nature.

Some people depend more on faith and intuition so their speculations are less accurate.

In effect, speculations are like predictions. They're only as good as the information they use. But they do tend to depend more on faith and intuition because this is how the word is often used.

But many of the things in Einstein's theory had to be proven after the theory was created.

As a result, Einstein predicted what was out there based on the best observable information.

So if predictions are anything like speculations then Einstein was speculating.

As already stated, speculation usually is a word used to describe an argument that's based not on facts but on something else. But it all depends on context and how you use the word.

So...

Based on observable phenomena, what's there to say that God created us or didn't create us?

Observable phenomena greatly limit what we can speculate.

We're speculating because I don't believe we have enough evidence to know for sure.

God is stretching the limits of what we can know far out past its breaking point.

Not all things even in science are on equal ground.

We've observed black holes only indirectly and there're things we'll never see in them.

In fact, there's a terminator outside our observable universe beyond which we will NEVER see.

I read that it has to do with relativity. We'll just never see what's beyond the terminator.

It all depends how much bigger the universe is, but it's bigger than the observable.

What if just outside the terminator every known law of physics becomes untrue?

We'll never know because we can't go there and find out.

Just as I can't go to the center of a black hole to confirm theory about what exists there.

We can only guess based on what we see and extrapolate from it.

Theories often have to depend on indirect evidence and on our best predictions.

In any case, what kind of evidence is there for a god existing?

We have substantial evidence supporting our theory of evolution.

But what about substantial evidence supporting our theory of god?

Is there even a theory of god and how could we find evidence to support it?

Here's an idea....

The bible says God created the heavens and the earth in seven days.

We know that isn't true so this part of the biblical god theory is incorrect.

The bible says that jesus rose from the dead.

We have no evidence that supports this so it's unsubstantiated.

The bible says a number of other things I'm sure that can be put into doubt or debunked.

So maybe we can take different theories of god and compare them to what we observe.

From there we can get an idea how reliable our theories are about god.
edit on 9-9-2012 by jonnywhite because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
9
<< 7  8  9    11 >>

log in

join