Religion And Common sense

[A2597]

that's exactly what you're 'not' doing from our point of view...what if religion is *your* preconception? at least admit that it's possible God doesn't exist...I can respect anyone who admits it's *possible* they're wrong...even if the chance is miniscule in their own mind.

Nice to know someone on these forums respects me.

 

[A2597]

Im amazed by your ignorance:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html



LMAO wow that is the most retarded thing Ive ever heard. Seriously you dont even know what your talkin about and I cant wait to see your reply to this. Being atheist does not imply that you believe in Evolution. First off there is a thing called "implicit atheist", which is what you are when you are born! You can say this is a cheap argument for atheists, but its the truth. So intil your introduced to the concept of religion and can comprehend it, you are atheist. So if you are never introduced to the concept of religion there is no way for you to refuse it, so you are a implicit atheist.
OK then, WHAT ARE YOU. You have yet to answer that question, and just dance around it every time I ask. So ANSWER ME. I can respect your views, no matter what they are, but as of yet you haven't given me any view. If you can't answer that little question, and its a simple one at that, then you haven't even thought about it yourself, sticking your head in the sand isn't going to solve any problems mate.

Then there is explicit, someone who refuses creation for whatever reason they choose. one can choose to refuse creation for whichever reason they want to! One being a explicit atheist does not imply he believes in Evolution! It just shows that he refused religion for some reason, whether it be philosophical (me), scientific (evolution) or whatever. I can very well refuse Christianity just because I dont like you! So really think about what you say before you say it.
OK, so you refused religion, but you keep touting evolution as a science, yet you continually say you don't believe in that either. SO WHERE DID WE COME FROM IF WE DID NOT EVOLVE AND WERE NOT CREATED. I'm getting tired of you dancing around this question man!


Lol dont comfort yourself anymore your beliefs are save just aslong as you keep ignoring the facts. We will never be able to comprehend anything outside of our natural laws.
Isn't that what I just said?....


LMAO please tell me this moutain, because Im pretty sure of which one your talkin about but we have proven it isnt there. And here again you just refuse to look at the evidence:
"Why do other flood myths vary so greatly from the Genesis account? Flood myths are fairly common worldwide, and if they came from a common source, we should expect similarities in most of them. Instead, the myths show great diversity . [Bailey, 1989, pp. 5-10; Isaak, 1997] For example, people survive on high land or trees in the myths about as often as on boats or rafts, and no other flood myth includes a covenant not to destroy all life again."
There have been so called ark sighting on numerous mountains, some have been proven false, others have yet to be proven. Myself, I think the ark has long since decayed and is gone. But it wouldn't surprise me it it was suddenly found.






UGH here we go again....look Ive already shown how he is threatening Im not gonna say it again Im just amazed you overlook every damn thing.
and I'm amazing that you are so bent on thinking that God hates you that you can't see that he LOVES you, even though you apparently hate him.


Ugh WHATEVER Im getting tired of repeating myself...I feel like a cheap whore...
I am to, your so bent on believing...something, you have yet to say what you think/believe on anything. talk about non commitment.


Dear Lord,
Please send us someone who can read.
Amen.
LMAO, I was waiting for a comment on my spelling...


LMAO its not at all accurate! Not only that but theologians have admitted that there are scriptures that have been tooken out! Please please stop just stop...
No shit sherlock. The KJV of the bible was made because there were chapters written by any olf yahoo on the street. They very carefully taced back each book to the person that wrote it, credibility is everything. Whatever chapter you quoted earlier was taken out for a reason.


There is a BIG difference between the 2 please please dont compare WW2 to a fairy tale book...excuse me The Bible.
I fail to see the difference, the Bible IS a history book, and has been proven very accurate on things like cities, travels of people mentioned in it, wars, civilizations, customs, cultures, etc. There are other historical text from those periods to back it up.


Jezzzzz here we are again. I asked you several times to demonstrate to me how the universe couldnt have created itself. The universe being here doesnt imply a creator, you saying it does is you basically saying you have omniscience of the universe and you can tell me what the universe is and isnt incapable of. Intil you can demonstrate this to me, that the universe didnt create itself, your posts have no basis whatsoever. If you cant demonstrate how the universe couldnt have created itself then all I have to say is this: How come you are quick to believe in a uncause God but not a uncaused universe? And on what basis can I accept your religion but dismiss the others?
The universe isn't capable of jack shit, thats what the universe is capable of. There is no intelligence in the universe, the universe isn't alive. The universe is composed of a bunch of rocks, stars, and dust. NOTHING about the universe suggest it is alive, you think I"M off my rocker, and your telling me the universe is a being capable of knowingly creating life for petes sake!

How am I so quick to believe in an uncaused God? Because it's a physical FACT in this universe, NOTHING, absolutly NOTHING happens without a mover. SOMETHING had to create this universe. for something to createthis universe however, it would have to exist OUTSIDE our realm of being, outside time and space.

.
lol I ask you again: on what basis can we except your religion over the others?
The best way you can do this is demonstrate Him to me, which you have failed to do so, and since you havent there is no reason whatsoever for me to except Christianity but ignore the other religions.
I'm not asking you to blindly follow Christianity, I'm asking you to open your heart to God, and ask HIM to lead you to a faith. I follow Christianity because I feel it is the truth, and there is alt of evidence to show it is.


Also why didnt you comment on my dialouge or about the miracles?? And about the inconsitencies, Im not even going to comment on those.
*Goes back to look for what he missed. but I DID answer all your "inconsitancies" numerous times man.

oh yea...ten char count.

 

[A2597]

Well I take everything he says as personal, to think that Im stupid to believe some of the shit he spits, Im not aiming the Bible one at anyone else just steppin on A2957's toes.

odd...I don't feel stepped on, more like a gentle breeze went passed.

nice try mate. you can't get me mad, at you. Feel free to keep trying though. This would be alot of fun to carry out in person though. (Aside from the stepping on my toes bit...that might hurt in person. )

 

[A2597]

I don't mean to be rude but lets not get to personal. Those could be looked at as personal attacks and I would like to keep this as civil as possible.

Anyway nice man, Your just handing out information left and right yet they dont bother to listen or read it. O well hahahah :thumbs:

They have been denying science for 2k years now, I dont expect us to get lucky this time either

coolio2man, I like your style mate. After reading most of your post, you don't let other people rile you up and you call it as you see it. "thumbs:

BTW, don't worry about me, I've been attacked far worse then by the likes here and with better arguments numerous times. I don't mind personal attacks, actually, I kind of welcome them because they are the easiest to prove wrong, and sevearly weaken the other's case.

I don't deny science, I find it pretty amazing. Biology, chemistry, I love them! But Science nowadays is thought of as having to be seperate from religion, when that just iisn't the case. I find science much more amazing when looking at it from the view of how complex God's creation is, rather then how things evolved...

 

[mchammer75040]

OK then, WHAT ARE YOU. You have yet to answer that question, and just dance around it every time I ask. So ANSWER ME. I can respect your views, no matter what they are, but as of yet you haven't given me any view. If you can't answer that little question, and its a simple one at that, then you haven't even thought about it yourself, sticking your head in the sand isn't going to solve any problems mate.

Im a explicit atheist, I did answer I put "(me)" right after philsophical rejection of religion, not scientific.

