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.
originally posted by: Phantom423
As I have stated, it hasn't been proven, nor will it be proven. Everything around you reeks of design. The more you learn, the more you see it could be no other way. It is actually more believable than what you propose. But both require faith to understand.
When you say it "hasn't been proven", what do you think those experiments show?? Why do you think they do them?? If it's not proof, why isn't it? Those questions must be answered. Otherwise, it's a default in favor of proof of evolution.
originally posted by: Phantom423
@pleasethink
Any man claiming to understand fully and empirically what happened in the beginning is a foolish one.
As I said, evolution has nothing to do with origins or initial states. You're changing the definition to suit your position.
originally posted by: pleasethink
originally posted by: Phantom423
@pleasethink
Any man claiming to understand fully and empirically what happened in the beginning is a foolish one.
As I said, evolution has nothing to do with origins or initial states. You're changing the definition to suit your position.
It literally has everything to do with the change from a "universal common ancestor" (initial state) to the varied life forms the world now possesses.
It seems to be you changing Darwin's theory to support your purposes.
originally posted by: Phantom423
@pleasethink
Any man claiming to understand fully and empirically what happened in the beginning is a foolish one.
As I said, evolution has nothing to do with origins or initial states. You're changing the definition to suit your position.
originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: pleasethink
Then you are constructing your own definition of evolution and not the one that scientists use.
originally posted by: pleasethink
originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: pleasethink
Then you are constructing your own definition of evolution and not the one that scientists use.
I am utilizing the actual definition of the theory from the One Who Proposed It.
originally posted by: Phantom423
originally posted by: pleasethink
originally posted by: Phantom423
@pleasethink
Any man claiming to understand fully and empirically what happened in the beginning is a foolish one.
As I said, evolution has nothing to do with origins or initial states. You're changing the definition to suit your position.
It literally has everything to do with the change from a "universal common ancestor" (initial state) to the varied life forms the world now possesses.
It seems to be you changing Darwin's theory to support your purposes.
Darwin also made assumptions that he couldn't prove. He wasn't right on everything. We know that. Forget Darwin. He's old news. The new news is that experimental data demonstrate that evolution is a physiological process that's an intrinsic factor in the development of all organisms on this planet.
originally posted by: pleasethink
originally posted by: Phantom423
@pleasethink
Any man claiming to understand fully and empirically what happened in the beginning is a foolish one.
As I said, evolution has nothing to do with origins or initial states. You're changing the definition to suit your position.
Darwin's Theory of Evolution - The Premise
Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the widely held notion that all life is related and has descended from a common ancestor: the birds and the bananas, the fishes and the flowers -- all related. Darwin's general theory presumes the development of life from non-life and stresses a purely naturalistic (undirected) "descent with modification". That is, complex creatures evolve from more simplistic ancestors naturally over time. In a nutshell, as random genetic mutations occur within an organism's genetic code, the beneficial mutations are preserved because they aid survival -- a process known as "natural selection." These beneficial mutations are passed on to the next generation. Over time, beneficial mutations accumulate and the result is an entirely different organism (not just a variation of the original, but an entirely different creature).
www.darwins-theory-of-evolution.com...
originally posted by: pleasethink
a reply to: Phantom423
So now you segue a conversation about evolution into a conversation about molecular genetics, as it is evident that you are not the most equipped to defend your position.
It is shameful on both sides. If coming to believe in G-d is not in someones path, do not force the path onto them. It is for the elect, as it says in the Bible. Science is not against Biblical understanding, it is a small contingent of politically minded individuals. And the Bible doesn't go against science, as seeking out wisdom and understanding is commanded by G-d.
Your prejudice walks before you, mocking you to all with the ability to perceive. But yet you cannot perceive it. But we should listen to you, right? You are the last hope for humanity? Doesn't sound like denying ignorance. Sounds like spreading it like a virus.
Dr. Darrel Ray, psychologist and lifelong student of religion, discusses religious infection from the inside out.
How does guilt play into religious infection? Why is sexual control so important to so many religions? What causes the anxiety and neuroticism around death and dying?
How does religion inject itself into so many areas of life, culture, and politics?
The author explores this and much more in his book The God Virus: How Religion Infects Our Lives and Culture.This second-generation book takes the reader several steps beyond previous offerings and into the realm of the personal and emotional mechanisms that affect anyone who lives in a culture steeped in religion. Examples are used that anyone can relate to and the author gives real-world guidance in how to deal with and respond to people who are religious in our families, and among our friends and coworkers.
Almost as amusing as the fact you think Noah was made by Answers in Genesis.