Do you believe in evolution?

[jojackson]

Assembled a one thousand gene strand of DNA ...From what? existing but different bacteria strain?
More detail required professor Frink!

Im sure whatever it is they did was remarkable and took them 15 years, Id be shouting about it too, especially if a grant was on the cards.

 

[Ryan Jarosek]

Didn't religion evolve from gods to god? What ever happend to Zeus?

 

[pssh]

As long as religion has been around, there has always been polytheism and monotheism.

 

[Cainschams]

Didn't religion evolve from gods to god? What ever happend to Zeus?

LMAO!!!!!

Im still just going to go with my original post. Id love to elaborate on this though

 

[ABbuggin]

I'll be short. I do not believe in it. Not only is the theory of evolution too contradictory and lacking any kind of substantial proof (show me a valid "intermediate fossil"), but the whole idea is absurd. Think about it, does it sound legit to think every organism, was created by the chance luck of some chemicals mixing just the right way, O so long ago?

 

[Olimpia]

I'll be short. I do not believe in it. Not only is the theory of evolution too contradictory and lacking any kind of substantial proof (show me a valid "intermediate fossil"), but the whole idea is absurd. Think about it, does it sound legit to think every organism, was created by the chance luck of some chemicals mixing just the right way, O so long ago?

You only asked for one example http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm

 

[ABbuggin]

You only asked for one example http://chem.tufts.edu/science/evolution/HorseEvolution.htm

That example (and along with all of the others) are just guesses. Sure they are real fossils, but they present no actual proof of a species changing into something else different. Even in the example that you presented, the scientists who conducted the study even mentioned that they "could" be proof. They weren't even sure themselves.

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

That example (and along with all of the others) are just guesses. Sure they are real fossils, but they present no actual proof of a species changing into something else different. Even in the example that you presented, the scientists who conducted the study even mentioned that they "could" be proof. They weren't even sure themselves.

Prove to me that God made them then. What is your proof that he even exists? "Believing" is not enough since me believing all the evidence of evolution is not enough for you.

Why does the burden always fall on the ones with actual evidence rather then the ones completely discounting it? Bring out your evidence.

Not looking to be burned at the stake here, just interested in the other side's argument of "proof"...

 

[ABbuggin]

Prove to me that God made them then. What is your proof that he even exists? "Believing" is not enough since me believing all the evidence of evolution is not enough for you.

Why does the burden always fall on the ones with actual evidence rather then the ones completely discounting it? Bring out your evidence.

Not looking to be burned at the stake here, just interested in the other side's argument of "proof"...

Who said there is no evidence supporting God's existence? There is plenty of it out there. Might take a look into the Bible for starters. After all, it is the most well supported document in history without a single contradiction. It passes the bibliographic, internal and external tests far better than any other ancient document Others have tried to prove that the Bible is false and just can't find a way.

I'll be leaving for a camping trip soon so if I don't reply, it's not because I don't want to.

 

[Chris Anderson]

I'll be short. I do not believe in it. Not only is the theory of evolution too contradictory and lacking any kind of substantial proof (show me a valid "intermediate fossil"), but the whole idea is absurd. Think about it, does it sound legit to think every organism, was created by the chance luck of some chemicals mixing just the right way, O so long ago?

No problem:

Fish to Tetrapods: Tiktaalik, Panderichthys, Acanthostega, Ichthyostega, and Eryops.

Early Amphibians: Gerobatrachus and Eocaecilia.

Tetrapods to Reptiles: Proterogyrinus and Paleothyris.

Early Turtles: Odontochelys and Eileanchelys.

Lizards to Snakes: Eupodophis and Najash.

Dinosaurs to birds: Archaeopteryx, Anchiornis, Confuciusornis and Ichthyornis.

Early Synapsids: Archaeothyris, Procynosuchus and Thrinaxodon.

Walking whales: Ambulocetus and Kutchicetus.