OK, so you refused religion, but you keep touting evolution as a science, yet you continually say you don't believe in that either. SO WHERE DID WE COME FROM IF WE DID NOT EVOLVE AND WERE NOT CREATED. I'm getting tired of you dancing around this question man!

Im not dancing around the question. And I didnt say we didnt evolve either, I said I need to further investigate Evolution before I accept it.

Isn't that what I just said?....

You said at our current understanding, as if we would one day achieve knowledge of something supernatural.

There have been so called ark sighting on numerous mountains, some have been proven false, others have yet to be proven. Myself, I think the ark has long since decayed and is gone. But it wouldn't surprise me it it was suddenly found....

In the Bible it says it was on Mt Aratat (sp?), so thats where its going to show up if you count on the Bible as a legit source.

and I'm amazing that you are so bent on thinking that God hates you that you can't see that he LOVES you, even though you apparently hate him.....

I never said God hated me, because if I was to say that then I would have to accept Christianity.

I am to, your so bent on believing...something, you have yet to say what you think/believe on anything. talk about non commitment.....

What do you want me to say? I believe the universe created itself. Do I believe in Evolution? No not yet, Im not about to just accept it because Im atheist I want to read up on it before I accept it. Thats the logical way of approaching it, no? As for what I believe right now, I believe the universe is a uncaused being in itself, since thats the only logical conclusion since no one has once demonstrated to me how it couldnt be and needs supernatural intervention.

LMAO, I was waiting for a comment on my spelling........

lol

The universe isn't capable of jack shit, thats what the universe is capable of. There is no intelligence in the universe, the universe isn't alive. The universe is composed of a bunch of rocks, stars, and dust. NOTHING about the universe suggest it is alive, you think I"M off my rocker, and your telling me the universe is a being capable of knowingly creating life for petes sake!

Sigh..see this is what Im talkin about. So your telling me you know everything the universe is capable of? You have omniscience of the universe and you know what the universe can and cannot do? You saying that the universe isnt capable of jack shit is saying you know exactly how the universe works, you know everything and since you dont you cant jump to the conclusion that it doesnt.

How am I so quick to believe in an uncaused God? Because it's a physical FACT in this universe, NOTHING, absolutly NOTHING happens without a mover. SOMETHING had to create this universe. for something to createthis universe however, it would have to exist OUTSIDE our realm of being, outside time and space...

Lol see again you choose to ignore the fact that you contradict yourself. If something has to have moved us, lets say that something is God, then something had to move God and so on. So your proposition of the first mover solves nothing.
Plus again you arent demonstrating the existence of your God.

I'm not asking you to blindly follow Christianity, I'm asking you to open your heart to God, and ask HIM to lead you to a faith. I follow Christianity because I feel it is the truth, and there is alt of evidence to show it is.

LMAO you say your not asking me to blindly follow Christianity but to accept Him on faith!??!? LMAO samething!

I fail to see the difference, the Bible IS a history book, and has been proven very accurate on things like cities, travels of people mentioned in it, wars, civilizations, customs, cultures, etc. There are other historical text from those periods to back it up.

The thinking back in the day the Bible was written was very supersticious, nothing had to be demonstrated to show it existed. We live by a empirical way of thinking now days, which is the opposite. Second of all, the Bible may be a history book, but that doesnt mean there isnt some mythology in it.

*Goes back to look for what he missed. but I DID answer all your "inconsitancies" numerous times man.

Dude look this is the passage Im talkin about:
"What kind of crap argument is this?? On what basis can one accept the miracles of Christianity yet deny those reported by all other religions? I remember watching a Jackie Chan special on Hong Kong and it was showing people pray to buddha and jackie said (this is just a example btw, dont take jackie as the representive of miracles reported by buddhism)"You come here and ask buddha for a baby boy and boom 9 months later you have a baby boy". So how do you show this is false? If you say its by chance that one just happened to have a boy, then well the same could be said for yours.
Second, care to explain these mericles..errr excuse me miracles? Callin a event a miracle is irrational, because your basically saying that you have omniscience of the universe and that whatever you witnessed contradicted your unfallible knowledge. Also how are we supposed to accept the miracles jesus supposedly did? How does one distinguish historical fact from mythological bullshit?. Take the miracles Jesus supposedly did for example. Nothing Jesus said or did wasnt already done by then God-man known variously as Mithras, Osiris, and Dionysus that were worshipped in a widespread Mediterranean cult.

Second of all your jumping to conclusions. For example, a theist finds a iron bar floating in the water he immediately exclaims "Its the work of God!!11!", he has solved nothing saying this but it saves him the brain power so eh whatever. The scientist on the other hand, observes it and tries to fit it in with any presently known laws. If he cant find it sticking with any of them he investigates it more and finally comes to a conclusion. There has to be a logical conclusion since nature cant contradict itself. Whatever event that took place that you call a miracle, wasnt a miracle of the supernatural it just means we cannot explain with reference to presently known laws. But hey its just like John hospers said:"...what people call a miracle depends very much on what they want to believe..."

You totally ignored this part of my argument. Also dont attack the argument just because i used jackie chan as a example. I used him to illustrate chance.

 

[A2597]

gah 123456789

Im a explicit atheist, I did answer I put "(me)" right after philsophical rejection of religion, not scientific.



Im not dancing around the question. And I didnt say we didnt evolve either, I said I need to further investigate Evolution before I accept it.
OK then...but concider how old you think science has dated the planet, and how long, how many billions of years longer, it would take for us to evolve.

You said at our current understanding, as if we would one day achieve knowledge of something supernatural.
OK, my fault. But you did understand what I attempted to say with my limited linguistic skills?

In the Bible it says it was on Mt Aratat (sp?), so thats where its going to show up if you count on the Bible as a legit source.
True, but we have no idea which mountain is Mt. Aratat.

I never said God hated me, because if I was to say that then I would have to accept Christianity.
But you say that God finds you a meaningless creation, this doesn't require belife then?


What do you want me to say? I believe the universe created itself. Do I believe in Evolution? No not yet, Im not about to just accept it because Im atheist I want to read up on it before I accept it. Thats the logical way of approaching it, no? As for what I believe right now, I believe the universe is a uncaused being in itself, since thats the only logical conclusion since no one has once demonstrated to me how it couldnt be and needs supernatural intervention.
How can it be uncaused. First off, it is expanding. meaning at some point, everything was highly compacted., so at SOME point, there was a big bang. where did that matter come from then? It's well known that nothing can exist without a mover, and a dence ball of matter had to of come from somewhere. If I pick up a rock it isn't going to contiously decide to become a small universe, because there is no way for it to do so. the same must then be true of a dence ball of intert material back then. Something had to first create the material there, and as it is scientific FACT that nothing can create itself, that something else had to create it.

lol
Yes! Humor has entered the thread!/b]

Sigh..see this is what Im talkin about. So your telling me you know everything the universe is capable of? You have omniscience of the universe and you know what the universe can and cannot do? You saying that the universe isnt capable of jack shit is saying you know exactly how the universe works, you know everything and since you dont you cant jump to the conclusion that it doesnt.
If it could, that would mean something can create itself from nothing, which is scientifically impossible.



