Creationism takes less faith

AnuTyr

You can read sources like the pyramid texts to get a more general idea of what the Old kingdom actually believed in.

We can look at the very near past and see how belief is not fact, so I don't put a lot of faith in the beliefs of the distance past to actually be fact.

There is Old egyptian hyroglyphs we refer to as ( Old kingdom texts) these texts condradict many claims.

Such as the pyramids being 78,000 years old. And the explaination for why the ancient kings lived so long. Was in fact because they WERE the Atlantean kings before Atlantis was wiped out and flooded.

Great story, why would they all be killed if they were so advance, and primitive man lived on?

The sphinx shows water errosion. The pyramids would survive being submerged. As the coasal pyramids have survivded.
In its current state. The pyramids have had multipul restorations visible on the outside. As different layers of rock coat the pyramids, it may be that they are far more weathered and beaten than simply 2000 years old.

There is some proof of a great flood. Now, we do not know if it was over the entire earth, or over a good part of the Middle East. In either case the stories would be the same.

This would fit in with the time different gap we humans have, Genetists are turning up results that us humans just poped up no later than 100 thousands years ago.

This would account for the time frams with the stories told on the pyramids walls.
As 22,000-30,000 years prior to the great kings. Atlantis would of just began booming across the planet.

You put a lot of focus on just one area to explain the fact of human evolution. We today would leave a rather larger dent in the earth if we were wiped out and some primitive group took over. A large dent indeed.

This would explain the pyramids structures found all over the globe and under the ocean, also in places like the Antartica, where it is believed there are pyramids discovered or yet to be discovered and disclosed.

Does it? Maybe pyramids are the natural style that primitive man would be able to build. Remember, we can talk all we want about advance races, but all your evidence is still raw stone and raw wood. I can say no matter how great they could build it is still just raw (primitive) material.

I guess we need to find one of those pyramids...

The bottom line is evolution would still be a part of all this whether another advance race came and went, it stills follows the pattern that species last only a million or two years and then they are gone. If anything, another advance race would be proof of evolution.

Who knows, maybe the smartest animal on earth was 200 million years ago and they didn't have the physical capabilities to do anything with their intelligence. Once again, man is not some end evolution state, man is just another species, so if you want to talk about another species that was advance it means little to evolution. We already know there was 10s of not more human type species in the past. Who says we are the smartest?

With all this said, we are still talking about raw stone work and raw wood, we need something more than just that, no matter how great it is, to suggest advance anything.

This new system sucks..

reply to post by Xtrozero


It's not all bad. At least my entire username fits in the avatar box now..

AfterInfinity
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

Already been debunked.

I give you Science from well educated people, and you give me a forum thread to back up your argument...ok so basically their counter argument is the semiotics of the genetic code only exist when there is an observer, am I correct in that?

Xtrozero

ServantOfTheLamb
reply to post by Xtrozero

 

There are some parts of evolution that I accept are observable within nature. I disagree with Macro-evolution.

One reason. Semiotic dimensions of protein synthesis.

edit on 15-9-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

edit on 15-9-2013 by ServantOfTheLamb because: (no reason given)

There isn't much different, please explain..

Not much difference?

mi·cro·ev·o·lu·tion ˌmīkrō-evəˈlo͞oSHən,-ˌēvə-/ noun Biology noun: microevolution; noun: micro-evolution 1. evolutionary change within a species or small group of organisms, esp. over a short period.

Definition noun, plural: macroevolutions Evolution happening on a large scale, e.g. at or above the level of species, over geologic time resulting in the formation of new taxonomic groups.

Ok so micro evolution is the observable evolution. Species genetically adapt to their surroundings due to natural selection. Macro-evolution is the transition from one species to another. This is not an observable fact, and probably never will be.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


Microevolution over billions of years = the entire diversity of life on this planet.

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing

Microevolution over billions of years = the entire diversity of life on this planet.

Yes that is the theory. This not proven fact my friend.

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


I can show you micro evolution happening in this lifetime, it does not prove change from one kind to another kind. Animals adapt, plants adapt, and we can genetically modify them via our intelligence. None of that proves how life began, how we came from a common ancestor and science is based on observation and testing theories that you can prove or disprove. Evolution was supposed to be evident in the fossil record, and it is not. There are no intermediate fossils of things changing kind.

