Evolution Vs. God

Well, we need to distract multiple groups while we try and get support for another war, what do you suggest?

Start a thread titled "blah vs blah"

Sorry but really 26 pages of the same stuff that we've all tried to explain time after time again, really seems like it would be better spent on stuff both sides likely are against, rather claim to be; the slaughter of innocent people.

Anywho, just saying maybe the milionth god v evolution thread can wait, as it wont be going anywhere.

reply to post by shaukuna


You say that as if this is the most popular thread on ATS and we couldn't possibly be talking about anything else in other sections of the forums.

The funny thing about Syria, though... It's the same deal as what you just said but worse. We could all be against it, and it won't even matter. The American government has not cared what you think about their ongoing Haliburton&co Vs. The Middle East. Even if the Syrian government did use chems on their own people, what is the US going to do? Oh right, show up and kill a bunch of civillians, take over the country, introduce a new guy who will screw up in 12 years, rinse & repeat. Your tax dollars at work.

Now, if you don't mind, we're busy trying to explain to adults the difference between fact (scientific theory) and fiction ([insert unverifiable deity here]).

Originally posted by LightOrange
reply to post by shaukuna

 

You say that as if this is the most popular thread on ATS and we couldn't possibly be talking about anything else in other sections of the forums.

The funny thing about Syria, though... It's the same deal as what you just said but worse. We could all be against it, and it won't even matter. The American government has not cared what you think about their ongoing Haliburton&co Vs. The Middle East. Even if the Syrian government did use chems on their own people, what is the US going to do? Oh right, show up and kill a bunch of civillians, take over the country, introduce a new guy who will screw up in 12 years, rinse & repeat. Your tax dollars at work.

Now, if you don't mind, we're busy trying to explain to adults the difference between fact (scientific theory) and fiction ([insert unverifiable deity here]).

Also boils down to religion doesnt it? There fighting because they have two different beliefs and its a religious war.

reply to post by dragonridr


Good point, actually, it was more on topic than I think even he knew

That is, if you believe the chems came from where the MSM says they came from, which is usually a rather highly-contested topic around the issue.

May not have as much to do with religion as it seems on the surface, although typical historical tendencies would beg to differ.

For those wanting an interesting video to watch and deal with lots of these issues, please enjoy this. It is long, but full of great information

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
For those wanting an interesting video to watch and deal with lots of these issues, please enjoy this. It is long, but full of great information

Did you like this because it had inspirational music and a guy speaking halfway between poetry and prose?

Because this guy is out of his mind and in the first 20 minutes -- which I stopped the video after -- I can pick out 20 things that are assumptions and another 20 things that don't even make sense.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
I also think evolution should be removed if it insists on teaching Macro vertical development of species into other kinds. There is zero proof of it no matter how many times the adherents of evolution scream there is proof.

How can you say that, when you haven't even attempted to debunk the science posted that clearly shows common ancestry? Until you do, you have no right to dismiss it.

We can talk about natural selection, extinction, mutations, cellular biology and the issue of massive data to create living systems which points to intelligent design.

So we should not teach evolution, but instead teach mutations and natural selection. They are totally not the same or anything. You still haven't provided a mechanism to show why mutations cannot add up over time to show big change. Why is this so ridiculous to you and what reason do you have to think that evolution couldn't be used by god as a method of creation?

It seems to me this is a very difficult issue because of the strong feelings involved in it. It's too bad we can't just allow for both viewpoints to be expressed and for no teacher being allowed to indoctrinate their viewpoint into the matter.

At least you admit that you have strong feelings involved and it completely explains your stance on the matter and your refusal to accept scientific evidence. Evolution isn't a feeling, it's a science. If you don't like it, that's too bad. No need to preach to people about how evil it is when you haven't even studied it beyond regurgitating creationist web sites based on lies. Take an evolution or biology class and get back to us. Stop the damn war on a field of science. It's silly. It should make god greater, not turn you into a lunatic, hellbent on attacking scientists who spend decades studying something while you sit at home, criticize and believe in myths.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


I love it when people try to make it look like the math makes it impossible it doesnt. This is accomplished by sitting parameters saying things like 1 cell per year goes though a change and saying theres just not enough time. As i explained when dealing with simple celled organism there can be trillions and trillions of them each replicating and changing Think of plankton for example,they have more bio mass then the rest of the living creatures combined yet are the smallest. Think of the shear numbers were talking about for a simple celled organism to be the dominant life force on earth.So the math argument is stupid if you set the parameters you know the results duh.