Lol see again you choose to ignore the fact that you contradict yourself. If something has to have moved us, lets say that something is God, then something had to move God and so on. So your proposition of the first mover solves nothing.
Plus again you arent demonstrating the existence of your God.
See, here you are wrong. For something to exist without a mover, it HAS to exist outside of our time space. If the universe created itself, at some point it had to be outside time, but to enter time and create itself....is impossible. nothing forms from nothing. If something could form from nothing, we would know, but there is no scientific research out there to support the view that the universe created itself from nothing. ergo, creator.



LMAO you say your not asking me to blindly follow Christianity but to accept Him on faith!??!? LMAO samething!
I'm saying that if you ask, you'll probably be led somewhere. Your big into studying stuff, but quick to refuse this.

The thinking back in the day the Bible was written was very supersticious, nothing had to be demonstrated to show it existed. We live by a empirical way of thinking now days, which is the opposite. Second of all, the Bible may be a history book, but that doesnt mean there isnt some mythology in it.
your thinking of the dark ages mate. The Greeks and Romans were quite advanced, Greeks invented the concept of empirical research. Old and new testiment wrightings would have been looked at very closely.

Dude look this is the passage Im talkin about:
"What kind of crap argument is this?? On what basis can one accept the miracles of Christianity yet deny those reported by all other religions? I remember watching a Jackie Chan special on Hong Kong and it was showing people pray to buddha and jackie said (this is just a example btw, dont take jackie as the representive of miracles reported by buddhism)"You come here and ask buddha for a baby boy and boom 9 months later you have a baby boy". So how do you show this is false? If you say its by chance that one just happened to have a boy, then well the same could be said for yours.
Because the miricals in the Bible are documented by other sources.

Second, care to explain these mericles..errr excuse me miracles? Callin a event a miracle is irrational, because your basically saying that you have omniscience of the universe and that whatever you witnessed contradicted your unfallible knowledge. Also how are we supposed to accept the miracles jesus supposedly did? How does one distinguish historical fact from mythological bullshit?. Take the miracles Jesus supposedly did for example. Nothing Jesus said or did wasnt already done by then God-man known variously as Mithras, Osiris, and Dionysus that were worshipped in a widespread Mediterranean cult.
Osirus was the Egyption god of death man, and was never a living being, as we know Jesus was. Same oes for Dionysus and Mithras. They never walked this earth, Jesus on the other hand, we know alot about, because the Romans kept good records. we know where he traveled, how he died, where he was buried, and that he dissapeared from the tomb. Well documented and unrefutable all.


Second of all your jumping to conclusions. For example, a theist finds a iron bar floating in the water he immediately exclaims "Its the work of God!!11!", he has solved nothing saying this but it saves him the brain power so eh whatever. The scientist on the other hand, observes it and tries to fit it in with any presently known laws. If he cant find it sticking with any of them he investigates it more and finally comes to a conclusion. There has to be a logical conclusion since nature cant contradict itself. Whatever event that took place that you call a miracle, wasnt a miracle of the supernatural it just means we cannot explain with reference to presently known laws. But hey its just like John hospers said:"...what people call a miracle depends very much on what they want to believe..."
I'm all for the study of mericals, but good luck figuring em out.

You totally ignored this part of my argument. Also dont attack the argument just because i used jackie chan as a example. I used him to illustrate chance.
When chance repeats itself on a regular basis, it ceases to be chance IMHO.

 

[Zoorado]

You believe what you seek to believe. Totally converting one another's intrinsic beliefs are extremely difficult, if not impossible.

God exists if you think he does. There is no proof for or otherwise. Same thing with science. There is no absolute, only relatives. For all we know, God maybe in the form of quantum particles, strings, somewhere within the realm of mathematics, or even something so far beyond our current scientific "knowledge" (what we observe might not be what there are). But the thing is, we don't know. So there's no real need to try proving others' views wrong. I myself don't give a damn about religion. Who cares about afterlife or the existence thereof, when I can be happy now?

Just my 2 cents.

 

[Rilcon]

You talkin' about the samer romans that held as historical fast thet Gayus Julius Caesar was a direct descendant of Venus? The same romans that ended up being so blasted christian it got disgusting? Those romans? Yeah, there history books can SO be trusted.

FYI, I've spent five blasted years studying roman culture, language, society and laws, I kinda know what I'm talking about.

Here's something else. I was born a chrisitan, raised in a christian environment, knew hardly anything about other religions, and had never heard of atheists or agnostics. I knew and practiced all the rights, had studied (not just read) the bible, and was, in general, the most chrisitian kid on the block. And one day, when I was 12, I just wake up and excalaim 'bullshit'.

Here's an argument against religions, why the hell are there more than one? Don't give that 'men are free' stuff, it doesn't work. Why would a god only let a few people know of his existence, while permiting other 'heretical' religions that practice rites such as human sacrifices? Wouldn't god be damning these people to hell? Oh, wait, god's such a nice guy he'll give them the opportunity to repent. Yeah right.

Another thing. God went out and MURDERED the oldest children of the egyptians for the supposed sins of their elders. Uhm... WTF? You're praying to this guy? Let's replay the facts: god get's mad with the egyptians, so he goes over and KILLS THEIR CHILDREN. Gee that's nice of him, killing inocent children. No, wait, I bet they also got the opportunity to 'follow the right path'. Uhm, not!

Oh, yeah, be happy people

 

[Maskirovka]

A2597: i suggest you try to refute some of what timmy has said. you still think there are magical underground oceans that sprung forth to create "the flood"?

also, i don't understand how we're supposed to take you seriously when you can't even spell miracle right....or writings for that matter. if evolution is untrue, please, like timmy said...do some research and post some actual facts instead of just your random "truths"

See, here you are wrong. For something to exist without a mover, it HAS to exist outside of our time space. If the universe created itself, at some point it had to be outside time, but to enter time and create itself....is impossible. nothing forms from nothing. If something could form from nothing, we would know, but there is no scientific research out there to support the view that the universe created itself from nothing. ergo, creator.

you're the one who's wrong. if you want to use logic to prove something, you need to use logic instead of uh...whatever you're using. you say "nothing forms from nothing" then where did god come from? you're going in circles...and circular arguments are supposed to be ended by logic...but you're creating them. if god "just is and has always been", then the universe could be and always has always been. just exchange "god" for "universe" in all of your arguments.

also very important. physics and mathematics now suggest (and have for a long time) that there are dimensions that we cannot perceive. in fact, string theory suggests that the universe originally existed in 10 dimensions...and collapsed into a 4 and 6 dimensional universe because it was unstable. so it's possible that the universe existed before the big bang in a way that we could not perceive it...and that it collapsed into the 4-dimensonal universe that we now perceive...and we are incapable of understanding the universe before the big bang.

the point is, the "what happened before that" argument is the same on both sides...you can't be sure. you've just chosen to be "sure" by saying "oh...a being we cannot perceive created it and he is all-knowing and all-powerful and he's great and he'll send you to hell or let you into heaven based on what you do in your life"

please...that is not proof...that's just your choice of what to believe.

and again you talk about something you CLEARLY know nothing about when you talk about the romans and their "unrefutable" (not a word...it's irrefutable) history books. we all know that history is written by the author. if you always accept the author of a book as 100% truthful, you will quickly gain a skewed view of reality. if you never accept the possibility that something is wrong, you're just being stupid and ignorant of other views. i even accept the possibility that evolution is wrong, though there is a huuuuge pile of evidence that points to it being correct. if something came along and proved that evolution was incorrect, i wouldn't go NOOOOOO IT CANT BE. whereas if it was somehow proven that God doesn't exist, many people's lives would fall apart and the thing that refuted God's existence would be called "the devil's work".