You all have scoured the earth looking for them. You have had millions of generations of fruit flies and bacteria which have been subjected to innumerable methods to induce mutation and they all remain fruit flies and bacteria. In fact, the scientists gave up and said it appears fruit flies are the only things that can't evolve!

So, since it can't be observed happening to a simple bacteria or fruit fly or anything else for that matter, and we cannot find it in the fossil record, then it is a belief system.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


Never mind proof for a moment, just try common sense.

If artificial selection can produce such changes in only a short span of time - like, for example, creating the many varieties of dogs we see around us over a few thousand years from just the humble wolf as a starting point, imagine (just for a second, without your internal prejudices and creationist propaganda filtering your thought patterns) what natural selection operating over billions of years can achieve.

No. I don't suppose you can. Because you can't accept the notion of billions of years of history for a start..

reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing


Why don't you simply show it. The earth is not 6000 years old and the bible says so regarding 3 ages. So, you can drop the sarcasm. Some ignorant Christians teach it, but not the biblically literate.

Just show the change in kind please. Not adaptation, not belief it happened, but something we can observe. It's not in the fossil record and it's not in the millions of generations of fruit flies or bacteria, so it has not been observed and thus not scientifically proved. It's a belief.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


You are so stuck in your own intellect-limiting paradigm that you cannot even begin to think outside of it.

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing

 

Why don't you simply show it. The earth is not 6000 years old and the bible says so regarding 3 ages. So, you can drop the sarcasm. Some ignorant Christians teach it, but not the biblically literate.

How biblically literate would you like? How about the Pope? The entire Catholic Church? How about the Archbishop of Canterbury? Church of England? Because all of them and many, many more religious ppl accept evolution as fact...

ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

Never mind proof for a moment, just try common sense.

If artificial selection can produce such changes in only a short span of time - like, for example, creating the many varieties of dogs we see around us over a few thousand years from just the humble wolf as a starting point, imagine (just for a second, without your internal prejudices and creationist propaganda filtering your thought patterns) what natural selection operating over billions of years can achieve.

No. I don't suppose you can. Because you can't accept the notion of billions of years of history for a start..

edit on 17-9-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)

Um, if you assume I am one of the Christians that believes the Earth is 6000-10000 years old you are definitely wrong, and I'd appreciate if you wouldn't pretend to know what I believe on a subject without asking.

I understand the argument for Macro-evolution. There are plenty of gaps in the fossil record for that counter argument.

If artificial selection can produce a variety of dogs? Should we start talking about the experiments they preform with fruit flies(they reproduce really fast) in attempt to create a new species,

In 1980, this search for proof led researchers to painstakingly and purposefully mutate each core gene involved in fruit fly development. The now classic work, for which the authors won the Nobel Prize in 1995, was published in Nature.2 The experiments proved that the mutation of any of these core developmental genes―mutations that would be essential for the fruit fly to evolve into any other creature―merely resulted in dead or deformed fruit flies. This therefore showed that fruit flies could not evolve.

Similarly, Michigan State University evolutionary biologists Richard Lenski and his colleagues searched for signs of evolution in bacteria for 20 years, tracking 40,000 generations.3 In the end, the species that they started with was hobbled by accumulated mutations, and the only changes that had occurred were degenerative. University of Bristol emeritus professor of bacteriology Alan Linton summarized the situation: But where is the experimental evidence? None exists in the literature claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another. Bacteria, the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study, with generation times of 20 to 30 minutes, and populations achieved after 18 hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another, in spite of the fact that populations have been exposed to potent chemical and physical mutagens and that, uniquely, bacteria possess extrachromosomal, transmissible plasmids. Since there is no evidence for species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic to eukaryotic cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher multicellular organisms.4

In a recent study, also published in Nature, University of California Irvine researcher Molly Burke led research into the genetic changes that occurred over the course of 600 fruit fly generations. The UCI lab had been breeding fruit flies since 1991, separating fast growers with short life spans from slow growers with longer life spans.5 The UCI scientists compared the DNA sequences affecting fruit fly growth and longevity between the two groups. After the equivalent of 12,000 years of human evolution, the fruit flies showed surprisingly few differences.

One requirement for Darwin's theory is that the mutational changes that supposedly fuel evolution somehow have to be "fixed" into the population. Otherwise, the DNA changes quickly drift right back out of the population. The researchers found no evidence that mutational changes relevant to longevity had been fixed into the fruit fly populations.

www.icr.org...