Dna actually shows a severe lack of coding its called junk DNA this in itself proves trial and error as the presiding factor. Lets look at some things In DNA the more cose does not mean the more complex the life form. In computer programming the longer the code the more complex the program. But in DNA we can have the same species with different in DNA sequences theres the fugu puffer fish for example one species has almost 100 times the dna code as another of the same species. This tells us immediately that the amount of code means nothing. Humans arent even the largest DNA chain on earth but clearly were the most complex life form.

Now lets move further if god created DNA code why can we show are DNA code evolved from an even simpler code?Dna is based on a triplet code but when you break it down you can see it started as a pair not 3. We change the third letter and it makes no difference in protein synthesis. Also where you aware there are retroviruses encoded in human DNA? This is where viruses encoded themselves into DNA but no longer functional do to adaptation.

So since we know junk DNA exists we know DNA came from an even more basic code then how can you argue it was created? Complexity doesnt prove design look at crystals they are highly complex structures no intelligence needed.And ill tell you there structures are just as complex as DNA.So this whole argument that god had to create DNA is stupid that's like saying god had to create gravity or light there is just nothing to show that to be true.

PS DNA just proves it evolved over millions of years when many dead ends and changes along the way. And the amount of code doesnt mean more information unlike a true code.

reply to post by dragonridr


I hope you start reading your own clans stuff ... there is no junk DNA. I do hope you actually start reading the science literature which proves they can't support evolution from the fossil record, their experiments, or hoaxes, but it's been nice watching you twist everything to sound like you can.

So many scientists are struggling with the lack of evidence, and now with real dino tissue that should not be, it's really getting hard to drink that kool-aid for some honorable scientists. But, like I said, it's fun watching you all do the mental gymnastics, you are quite limber.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Funny how scientist's findings are accepted when it fits the agenda at hand.

They are not all hoaxters when it suits the ID crowd. Careful your double standard is showing.

Originally posted by UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by dragonridr

 

I hope you start reading your own clans stuff ... there is no junk DNA. I do hope you actually start reading the science literature which proves they can't support evolution from the fossil record, their experiments, or hoaxes, but it's been nice watching you twist everything to sound like you can.

So many scientists are struggling with the lack of evidence, and now with real dino tissue that should not be, it's really getting hard to drink that kool-aid for some honorable scientists. But, like I said, it's fun watching you all do the mental gymnastics, you are quite limber.

We cannot draw scientific conclusions by invoking the supernatural to explain natural phenomena.Intelligent design relies almost entirely on inductive inferences. Lack of proof isnt proof of anything.Now as far as DNA i suggetst you stop getting your science from creationist web sites because junk DNA does exist and surprise proven even in a lab! In 2004, Nobrega deleted almost 3% of the mouse genome that appeared to be repetitive and non-coding, and the mice continued to reproduce with no ill effects. If this DNA were functional, how could the mice keep on reproducing without it? Heres the paper:
Nobrega, M.A., Zhu, Y., Plajzer-Frick, I., Afzal, V., and Rubin, E.M. 2004. Megabase deletions of gene deserts result in viable mice. Nature 431: 988-993.

So he removed 3 percent of genes he identified as junk DNA and the mice continued to reproduce doesnt sound to me they needed those DNA strands huh?Now what your unaware of is where the creationist websites got this idea of no junk DNA. It was from ENCODE Consortium publications who made the claim that 80 percent of the human genome is functional. Of course this still leaves what 20 percent garbage but then the truth is they are wrong its much higher then that.in fact i saw one paper that estimated as much as 98 percent of the human genome is useless information. Random if you will. See its like if you sit a monkey in front of a type writer eventually he will type a sentence.and if he ha millions of years a novel,

We urge biologists not be afraid of junk DNA. The only people that should be afraid are those claiming that natural processes are insufficient to explain life and that evolutionary theory should be supplemented or supplanted by an intelligent designer (e.g., Dembski 1998; Wells 2004). ENCODE’s take-home message that everything has a function implies purpose, and purpose is the only thing that evolution cannot provide. Needless to say, in light of our investigation of the ENCODE publication, it is safe to state that the news concerning the death of “junk DNA” have been greatly exaggerated.

freethoughtblogs.com...

gbe.oxfordjournals.org...

daskakik
reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

 

Funny how scientist's findings are accepted when it fits the agenda at hand.

They are not all hoaxters when it suits the ID crowd. Careful your double standard is showing.