how can you be sure that the authors of the records were recording the truth? what if their view of what was happening was untrue? what if they thought they were writing the truth but they just didn't have all the information to write the truth?

alexander the great thought he was on the verge of conquering the world...yet he had no knowledge of the americas. if he actually succeeded and then wrote a book, he might say in it, "i have conquered the entire world". that would be true for him, but not for us...because we know that more earth existed to be conquered.

ever heard of plato's "allegory of the cave"? google it...the matrix is based on it. it's all about perception vs. reality. you continue to state your perception, but refuse to believe that your perception of the world can be wrong. that is arrogant and stupid. I admit that God could exist. I could be wrong about that.

you continue to spout what you call "facts" but every single one can be torn down by hard evidence. now please...stop with the underground oceans and seashells on top of mount everest

 

[FortisVir]

Heh, this is why these discussions always go around in circles, Christians just don't want to look at the facts/evidence, and that's all there is to it. Lets think here for a minute.

- The earth is billions of years old, not thousands.
- Dinosaurs? Huge crater on the Yucutan peninsula in Mexico?
- Large amounts of evidence to support the theory of evolution. (I think timmy mentioned the soot-moth case)
- Everything has a beginning - God and the universe included.
- Moon craters which could only have occured as the result of bombardment of space objects over a period of millions of years. Why would God make a cratered moon anyway?
- A worldwide flood would be impossible
- An ark holding two of every animal would be impossible. How did these animals distribute themselves across the world after the flood? If God helped these animals, why would he even have the flood in the first place? He could simply wipe out the evil population without flooding the earth - flawed logic.
- God sometimes changes the properties of light or air.
- The Bible doesn't exactly stand together very well under close scrutiny. Inconsistencies are one thing, stuff that just plain doesn't make sense is something else.

Well thats all I can think of without going to look some more stuff up. Interesting about the collapsing-dimensions theory Maskirova, I hadn't heard of it before.

In the argument of blind faith vs. logic, the person with blind faith will always win in their minds, for they believe they cannot be proven wrong.

 

[not28]

Religious threads are always the longest in any forum. One could read through this entire topic and learn absolutely nothing.

To FortisVir: A lot of Christians don't take the Bible literally. In other words, God didn't create the world in seven days. Perhaps one day equals a thousand years, or a billion years. This is why there are scholars who study the Bible and its symbology. The only people who take it literally are those hard-ass religious zealot types. I can see if your argument is toward those kinds of people, but don't try to win over the mind of the average Joe who simply attends church every Sunday.

At any rate, a large-scale forum debate on religion is a waste of time. Every member has his or her own beliefs. Nobody knows each other, no nobody is going to back down. Essentially, you're all correct. So shut the hell up.

 

[mchammer75040]

OK then...but concider how old you think science has dated the planet, and how long, how many billions of years longer, it would take for us to evolve.

lol whatever.

True, but we have no idea which mountain is Mt. Aratat.

http://volcano.und.nodak.edu/vwdocs/volc_images/img_ararat.html
http://www.noahsark-naxuan.com/images/urartu.jpg

How can it be uncaused. First off, it is expanding. meaning at some point, everything was highly compacted., so at SOME point, there was a big bang. where did that matter come from then? It's well known that nothing can exist without a mover, and a dence ball of matter had to of come from somewhere. If I pick up a rock it isn't going to contiously decide to become a small universe, because there is no way for it to do so. the same must then be true of a dence ball of intert material back then. Something had to first create the material there, and as it is scientific FACT that nothing can create itself, that something else had to create it.
If it could, that would mean something can create itself from nothing, which is scientifically impossible..
See, here you are wrong. For something to exist without a mover, it HAS to exist outside of our time space. If the universe created itself, at some point it had to be outside time, but to enter time and create itself....is impossible. nothing forms from nothing. If something could form from nothing, we would know, but there is no scientific research out there to support the view that the universe created itself from nothing. ergo, creator.

*points to Maskirovka's post.*

I'm saying that if you ask, you'll probably be led somewhere. Your big into studying stuff, but quick to refuse this..

lol Im quick to refuse this because not once have you made me question my position on this. I asked alot when I was Christian and was led nowhere.

your thinking of the dark ages mate. The Greeks and Romans were quite advanced, Greeks invented the concept of empirical research. Old and new testiment wrightings would have been looked at very closely...

No Im sorry, miracles were a everyday occurance in those days, did you not noticed that as we progressed in more logical thinking that these numbers of miracles shrinked?
*Also points to Rilcon's post*

Osirus was the Egyption god of death man, and was never a living being, as we know Jesus was. Same oes for Dionysus and Mithras. They never walked this earth, Jesus on the other hand, we know alot about, because the Romans kept good records. we know where he traveled, how he died, where he was buried, and that he dissapeared from the tomb. Well documented and unrefutable all....

ARGHHHH ok Im not even going to get into this go read
The Jesus Mysteries : Was the "Original Jesus" a Pagan God?
by Peter Gandy, Timothy Freke
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-0879712-7996937?v=glance&s=books&n=507846

Because the miricals in the Bible are documented by other sources...

LOL again where is the evidence of the miracles? I ask again How does one distinguish historical fact from mythological bullshit? Just because the Bible says so isnt good enough, because all other religions do the same thing!

When chance repeats itself on a regular basis, it ceases to be chance IMHO....

You still arent giving us any miracles YOU have witnessed to illustrate this.

 

[mchammer75040]

Well thats all I can think of without going to look some more stuff up. Interesting about the collapsing-dimensions theory Maskirova, I hadn't heard of it before.

Yes the string theory is very intresting heres some reading material on it if anyone is intrested in it:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/everything.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/greene.html
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/elegant/program.html (3 hour video for dl)
http://superstringtheory.com/
http://www.sukidog.com/jpierre/strings/

 

[Maskirovka]

if you guys are interested in the extradimensional stuff...read anything by Michio Kaku...and like i said before..."hyperspace" is a good example.

he compares the 10 dimensional universe collapse thing to that old Charlie Chaplin film where he's trying to stretch a bedsheet onto a bed that's too big. he finally gets it on, but it's unstable and one side inevitably comes off and folds up. so the 10 dimensions were unstable...we live in the "folded up" part of the universe, and those other 6 dimensions are the part that's still stretched out. It's hard to explain and understand unless you've read the rest of the book. i'm sure you might be asking "how can we even hope to have evidence that there are 6 dimensions that we can't perceive?"

well you'll have to read the book, cause i can't really explain it without typing in huge quotes from the book...and i'd rather not do that

but basically, none of this stuff can be proven experimentally...just like you can't prove that God exists by experiment...unless that experiment is suicide. so IMO, the fact that science and religion have ended up with the same dilemma is like...God's joke. If you've ever seen the movie Dogma...you know what i'm talking about...at the end God is asked the age old "why are we here?" question, and God answers by poking the nose of the person who asked the question and makes a funny noise.

of course Dogma isn't the basis for my belief system, it's just a way of showing myself that i'm not the only one who feels that way...which is important for all humans.

another interesting note:
have you noticed another thing about religion threads? the religious people usually get frustrated by people who have evidence for things...they never give you a good reason to believe.

my girlfriend's grandfather is an archaeologist and a christian minister. she has a lot of the same questions and problems with religion that we all share, and she though it'd be a great idea to ask him since he's seriously a great guy and he also has an immense scientific mind and background.

she asked even this person some of the questions posed by agnostics on this thread, and he couldn't really give straight answers...now c'mon...if even someone with a PhD can't do it, how can A2597, who can't even spell the things he's trying to explain, hope to do so?