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity

Why don't you simply show it. The earth is not 6000 years old and the bible says so regarding 3 ages. So, you can drop the sarcasm. Some ignorant Christians teach it, but not the biblically literate.

Just show the change in kind please. Not adaptation, not belief it happened, but something we can observe. It's not in the fossil record and it's not in the millions of generations of fruit flies or bacteria, so it has not been observed and thus not scientifically proved. It's a belief.

I'm still waiting for you to explain where God comes from, seeing as how creationism is such a scientifically superior theory. You keep criticizing evolutionary theory while ignoring that fact that even by your own standards, God theory is trash. And it will remain trash until you can prove that your God theory provides more answers than evolutionary theory does.

reply to post by Xtrozero


oh my friend im not excluding Evolution. But for our planet, It has a mystical History.

The sad thing is, Egypt is the most researched and is the primary archeological interest because of how much evidence is left there.

its also not locked away by mountains or thousands of tons of water on the sea bed. Life in totality finds a way from the processes of consious energy to the very will of a species itself.

Why these ancients don't exist anymore? Because there are also multipul stories about the war with the Gods recounted over and over everywhere.

These are warnings, If the passed was a happy place we would of read about it, but it seems we are always in tormoil.

Nothing but punishment pain sorrow greiving and hiding, Triumph over Evil and the continuation of life and Flora.

These stories are recounted as well, it seems that if the planet was never in a state of destruction its hard to fathom people consiously wanting to write about an event they would have to of experienced before.... Not ever happening.

Nichola Tesla may beable to pull inventions out of thin air but collectively saying all of humanity happened to do the same at the same time?

Pyramids are not primative, And most of those structures are created out of ganite, there are also structures made of Diorite which would of HAD to have modern day and advanced mining techniques or some sort of lost power to create all of them.

In the Pyramid texts it speaks of Psychic kings who used something disgribed as *explosive Telekinese* That as discribed on the walls, Had the ability to cause Storms over the whole planet and do all kind of * God like* things.

Weither these thousand year old texts are BS or not is interesting... that they would get so in depth with things we humans refer to as Science fiction. Modern day futuristic movies Show things like this..
Even then the passed is surfacing in the future right now and only the Elite are realizing it.
That is why everything is getting so messy. They are awaiting their gods and in the mean time. Don't know what to do....

It kinda sucks that we are put in this position, We could of just evolved over the millions of years * hopefully* and not be wiped out by cataklysms and Maybe just hopefully humanity would of evolved on its own. But. The help we got defanently increased our odds.... And also our odds at being targeted by other species... which is exactly what is going on right now.

Theres a huge gap of information most of you are missing. So before you attain it, Its hard to put all of this into perspective.

reply to post by AnuTyr


The bible even speaks of a time before this time that cities were destroyed in an instant, mountains shook, and not a man or animal was left alive, none. Could the Pyramids be a left over from that time? I think it is quite possible and they could be millions of years old.

Jer 4:23 I beheld the earth, and, lo, it was without form, and void; and the heavens, and they had no light.
Jer 4:24 I beheld the mountains, and, lo, they trembled, and all the hills moved lightly.
Jer 4:25 I beheld, and, lo, there was no man, and all the birds of the heavens were fled.
Jer 4:26 I beheld, and, lo, the fruitful place was a wilderness, and all the cities thereof were broken down at the presence of the LORD, and by his fierce anger.
Jer 4:27 For thus hath the LORD said, The whole land shall be desolate; yet will I not make a full end.

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


It takes less faith to just make up magic?
WTF??????

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


You know that new species develop all on their own and have for a very long time, right?

1104light
reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb

 

You know that new species develop all on their own and have for a very long time, right?

Oh, they do? Show me proof of a species turning into another species. I will agree varieties among species emerge from natural selection, but not new species entirely.

reply to post by UnifiedSerenity


There you go quoting scripture again! I'll just go get my science book telling us all about evolution and consider that evidence too, shall I?

reply to post by ServantOfTheLamb


You're right, that was an assumption on my part. Because it makes sense that a YEC would think that way. I was actually being kind of generous in an odd way..

Okay, so you accept the time periods involved. Then use that grey matter. If small changes to organisms can occur over short spans of time, what happens over seriously long spans of time?

If evolution, in your view is constrained to micro evolution only, then how do the organisms know to cease changing? Did God just say "Thou shalt vary over time, though only within a species"?