Monkey's to Apes and Humans: Proconsul, Pierolapithecus, Ardipithecus, Australopithecus, Homo habilis

Chris

 

[Ace]

Who said there is no evidence supporting God's existence? There is plenty of it out there. Might take a look into the Bible for starters. After all, it is the most well supported document in history without a single contradiction. It passes the bibliographic, internal and external tests far better than any other ancient document Others have tried to prove that the Bible is false and just can't find a way.

I'll be leaving for a camping trip soon so if I don't reply, it's not because I don't want to.

there have been many contradictions actually...

and the bible was written by people not god himself so it has flaws just as humans do....

just like the bible it is up to interpretation, since the divide in christianity for starters

also dont take it personally but what you stated gives the stereotypes of people with faith have ignorance or high pride or maybe"fear" to science, while that is not all the case....

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

Who said there is no evidence supporting God's existence? There is plenty of it out there. Might take a look into the Bible for starters. After all, it is the most well supported document in history without a single contradiction.

No contradictions?? Are you kidding?! Have you read the bible?

So we provide scientific names, studies, fossils, etc at nauseum and when asked for your proof you can simply say "well of course what I think is true" and be done with it? Do you see the irony here? No one can prove the bible is false because people like you flat out refuse to listen to them. Where is your proof of Noah's ark for one? I'm not necessarily saying there's no god, I just would like to see your so-called proof since you must have the proof of absolutely every step that has ever occured in the long history of the Earth to think we might be on to something with this evolution thing. Fossils are not created easily btw, have to be perfect conditions to be preserved. Doesn't mean the creatures in between didn't exist.

 

[Ace]

No contradictions?? Are you kidding?! Have you read the bible?

So we provide scientific names, studies, fossils, etc at nauseum and when asked for your proof you can simply say "well of course what I think is true" and be done with it? Do you see the irony here? No one can prove the bible is false because people like you flat out refuse to listen to them. Where is your proof of Noah's ark for one? I'm not necessarily saying there's no god, I just would like to see your so-called proof since you must have the proof of absolutely every step that has ever occured in the long history of the Earth to think we might be on to something with this evolution thing. Fossils are not created easily btw, have to be perfect conditions to be preserved. Doesn't mean the creatures in between didn't exist.

be calm ferret she is already "camping" and no need to get all tense.

just chill lol

save your energy if she comes back

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

I'm not upset, just loling over here at the absurdity of her "argument". Some people make you want to beat your head against a wall just to make something make sense. Hitting head = pain: makes sense.

I guess I'd be a little cooler if I hadn't had this argument about a billion times before this and it always winds up as "I believe, so discard your science completely". Frustrating...

 

[Cainschams]

Who said there is no evidence supporting God's existence? There is plenty of it out there. Might take a look into the Bible for starters. After all, it is the most well supported document in history without a single contradiction. It passes the bibliographic, internal and external tests far better than any other ancient document Others have tried to prove that the Bible is false and just can't find a way.

I'll be leaving for a camping trip soon so if I don't reply, it's not because I don't want to.

Please tell me. What are the bibliographic, internal and external tests that prove it is better than any other ancient document There is so much thrown out of the bible by the Catholic church to sculpt it in a way to be able to control people and even more dip in others wallets.

You want evidence? Ever hear of the Book of Enoch? Most Christians do not even know who he was. He was the great grand father of Noah. Maybe they threw his book out because in the time of when the Catholics were adding and subtracting things from the bible they believed the earth was the center of the universe and that everything revolved around it. Well, in the Book of Enoch he describes exactly how the solar system works, the planets orbits, the sun being the center, the pathways of the sun and moon, the equinoxes etc etc etc. Maybe this is why they threw it out? Maybe its because he claimed there were more than one god that controls the heavens? Maybe that the "keepers" took him into space and showed him all of this and he came back 300 years later? Kinda sounds like what happens when you travel at high speeds. Its proven traveling at high speeds is how to travel into the future.

How are any other ancient texts not as good as what is in the bible? Maybe because civilizations like the Sumerians does not sound as good to people with faith? After all, their texts are translated to say they were created by an extra terrestrial race as a slave species and there is no divine purpose of life. Im sure this doesnt sound pleasant to those who want to get to heaven.