 

[waedoe]

Heh, this is why these discussions always go around in circles, Christians just don't want to look at the facts/evidence, and that's all there is to it. Lets think here for a minute..

- The earth is billions of years old, not thousands.

They speculate that the universe is Apperantly: 15 - 20 billion years old

So it seems safe to estimate that the age of the Universe is at least 15 billion years old, but probably not more than 20 billion years old.

heres my link: http://superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo1.html

Heres how old earth *aparently* is:
4.55 billion years

ref: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

heres how they date the earth:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html

From what i have seen, thier very obscure or inaccurate at times. Any how i personally belive the earth is probably a couple hundred millions of years. I reconize that god uses alot of metaphores so that 7 days could have been millions, maybe billions of years :cheers: any how, gods calander is different from ours.

- Dinosaurs? Huge crater on the Yucutan peninsula in Mexico?

The bible states that men walked with Large animals... this could mean dinosaurs. Huge crater, would explain dinosaurs dissappearence, it would also explain the Great flood... IE the water goes every where!

- Large amounts of evidence to support the theory of evolution. (I think timmy mentioned the soot-moth case)

I personally belive if god can make the universe, he can use evolution to make things grow. But evolution is construded. Its nothing more than meer adaptation. Meaning one spieces doesnt become another spieces. And yes i do agree that humans could have come from apes. Were from the same spiecies HOMO - **** < fill in the blank. We share same genetic makeup just different Body structures. I however dont belive we came from fish that decided they wanted to walk.

- Everything has a beginning - God and the universe included.

Heres where pure faith comes in, god has no Beginning, middle, or end. He created us so i doubt our human limitations will allow us to understand what he means.

- Moon craters which could only have occured as the result of bombardment of space objects over a period of millions of years. Why would God make a cratered moon anyway?

Anwsered this with the universe age thing.

- A worldwide flood would be impossible

Not if the ice caps melted. (people originated near the equator, around africa and the middle east.) If these Caps melted the waters would rise rapidly. Terenchal rains and weather patterns would change too. Id also like to add that thier ARE documents of the flood from asia to the middle east. Also once again the meteor could have caused it from that crator you were talking about.

- An ark holding two of every animal would be impossible. How did these animals distribute themselves across the world after the flood? If God helped these animals, why would he even have the flood in the first place? He could simply wipe out the evil population without flooding the earth - flawed logic.

He did only noah and his family were pure, read the bible. Any how animals grow exponetionally they would reproduce eventually.

For the arks design here it is:

Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

(A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)

My ref: http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/arksize.html

Also god can create a universe i think he can give noah blue prints big enough to construct what he wants done.

- God sometimes changes the properties of light or air.

um i dont understand this one.

- The Bible doesn't exactly stand together very well under close scrutiny. Inconsistencies are one thing, stuff that just plain doesn't make sense is something else.

plz give some refrences.

Well thats all I can think of without going to look some more stuff up. Interesting about the collapsing-dimensions theory Maskirova, I hadn't heard of it before.

In the argument of blind faith vs. logic, the person with blind faith will always win in their minds, for they believe they cannot be proven wrong.

same with you, you belive your right in every way don't you. you think were narrow minded and we think your narrow minded. Nuf said.

 

[mchammer75040]

another interesting note:
have you noticed another thing about religion threads? the religious people usually get frustrated by people who have evidence for things...they never give you a good reason to believe.

Yes and thats why Im getting frustrated. How can someone just totally ignore evidence and lie to oneself?

if even someone with a PhD can't do it, how can A2597, who can't even spell the things he's trying to explain, hope to do so?

Good point, but he'll lie his ass through it you can be sure of that.

 

[mchammer75040]

I personally belive if god can make the universe, he can use evolution to make things grow. But evolution is construded. Its nothing more than meer adaptation. Meaning one spieces doesnt become another spieces. And yes i do agree that humans could have come from apes. Were from the same spiecies HOMO - **** < fill in the blank. We share same genetic makeup just different Body structures. I however dont belive we came from fish that decided they wanted to walk..

(not trying to flame)This obviously comes from a huge misunderstanding of Evolution:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2

Not if the ice caps melted. (people originated near the equator, around africa and the middle east.) If these Caps melted the waters would rise rapidly. Terenchal rains and weather patterns would change too. Id also like to add that thier ARE documents of the flood from asia to the middle east. Also once again the meteor could have caused it from that crator you were talking about.[/FONT

"...this has the problem of the heat from the gravitational potential energy. The water would be steam by the time it reached the surface of the earth"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#flood

He did only noah and his family were pure, read the bible. Any how animals grow exponetionally they would reproduce eventually.

The Bible isnt really a legit source. And please explain to me how Noah got all the animals from places like Australlia, or the Americas. Even if he was to get ALL the animals of the world on the boat he would have had to do it by 50 pairs every 3 sec.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

For the arks design here it is:

Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

(A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)

My ref: http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/arksize.html

Also god can create a universe i think he can give noah blue prints big enough to construct what he wants done.

"Wood is not the best material for shipbuilding. It is not enough that a ship be built to hold together; it must also be sturdy enough that the changing stresses don't open gaps in its hull. Wood is simply not strong enough to prevent separation between the joints, especially in the heavy seas that the Ark would have encountered. The longest wooden ships in modern seas are about 300 feet, and these require reinforcing with iron straps and leak so badly they must be constantly pumped"

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html

Id also like to add that thier ARE documents of the flood from asia to the middle east. Also once again the meteor could have caused it from that crator you were talking about.

"Flood myths are fairly common worldwide, and if they came from a common source, we should expect similarities in most of them. Instead, the myths show great diversity"
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html#philosophy

EDIT: Also why did you not reply to any of my other replys to your posts:
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=345003&postcount=74
http://www.halflife2.net/forums/showpost.php?p=345304&postcount=100

 

[Maskirovka]

They speculate that the universe is Apperantly: 15 - 20 billion years old

So it seems safe to estimate that the age of the Universe is at least 15 billion years old, but probably not more than 20 billion years old.

heres my link: http://superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo1.html

Heres how old earth *aparently* is:
4.55 billion years

ref: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html

heres how they date the earth:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html

From what i have seen, thier very obscure or inaccurate at times. Any how i personally belive the earth is probably a couple hundred millions of years. I reconize that god uses alot of metaphores so that 7 days could have been millions, maybe billions of years :cheers: any how, gods calander is different from ours.

i don't understand how the big bang theory and all the other evidence for how old the universe/earth is can be proven wrong by you saying "the earth is probably a couple hundred millions of years. [old?]"

of course the bible could be metaphorical...if it's taken literally, it can be refuted by experimental evidence.

and as far as them being "inaccurate" and "obscure". please post backup for the innacurate part...and science only seems obscure to people who haven't learned about it.

