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 abecedarian
+90% similarity with higher primates DNA is no evidence of common evoluition?
Originally posted by abecedarian
And yet there is no evidence of extra-terrestrial visitation and still you claim our creators came to this world from the heavens?
Originally posted by abecedarian
You don't believe in god but believe in alien creation?
Originally posted by abecedarian
An alien creator of our race would be no less than a god, in our eyes.
Originally posted by abecedarian
By your admission, humans are neither the result of evolution nor religious creation.
Originally posted by Sinter Klaas
I don't get it.
There are no missing links in existence.
There are only missing fosile remains.
Originally posted by Izarith
reply to post by brainwrek
Why the hell do so many people have such a hard-on to find out and prove we came from Apes?
You all clap and eooooooo and ahhhhhhh over any old ass bone that only adds more questions to the age old mystery of "did we come from a monkeys stinky vagina?".
Why?.....WHY?
LOL you guys remind me of crazy religious nuts who crumble to the floor in a fetal position every time a peperoni looks like Jesus on a pizza.
I'll tell you one this if by chance I some how by total mistake discover I am a descendant of a god damn ape.....I'm keeping that in the closet.....
Some things are just to embarrassing for people to find out about.
Originally posted by brainwrek
The new species of hominid, the evolutionary branch of primates that includes humans, is to be revealed when the two-million-year-old skeleton of a child is unveiled this week. Scientists believe the almost-complete fossilised skeleton belonged to a previously-unknown type of early human ancestor that may have been a intermediate stage as ape-men evolved into the first species of advanced humans, Homo habilis.
Originally posted by _boneZ_
And they created us in their likeness and image.
Genesis 1:2
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;
Gen 1:26 & Gen 1:27
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
The Wisdom of Agur
1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, his utterance. This man declared to Ithiel—to Ithiel and Ucal:
2 Surely I am more stupid than any man,
And do not have the understanding of a man.
3 I neither learned wisdom
Nor have knowledge of the Holy One.
4 Who has ascended into heaven, or descended?
Who has gathered the wind in His fists?
Who has bound the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His Son’s name,
If you know?
6 “ Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel,
And his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts:
‘ I am the First and I am the Last;
Besides Me there is no God.
“And behold, I am coming quickly, and My reward is with Me, to give to every one according to his work. 13 I am the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last.”
14 Blessed are those who do His commandments, that they may have the right to the tree of life, and may enter through the gates into the city. 15 But outside are dogs and sorcerers and sexually immoral and murderers and idolaters, and whoever loves and practices a lie.
16 “I, Jesus, have sent My angel to testify to you these things in the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, the Bright and Morning Star.”
17 And the Spirit and the bride say, “Come!” And let him who hears say, “Come!” And let him who thirsts come. Whoever desires, let him take the water of life freely.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
Originally posted by brainwrek
The new species of hominid, the evolutionary branch of primates that includes humans, is to be revealed when the two-million-year-old skeleton of a child is unveiled this week. Scientists believe the almost-complete fossilised skeleton belonged to a previously-unknown type of early human ancestor that may have been a intermediate stage as ape-men evolved into the first species of advanced humans, Homo habilis.
Like with other statements from scientists that believe in the evolution of man, again we have the 'we believe and may have'. This certainly isn't the first time and I think it's quite hypocritical of evolutionists to roar over articles that are nothing more than what a scientist believes and guess work.
Originally posted by _boneZ_
And they created us in their likeness and image.
That is the Holy Trinity. All three were active in the creation.
Genesis 1:2
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
Then God said, “Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness;Gen 1:26 & Gen 1:27
So God created man in His own image; in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
The holy trinity is further shown with the Lord physically walking and talking to Adam & Eve in the garden. The apperance to Abraham, to Isaac, the physical placement of Moses in the cleft of the rock.
Proverb 30 also reveals the trinue God.
Proverb 30:1-4
The Wisdom of Agur
1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, his utterance. This man declared to Ithiel—to Ithiel and Ucal:
2 Surely I am more stupid than any man,
And do not have the understanding of a man.
3 I neither learned wisdom
Nor have knowledge of the Holy One.
4 Who has ascended into heaven, or descended?
Who has gathered the wind in His fists?
Who has bound the waters in a garment?
Who has established all the ends of the earth?
What is His name, and what is His Son’s name,
If you know?
[edit on 4-4-2010 by TruthSeeker8300]
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Religious dogma has nothing to do with this thread, take it elsewhere.
Originally posted by brainwrek
Wonder how the religious types who claim the planet is only a few thousand years old will respond to this.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Religious dogma has nothing to do with this thread, take it elsewhere.
It's nothing about religious dogma for me, it is about the truth. It is about religion for you secular humanists. S.H is a religion. The motto of this site is deny ignorance. He said something that is out of ignorance and I am giving the truth. The attack on God and his children began with the OP's first post.
Originally posted by brainwrek
Wonder how the religious types who claim the planet is only a few thousand years old will respond to this.
You cannot believe in the evolution of man and believe in God for God is perfect and makes no mistakes.
[edit on 4-4-2010 by TruthSeeker8300]
[edit on 4-4-2010 by TruthSeeker8300]
Originally posted by hippomchippo
It doesn't matter what you think it is, it's irrelevent to the thread topic, take it to the religion forum.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
Originally posted by hippomchippo
It doesn't matter what you think it is, it's irrelevent to the thread topic, take it to the religion forum.
