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: CharlieSpeirs
originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
originally posted by: danielsil18
originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
originally posted by: danielsil18
a reply to: Frocharocha
These "Scientists" already have their conclusion and are trying to find evidence for it. That's the opposite of what should be done.
So they're not allowed to look for evidence outside of the bible, is that what your saying? Darwin drew his conclusion over 200 years ago, yet there are people still trying to find evidence for it so what's the difference?
I'm not saying that. You also got something else wrong.
Yes Darwin made had some hypotheses but Scientists are not "trying" to find evidence for it.
Scientists are just making discoveries. Some support Darwin and some do not.
Some discoveries support his conclusion of Natural Selection while others don't agree with him like the building blocks of life. Darwin thought that the building blocks of life were the cells, but now we know it's DNA.
Ok, fair enough on Darwin. But since know or at least think we know it's DNA why is it that our own DNA can be found in trees, rice, animals, plants, and fungi. So the question is which one did we come from?
That's why I tend to believe in limitations to Earthly DNA & genetic coding rather than direct or distant relationships.
Makes much more sense than speciation, in my opinion.
"...a common ancestor."
That somehow birthed not only an ape, but also a human...
& this is more believable than Young Earth Creationism how?
Darwin drew his conclusion over 200 years ago
If we share 99% of the DNA then why can't we mate with them?
And what are the building blocks of DNA?
Atoms Protons & Electrons?
Or...
APEs?
Hell our own DNA can be found in trees, rice, animals, plants, and fungi.
it's been awhile since I was baffled.
"But the Bible's language is clear that Adam and Eve were real people. Their historical existence and fall into sin are foundational to the gospel of Jesus Christ. In addition, the science of genetics—including human and chimp comparisons, mitochondrial and Y chromosome DNA, and human genetic variation—confirms and is consistent with the fact that all humans have descended from an original couple specifically created by God as described in Genesis,"
originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: CharlieSpeirs
And what are the building blocks of DNA?
Atoms Protons & Electrons?
Or...
APEs?
The answer you haven't a hope of knowing is 'purines and pyramidines'.
Learn some biochemistry
flesh and blood transformers
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
"...a common ancestor."
That somehow birthed not only an ape, but also a human...
Fantastic.
& this is more believable than Young Earth Creationism how?
Both "theories" are absolute piss.
originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
So in other words since it came from a christian site it's garbage right? So if it was a non-christian writer posting this on a non-christian website you would bite then huh? Probably not though, after all this is just impossible ant it?
But there is human DNA in trees right? Where did that come from?
originally posted by: Prezbo369
originally posted by: CharlieSpeirs
flesh and blood transformers
It's hard (if not impossible) to not assume someone knows nothing on the TOE when they post such nonsense.
However it shows that there is something to be said on the comedic value of Creationists.