The bible states that men walked with Large animals... this could mean dinosaurs. Huge crater, would explain dinosaurs dissappearence, it would also explain the Great flood... IE the water goes every where!

sorry, but there is also evidence that humans never existed at the same time as dinosaurs. and if a giant meteor caused the flood, the flood would have been in the form of a gigantic tidal wave, not 40 days and 40 nights of rain.

I personally belive if god can make the universe, he can use evolution to make things grow. But evolution is construded. Its nothing more than meer adaptation. Meaning one spieces doesnt become another spieces. And yes i do agree that humans could have come from apes. Were from the same spiecies HOMO - **** < fill in the blank. We share same genetic makeup just different Body structures. I however dont belive we came from fish that decided they wanted to walk.

apes do not share the genus homo. again, you show your lack of knowledge.

and "meer adaptation" is exactly what evolution is. species adapting to their environment. eventually they become different enough to be classified as a different species.

Not if the ice caps melted. (people originated near the equator, around africa and the middle east.) If these Caps melted the waters would rise rapidly. Terenchal rains and weather patterns would change too. Id also like to add that thier ARE documents of the flood from asia to the middle east. Also once again the meteor could have caused it from that crator you were talking about.

there isn't enough water on the earth for it ever to be covered in water. even if the ice caps melted. unless there are secret undergound oceans like A2957 tried to say (LOL). if there was actually a great flood, it didn't cover the WHOLE earth...maybe just covered what was the known world back then.

He did only noah and his family were pure, read the bible. Any how animals grow exponetionally they would reproduce eventually.

For the arks design here it is:

Genesis 6:15 in the Bible tells us the Ark's dimensions were at least 135 meters long (300 cubits), 22.5 meters wide (50 cubits), and 13.5 meters high (30 cubits). That's 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high! It could have been larger because several larger-sized cubits were used. But the 45-centimeter (18-inch) cubit is long enough to show the enormous size of the Ark.

(A cubit was the length of a man's arm from fingertips to elbow.)

My ref: http://www.users.bigpond.com/rdoolan/arksize.html

Also god can create a universe i think he can give noah blue prints big enough to construct what he wants done.

i don't understand why you used the dimensions of noah's ark. what are you trying to prove with that?

plz give some refrences.

he didn't have to give references because references were already given in force as this thread has gone one...go a few pages back to the "bible inconsistencies" links that were posted.

same with you, you belive your right in every way don't you. you think were narrow minded and we think your narrow minded. Nuf said.

no, i don't consider myself narrow minded because i can accept the possibility that i'm wrong...you and several other people on this forum cannot...and i don't consider all christians narrow minded either.

 

[Sprafa]

The physical meaning of life is to procreate and spread one's genes. You only have the ability to question those primal instincts because the homo sapiens species advanced to such a point that our brains were finally capable of true self awareness and self analysis. There are many examples in human history where this ability has gone awry, however. Less than a thousand years ago the Aztecs considered human sacrifice a crucial element to their very survival. They would sacrifice their own children, kicking and screaming all the way, in an attempt to make it rain again.

It is quite clear that we as a species are in the middle of a confusion period. We aren't really sure what the heck is going on, what we're supposed to be doing, or where the heck we're supposed to go. Look no further than the incredibly diverse range of religions and ideals from which to choose and you can see we really just have no clue. This is why certain people can be led to believe that an alien spacecraft is trailing a comet and that if they drink some funky Kool Aid they'll be able to travel to their homeland again. Cleanse the gene pool, thank you very much.

Most people are given religion as the panacea and are thus able to effectively participate in a large society and (in general) obey their respective morals and ethics. When a new member of our species joins this world, their physical location and culture determine the particular panacea they are given and will (most likely) follow for the rest of their lives. Some people are capable of breaking out of this brain-washing and attempt to search for their own meanings. You might be one of them, however you are still clinging to some of the notions instilled in you by other people when you were younger. I can't help you there other than to suggest that you release everything you were taught and look for your own answers. If indeed you're looking to discover on your own rather than be told by someone else...

Now, there are people that are simply incapable of breaking free from this programming and will just blissfully live their lives until their bodies no longer function. For them, the meaning of life was planted long ago and is quite simple. Any affront to their ideals is just so completely bizarre and foreign to them that they won't ever understand what you're trying to say. This is what we called closed-minded. The brain is a blank sheet of paper as a newborn child. It fills with knowledge along the way. For some people, the process of learning and discovery ends at some point and they just move through life like the programmed robots they are. "I am a product of God/Allah/Satan/insert_your_god_here. I will obey what my elders told me our god wants me to do. I will procreate. I will teach my children to be just like me. Then I will die, and I will go to heaven/insert_your_everlasting_playground_here."

For a select group of others, the entire life cycle is a process of learning and dicovery, and they just keep searching. For those people, life is trying to understand the meaning of life. Einstein was one such person. For him, his meaning of life was to try and reveal his god. His god happened to be the set of laws that define all of the physical world, and not the kind of god Christians or Jews or any other monotheistic religion believes in. IE, a religion whereby the divine creator of all things has a penchant for displaying a biased interest in homo sapiens and that we were crafted in his image. Einstein's god was not a single invisible entity but rather purely scientific in nature: understand how all forces in the universe work and you will have discovered god. His god would be revealed through the Unified Field Theory. Unfortunately that has yet to come to fruition.

"From the viewpoint of a Jesuit priest I am, of course, and have always been an atheist.... I have repeatedly said that in my opinion the idea of a personal God is a childlike one. You may call me an agnostic, but I do not share the crusading spirit of the professional atheist whose fervor is mostly due to a painful act of liberation from the fetters of religious indoctrination received in youth. I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being." - Albert Einstein

Now, where do you fit in all of this? Understand that, and you will have found your meaning of life. Still not sure? If you're young... and my guess is that you are since it sounds like you're a little confused... my suggestion to you is just to keep an open mind. When you do find that meaning, remember to be considerate to alternate views, especially those of people you respect (IE, your family.) You have the right to do as you want, however some people in your life will take offense no matter what it is you decide to do. Just note that they may not be capable of understanding, and that is okay. Love them for who they are and what they mean to you, but do not alter your beliefs purely to assuage them.



////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////

I hv this stored for this kind of situations.
Read and learn.

 

[Maskirovka]

When a new member of our species joins this world, their physical location and culture determine the particular panacea they are given and will (most likely) follow for the rest of their lives. Some people are capable of breaking out of this brain-washing and attempt to search for their own meanings.

..................

Now, there are people that are simply incapable of breaking free from this programming and will just blissfully live their lives until their bodies no longer function. For them, the meaning of life was planted long ago and is quite simple. Any affront to their ideals is just so completely bizarre and foreign to them that they won't ever understand what you're trying to say. This is what we called closed-minded.

...................

I prefer an attitude of humility corresponding to the weakness of our intellectual understanding of nature and of our being." - Albert Einstein

...................

When you do find that meaning, remember to be considerate to alternate views, especially those of people you respect (IE, your family.)

..................

some people in your life will take offense no matter what it is you decide to do. Just note that they may not be capable of understanding, and that is okay.

yes please...
the best part is...besides the einstein/humility part, this works as a good lesson for both sides of these types of issues. respect other views, others may not always understand, find your own meaning...not the meaning given to you by your parents/community.

 

[ComradeBadger]

Keep it clean, just a warning.