Excellent point, with all of the Evolution is a hoax thread, you would think there would be more "You Don't Need Obama Care All You Need IS God" or "Cure for Cancer: Pray...Hard". How do you pick out the part of science that dispels your intelligent design, idk what to even call it cause its not a theory. Gravity is a theory, evolution is a theory. Intelligent design is like a jock strap it barely covers the essentials and in the end your ass is still showing. I mean there is so much of the Catholic faith that defies science, why such the rebellion against evolution? Where's the rebellion against the existence of dinosaurs?

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


I'm about 95% sure you're just trolling now. This isn't even a debate anymore. You're just insulting us while we're insulting your insults.

I mean, seriously people. Do we really have to keep this thread going? Serenity has no case. We know that. S/he knows that. Just drop it and move on. There's no point to continuing this thread when there's obviously no bottom line to be had except that Serenity has failed to disprove evolution while also failing to prove god theory. Good luck next time, and good night charlie.

What else is there to say? What hasn't been said yet?

Evolution and religion, plot twist, are both wrong. (IMO)

I personally believe, and think it's the most plausible explanation for our existence, that we are simple hybrids between other worldly entities and apes, or we are the extraterrestrials themselves, almost like their children. To ancient man, a alien so to speak could quite easily be mistaken as a 'God' and with so many, if not all civilisations speaking of the same creation theories and 'Gods from the heavens/stars' there really isn't any other realistic explanation other than alien intervention in our distant past.

Didn't the Bible say we were created in the image of God? That speaks volumes.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Aww, you sound like a crying baby. I reflect back a smidgeon of your attitude and you act like I have committed the worst posting crime of all time. Gee.... maybe the mirror worked!

I tell you what, why don't you just leave this thread, and stop giving me more opportunities to show how inane your arguments are? Or is it this ego issue that somehow you have to have the last word? Yes, I think that is exactly what it is. When I don't like a thread, I delete it from my list of threads I am watching and therefore I am not tempted to chime in again.

You have not proved any points. You have just repeated over and over that evolution is fact and scientific despite the plethora of information I and others have shared. You are intellectually dishonest and in some need to believe you are right regardless of the evidence provided that disproves evolution.

Have a great day AI, and by all means stop trolling my thread!

Either debate the topic or this thread will be closed.

Personal attacks are not 'The Way'.

reply to post by masqua


Masque, I am happy to debate, but the personal attacks have been coming from the other side for some time. Let them post something to debate this, and allow others to post please rather than closing the thread. They have turned this contentious so it would be closed. That's all they have wanted since I posted this thread.

I appreciate your monitoring this.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Aww, you sound like a crying baby. I reflect back a smidgeon of your attitude and you act like I have committed the worst posting crime of all time. Gee.... maybe the mirror worked!

Are you 12? Stop attacking me and either put some evidence where your mouth is or go bother someone else. Your antics are only proof that you have nothing but hot air supporting your case.

I tell you what, why don't you just leave this thread, and stop giving me more opportunities to show how inane your arguments are? Or is it this ego issue that somehow you have to have the last word? Yes, I think that is exactly what it is. When I don't like a thread, I delete it from my list of threads I am watching and therefore I am not tempted to chime in again.

I don't think you have ever shown my arguments to be inane. You're just making stuff up now.

You have not proved any points. You have just repeated over and over that evolution is fact and scientific despite the plethora of information I and others have shared. You are intellectually dishonest and in some need to believe you are right regardless of the evidence provided that disproves evolution.

And yet you haven't provided proof for these allegations. You say it's true, yet you don't show it...per the norm. Are you done with the ad hominem or do you need to scream some more?

Have a great day AI, and by all means stop trolling my thread!

You're just mad because you've posted three threads on the same subject and gotten shut down at every turn. If anyone is confused as to who the troll is, I sincerely and firmly recommend you check out Serenity's last three threads and read them all. That should clear up the matter.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Masque, I am happy to debate, but the personal attacks have been coming from the other side for some time. Let them post something to debate this, and allow others to post please rather than closing the thread. They have turned this contentious so it would be closed. That's all they have wanted since I posted this thread.

I appreciate your monitoring this.

That's utter bullcrap and you know it, Serenity. You know exactly what we want: prove your case. Prove creationism, or admit you were wrong. The first step to treating a problem is admitting it's there. How do you expect to learn if you can't admit you are ignorant? I'm ignorant. Masqua's ignorant. We're all ignorant in one subject or another. It's time for you to learn, and you can't do that unless you admit you have room to learn.

Arrogance begets ignorance. We're trying to help you.

reply to post by AfterInfinity


Please show what part of the original op is wrong. Point to a video point, mark it and tell why you find it to be wrong. Then we can have a debate.