I'm not going to argue with you, I was not wrong for m reply and you're not going to single me out. I don't answer to you and so I'm not going to let you tell me what to do.
Originally posted by hippomchippo
This whole thread has been derailed by the petty religious attacks, on both sides of the argument.
Can we just discuss the amazing scientific find?
Originally posted by Xtrozero
Originally posted by abecedarian
Why does it have to be an "either/or" choice between evolution and creation? I find it equally plausible that evolution is the means of creation and the timeline was not measured by our current definition of years.
For the sake of argument, if the Old Testament were written by men why would it be necessary to explain every step of how man was created from dust need explained in the books / scrolls, when the important aspect is that we and everything else "were" created from dust, star dust if you will? Isn't that, in essence, what evolution seeks to explain: "how" we were created- the jump from simple molecules to complex life forms?
The great fallacy, in my opinion, is the confusion surrounding the definition of years. According to Relativity, time is experienced differently based on the frame of reference. Is it not possible that to someone outside of the Universe, our evolution took place in ~6500 of their years, while to us inside the expanding Universe, it took nearly 14 billion years?
And for the record, I'm not religious. I just have an open mind.
I agree with you for I see Adam as the point in man's history that man finally became man. Does it really matter how? God could just as easily started a single cell life form on a 4 billion year course to make man, or he could have waved a magic wand...I guess, but in any case both sides want to find a start for man, and so to say Adam as the first man or the missing link are one and the same.
One other point too is modern man is not much older than 6000 years old when one talks in terms of civilization.
[edit on 4-4-2010 by Xtrozero]
Genesis Chapter 6, verses 1 through 4 mentions Nephilim: Now it came about, when men began to multiply on the face of the land, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves, whomever they chose. Then the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; nevertheless his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." The Nephilim were on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men, and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
Originally posted by Studenofhistory
reply to post by Donny 4 million
Think about what you're saying. A single-celled organism that is not specialized ie. it doesn't only DO one thing like skin or muscle or liver, it does everything, has a change in genes that means that when it spilts into two cells, one of them will go on to specialize in something like muscle and the other one will specialize in something else like lungs and then those two will somehow also mutate so that they split and specialize even further into blood cells, brain cells, liver, pancreas, etc. etc. We are talking about huge changes in the genetic code. By the way, I'm assuming that a multi-cell organism would be an animal. If you assume a plant instead, it's just as bad because plants are made up of specialized cells too. How does a preliminary multi-cell organism survive if it doesn't have all of the specialized types of cells it needs? ie. muscle but no skin...etc. It's seems to me that a multi-celled organism, whether it be a plant or animal has to be an all or nothing kind of deal. Either it's all there and functioning or it's dead before it has a chance to reproduce.
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Originally posted by Donny 4 million
Originally posted by IntastellaBurst
In your face Creationism.
In..... Your....... Face !!!!
Why are you so against the writtings of the Jewish folks.
Are you anti-semetic? Are you a decendant of a monkey?
[edit on 4-4-2010 by Donny 4 million]
Creationism has nothing to do with Jewish people, grow up.
Originally posted by TruthSeeker8300
Originally posted by hippomchippo
Religious dogma has nothing to do with this thread, take it elsewhere.
It's nothing about religious dogma for me, it is about the truth. It is about religion for you secular humanists. S.H is a religion. The motto of this site is deny ignorance. He said something that is out of ignorance and I am giving the truth. The attack on God and his children began with the OP's first post.
Originally posted by brainwrek
Wonder how the religious types who claim the planet is only a few thousand years old will respond to this.
You cannot believe in the evolution of man and believe in God for God is perfect and makes no mistakes.
[edit on 4-4-2010 by TruthSeeker8300]
[edit on 4-4-2010 by TruthSeeker8300]
Originally posted by Studenofhistory
The aspect of evolution, which Darwin could NOT explain by the way, is that over time you get a completely new species and the problem with this theory from the point of view of fossils is that there aren't ANY intermediate fossils that are half one thing and half another thing. I'm not just talking about human fossils. I'm talking about ALL fossils. There are thousands of fossils of trilobytes of varying sizes, some longer, some shorter but they're all trilobytes, not half trilobyte and half something else.
Originally posted by StudenofhistoryAfter the mass extinctions that happened every 65 million years or so, you get an explosion of completely new species but no 'missing links' of any kind.
Originally posted by StudenofhistoryThe problem with Evolution is that it's proponents point to it's successes like micro-evolution and ignore it's failures like missing links.
Originally posted by StudenofhistoryTake apes and humans. All apes have 48 chromosomes. Humans have 46. Evolutionists would have you believe that somewhere, somehow an ape-ancentor was born with only 46 chromosomes and was somehow able to mate with a 48 chromosome partner to produce a whole new race of 46 chromosome offspring ie. humans. There is another identical situation that demonstrates how ludicrous this is.
Originally posted by StudenofhistoryI wish I could remember the name of a Nobel prize-winning scientist, who said that if the theory of evolution were tested the same way with the same rigor as any other scientific theory was tested, it would fail miserably.
Originally posted by peter vlar
All apes do NOT have 48 chromosomes. Humans are apes along with gorrillas, chimps, bonobos and oranguatangs. What most people seem to be having a terribly difficult time grasping is that Humans are NOT descended from apes, that the 5 great apes listed above have a COMMON evolutionary ancestor that existed between 7 and 10 million yrs ago. I'm not even going to touch the donkey with a 10 foot pole as this has already been covered far better than I would have.