 

[Maskirovka]

Keep it clean, just a warning.

you aren't referring to anything specific?

 

[mchammer75040]

Keep it clean, just a warning.

I wuv your avatar :imu:

 

[Lucifer Crass]

Woot, awsome read sparfa. Nicely done!

 

[A2597]

lol whatever.


No Im sorry, miracles were a everyday occurance in those days, did you not noticed that as we progressed in more logical thinking that these numbers of miracles shrinked?
*Also points to Rilcon's post*
Wrong, if they were an everyday occurance nothing Jesus did would lead to hundereds of thousands following him while he was still alive.


ARGHHHH ok Im not even going to get into this go read
The Jesus Mysteries : Was the "Original Jesus" a Pagan God?
by Peter Gandy, Timothy Freke
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/t...102-0879712-7996937?v=glance&s=books&n=507846
Oh for petes sake. The Romans kept these records, we KNOW where Jesus was born, KNOW he was concidered a prophet, KNOW he was Crusified, KNOW he died (The romans were excellent killers, you cannot deny that they would NOT know when someone died) Know where he was buried, AND that there was an empty tomb. Logically think this one out man, you simply cannot deny that Jesus existed when the Bible says he did. His travels are mentioned in many other historical text, such as the works of the historian Josephus, to name one.


LOL again where is the evidence of the miracles? I ask again How does one distinguish historical fact from mythological bullshit? Just because the Bible says so isnt good enough, because all other religions do the same thing!
*Points to the Josephus reference* Because they are documented in other historical text....

You still arent giving us any miracles YOU have witnessed to illustrate this.

Yes I did. Explain to me how a broken leg, and a broken back heal litterally OVERNIGHT. One night, and several fractured vertibra were as good as new. This was after x-rays had been done, and the kid's entire family and church was praying for him. And yes, I know this guy, it isn't BS.

 

[mchammer75040]

Yes I did. Explain to me how a broken leg, and a broken back heal litterally OVERNIGHT. One night, and several fractured vertibra were as good as new. This was after x-rays had been done, and the kid's entire family and church was praying for him. And yes, I know this guy, it isn't BS.

First off you didnt say anything before..and..
LMFAO omfg dude alright alright whatever I give up on you that is the most retarded thing and EVERYONE can tell your talkin out your ass saying this. I swear I cant believe one would sink this low for a godamn argument.

Wrong, if they were an everyday occurance nothing Jesus did would lead to hundereds of thousands following him while he was still alive..

LOL again you dont even know what your talkin about jeeezzzz...there was TONS of messiahs that came before jesus that performed "miracles" the only thing that made them different from jesus is how jesus taught! But I will never be able to get that through to you.

Oh for petes sake. The Romans kept these records, we KNOW where Jesus was born, KNOW he was concidered a prophet, KNOW he was Crusified, KNOW he died (The romans were excellent killers, you cannot deny that they would NOT know when someone died) Know where he was buried, AND that there was an empty tomb. Logically think this one out man, you simply cannot deny that Jesus existed when the Bible says he did. His travels are mentioned in many other historical text, such as the works of the historian Josephus, to name one. ..

UGH forget it like I said I give up.

 

[A2597]

I'll tell you what guys, I'll make this very eas for you to convert me to Evolution.

show to me cows that mate, and give birth to a duck, that is capable of reproducing.

'cause that is exactly what evolution is when you boil it down. Two animals of the same species giving birth to an animal of a different species that is able to reproduce. Not to mention that there has to be two of that new species so they can procreate.

Sure, you'll say it's impossible, because two cows can't give birth to a duck, because the genetic material is different, entirely so.

OK, easier still.

two monkeys mating and giving birth to a male human child, that isn't steril. Whoops. still impossible, because while our genetic makeup is much more smiular, it is still different.

OK, easier still.

show me two apes that mate, and give birth to a male chimpanzee capable of reproduction.
oops. still impossible.

ok, EVEN EASIER YET.
two animals of ANY SPECIES, whos offsprings genetic code is different from it's parents, and the male is still able to reproduce.

whoops. still impossible, because animals always, always, ALWAYS give birth to the same species. (Unless you cross breed, but then the offspring is always sterile)

if you can show me any of the above, I will be forced to believe in evolution.

MICROevolution is emperical science. We can see a bird change colors though different generations, but the genetic makeup is still identical to it's great-great-great-great grandparents.

Same goes for these moths you are toting as proof of evolution, it's an example of MICROevolution.

MACROevolution however, is NOT emperical scienece, because it
a: Cannot be seen occuring in nature
b: can not be reproduced in the lab

Ergo, MACRO evolution is an UNPROVEN THEORY, and is NOT science.

argue all you will, but the above are facts, because macro evolution simply doesn't happen.

 

[A2597]

oh, and one more thing before I dissapear for the evening.

Don't argue that because I have typos, that I am stupid.

You ALL have gramatical errors, by your own logic, you to must as well be stupid. Pulling the grammar card is cheap, and if you keep pulling it out, I'll start posting your own errors, mmmk?



-A2597, who has one the gramtical errors war numerous times...

 

[mchammer75040]

I'll tell you what guys, I'll make this very eas for you to convert me to Evolution.

show to me cows that mate, and give birth to a duck, that is capable of reproducing..

Wow see you dont even know anything about Evolution, Ive only barely started to learn about it and I know more than you do. GO READ UP ON IT BEFORE EVEN STATING THAT:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=000D4FEC-7D5B-1D07-8E49809EC588EEDF&pageNumber=1&catID=2
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/

cause that is exactly what evolution is when you boil it down. Two animals of the same species giving birth to an animal of a different species that is able to reproduce. Not to mention that there has to be two of that new species so they can procreate.

Sure, you'll say it's impossible, because two cows can't give birth to a duck, because the genetic material is different, entirely so.

OK, easier still.

two monkeys mating and giving birth to a male human child, that isn't steril. Whoops. still impossible, because while our genetic makeup is much more smiular, it is still different.

OK, easier still.

show me two apes that mate, and give birth to a male chimpanzee capable of reproduction.
oops. still impossible.

ok, EVEN EASIER YET.
two animals of ANY SPECIES, whos offsprings genetic code is different from it's parents, and the male is still able to reproduce.

whoops. still impossible, because animals always, always, ALWAYS give birth to the same species. (Unless you cross breed, but then the offspring is always sterile)

if you can show me any of the above, I will be forced to believe in evolution.

MICROevolution is emperical science. We can see a bird change colors though different generations, but the genetic makeup is still identical to it's great-great-great-great grandparents.

Same goes for these moths you are toting as proof of evolution, it's an example of MICROevolution.

MACROevolution however, is NOT emperical scienece, because it
a: Cannot be seen occuring in nature
b: can not be reproduced in the lab

Ergo, MACRO evolution is an UNPROVEN THEORY, and is NOT science.

argue all you will, but the above are facts, because macro evolution simply doesn't happen.

Jeez see you need to actually read up on it, what are you 11? Cause your arguments are sure of 11 year old, if you had actually read up on Evolution. Even a small amount you wouldnt be saying any of this. Also you saying its a unproven theory shows how very little you really know, Theory in the scientific sense is something backed up by facts, observations, analysis...etc.

 

[A2597]

Hey, I posted that a few pages back, shoot, you want proof, next time I'm your in my area of Florida, I'll take you to meet him. You can hear about it from him, his parents, and the members of his church, his other friends, and he may be able to give you contact information for the doctor whos care he was under.

not to mention, these kinds of things happen more ofthen then you seem versed with.

 

[mchammer75040]

Hey, I posted that a few pages back, shoot, you want proof, next time I'm your in my area of Florida, I'll take you to meet him. You can hear about it from him, his parents, and the members of his church, his other friends, and he may be able to give you contact information for the doctor whos care he was under.

not to mention, these kinds of things happen more ofthen then you seem versed with.

UGH WHATEVER. You base this part of your argument on the fact that I cant say "see your friend never had that done to him" and that we live far away from each other so I cant personally prove you wrong.

 

[A2597]

The fact remains, species ONLY GIVE BIRTH TO THEIR SAME SPECIES. They do NOT change. Micro evolution is an everyday occurence. but no matter how many billions of times it occures, it is still the same species! Same genetic code! GENETIC CODE DOESN"T CHANGE.

(OK, there are cases where it does, like downsyndrome, but the males are always sterile, and I would hardly call that a step UP on the evolutionary ladder)

 

[mchammer75040]

The fact remains, species ONLY GIVE BIRTH TO THEIR SAME SPECIES. They do NOT change. Micro evolution is an everyday occurence. but no matter how many billions of times it occures, it is still the same species! Same genetic code! GENETIC CODE DOESN"T CHANGE.

(OK, there are cases where it does, like downsyndrome, but the males are always sterile, and I would hardly call that a step UP on the evolutionary ladder)

Again go read up on it.

 

[Maskirovka]

how can you even start off your argument with something as ridiculous as cows mating and producing a duck...it just makes you sound retarded.

evolution is the selection of successful traits in a species through death and reproduction. therefore if apes exist, and one was born that was a little smarter because of a genetic mutation, that ape would be more likely to survive and produce more apes with these better genes.

then 1,000 years later, that ape's descendants give birth to an ape that has what is the beginning of an opposable thumb. this ape, which is also smarter, could use tools in a more dextrous way instead of just gripping a stick like current apes sometimes do.

1,000,000 years later, you have that many more things happen to a species that make them better suited to survive...or to die out.

i don't understand how this type of thinking, along with evidence like the moths are not proof to you. I fail to understand the difference between microevolution and macroevolution. they are both the same process...one just takes a lot longer. you talk about birds' colors changing, but if that makes them better suited to survive, and they do, and 90% of the entire species becomes that color...then that's evolution.

a slightly smarter moth might not be better suited to survive because it's already incapable of avoiding birds. but a different colored moth can avoid being seen by birds and therefore survive to reproduce and make different colored moths.

but a slightly smarter ape would be better suited to finding food if food got scarce...a smarter ape could learn to use tools to find food...or one that walked more upright could run faster from large predators.

here's more info on the moths:
http://www.txtwriter.com/Backgrounders/Evolution/EVpage07.html

 

[Lil' Timmy]

sigh.. even though i'm extremely disappointed with this forum right now, i'll come back to play with a2597 some more..

ok, not to pick on your grammar (diction specifically), since you're so sensitive about it, but this is just plain humorous also, notice that i have not been picking apart your grammar b/c there are so many more interesting ways to destroy your arguements

show me two apes that mate, and give birth to a male chimpanzee capable of reproduction.
oops. still impossible.

actually, since chimpanzees are apes, this is not only possible, it happens all the time. good job.
anyway..

I'll tell you what guys, I'll make this very eas for you to convert me to Evolution.

show to me cows that mate, and give birth to a duck, that is capable of reproducing.

if someone could show that happen, i'd probably believe in god right away, since such an occurence would be about as close to a miracle as i can imagine! as everyone should know, of course, evolutionary theory does not propose anything so preposterous. and as maskirovka said, mentioning this in even the most slightly serious tone can only illustrate how amazingly little you understand about this topic, regardless of all the "research" you've done that has led to your spectacular grades, a2597.

'cause that is exactly what evolution is when you boil it down. Two animals of the same species giving birth to an animal of a different species that is able to reproduce. Not to mention that there has to be two of that new species so they can procreate.

.. honestly.. the state of schools today... ;(

ok, EVEN EASIER YET.
two animals of ANY SPECIES, whos offsprings genetic code is different from it's parents, and the male is still able to reproduce.

well, this one happens millions of times a day probably.. all you need to satisfy this is organisms that reproduce sexually. if the offspring didn't have different genetic material from either of it's parents, it'd be a clone of one of them. i'm guessing this is not what you meant to say. feel free to correct yourself.

if you can show me any of the above, I will be forced to believe in evolution.

well, i guess you believe in evolution now.. though i can't say i like the way it came about.. believing in anything due to pure ignorance isn't noble in my eyes.

MICROevolution is emperical science. We can see a bird change colors though different generations, but the genetic makeup is still identical to it's great-great-great-great grandparents.

Same goes for these moths you are toting as proof of evolution, it's an example of MICROevolution.

MACROevolution however, is NOT emperical scienece, because it
a: Cannot be seen occuring in nature
b: can not be reproduced in the lab

Ergo, MACRO evolution is an UNPROVEN THEORY, and is NOT science.

so are you arguing that "macroevolution" cannot be observed or that it doesn't happen, b/c those are two entirely different concepts...

argue all you will, but the above are facts, because macro evolution simply doesn't happen.

oh ok, so it doesn't happen and you know this b/c it can't be observed on human time scale and can't be reproduced in the lab.. hmm.. these contentions (assuming them to be true) would actually argue that you can say neither the positive nor the negative (for certain) regarding "macroevolution". even if one were to give you that case (out of sympathy to be sure), the onus then falls on observable evidence, of which the preponderance points to evolutionary processes shaping the biological world we know. see, it's simple. :thumbs:

 

[mchammer75040]

lol wow Im just amazed...

 

[crabcakes66]

A2597 added to ignore becuase he is a lunitic.

 

[Lucifer Crass]

Please, I know that he is not as well informed as the rest of you, but do not call people retared. This is just plain rude and does not serve the purpose of relevating your argument.

I don't want this thread to become a flame war, this is supposed to be a well thought out discussion. It has been going great but I see a few of you are about to blow your top. I don't wanna sound like I am an Admin or anything but if you decide that someone is ignorant, tell them how not just "You're an asshat" sort of thing.

This goes for both sides. Anyway, 2 cows = a duck, dude really.
It more like, cows walk around.. .... they can't get food. They try to climb rocks. Cows can't climb so their hooves get broken and rehealed. After many hundreds of years of this healing and breaking of the hooves they adapt to have their feet stonger to scale small hill and rocks.

So a silly yet relevant example of evolution is, cow adapts into goat cuzz the ones that are evolving stay alive while the 100% cow dies off. So eventually there are only goats left.
(well thats how I understand it anyway)

Jezz crab, little harsh. We aren't supposed to damn the lesser of our kind we are here to educate.

 

[Maskirovka]

I think he just thought that evolution meant that 2 members of species A mate and produce species B. it's easy to understand why someone would not believe that...i wouldn't believe that if that's what evolution was.

 

[Maskirovka]

A2597 added to ignore becuase he is a lunitic.

wow dude that's not cool...

and if you're going to call someone names, at least spell the name right :\