Or maybe the Mahabharata is discredited because of their stories of flying machines, aerial battles, texts that translate into operation manuals for these flying machines called vimanas and detailed descriptions and drawings of how they work? These texts are thousands of years old!!!

Dont get me wrong. I am actually reading the bible right now because I am very into the ancient civilizations. I have been an atheist for all my life. Never believed in god even as a young kid but now reading some of these stories I cant help but think they could have some kind of truth behind them. I believe in evolution and I also believe in extra terrestrials that may have advanced the human species. This may be one big reason for such a huge gap and the missing link.

I cant help but see the evidence in how advanced these civilizations were in astronomy, knowing far more than we did for so long thousands of years ago. They know about stars you couldnt see with the naked eye thousands of years before we found them with telescopes. The Dogon tribe know about Sirius B hundreds of years before we discovered it such a short time ago.

There, now you guys have a feel of my twisted sense of humanity and evolution

 

[Olimpia]

No contradictions?? Are you kidding?! Have you read the bible?

So we provide scientific names, studies, fossils, etc at nauseum and when asked for your proof you can simply say "well of course what I think is true" and be done with it? Do you see the irony here? No one can prove the bible is false because people like you flat out refuse to listen to them. Where is your proof of Noah's ark for one? I'm not necessarily saying there's no god, I just would like to see your so-called proof since you must have the proof of absolutely every step that has ever occured in the long history of the Earth to think we might be on to something with this evolution thing. Fossils are not created easily btw, have to be perfect conditions to be preserved. Doesn't mean the creatures in between didn't exist.

I'm completely with you Ferret. What more do you really want? For each animal to have died clutching a little sign that says, "hey, dino-bird step #4 here?" The people who put together these lineages aren't just puling them out of their behinds, they sit there and measure and analyze things down to the very teeth of a fossil and make a highly educated calculation of where it belongs in the grand scheme of things. If we could analyze the DNA of fossils we would, but very rare is the case where something like that can be done.

Referencing a single book isn't really winning me over either. Especially one that has been edited and reedited dozens of times over the centuries, leaving some books out and mistranslating others, but that's another discussion. Give us as much proof as we've given you and then we can talk, but referencing a single source isn't going to cut it for an intelligent discussion.

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

Yes! Finally got cainschams into the mix! Too much for you to resist too huh?

 

[jojackson]

After all, it is the most well supported document in history without a single contradiction.

Id say theres no contradictions if you pick and choose your own interpretation to suit yourself, no priest, padre, nun or paster I ever spoke to could agree on a given interpretation about anything in the bible I dared question as a child. Atleast the scientific community can swallow their own 'sinful' pride and concede to agree on a given theory supported by evidence avail at the time of questioning and further concede they were wrong when further evidence points to a different conclusion.
I think a stubborn and conceited refusal to except new information, not to mention self evident living proof, and the blatantly dishonest and deliberate attempt to save face when you realise that humanity dosent have all the answers in a book, and that the world is more complex than our ancestors imagined, is an insult to your own concept of God.
Where does it say in the bible, "Ye shall be ignorant as sheep, no matter what you seeth or learneth about thy world in my absence" ?
Supposing the bible said all the world was land alone, no water therein but which falleth from the heavens.
Would you still say there was no evidence of oceans and create your own interpretation of it to fit your belief?
I respect your right to believe that, but the thinking world take glory in the intelligence and ability to learn we are blessed with, and we have moved on, and not all have left God behind.
You have contributed nothing to this thread whatsoever, but an angry self righteous defiance of common sense. You have either mis-intentionally or deliberately chosen to ignore the basic understanding of the theory , which is self evident from your comment about missing 'intermediate' fossils.
Your belief makes no difference to reality, anymore than a child's belief in santa clause.
Didnt people still refuse to believe in god, even after Jesus preformed miracles infront of them, This is because they chose not to believe, and so do you my friend.
God bless you.

Some might say this thread evolved, but has now devolved! Thankyou ABbuggin

 

[ferretinmyshoes]

Id say theres no contradictions if you pick and choose your own interpretation to suit yourself, no priest, padre, nun or paster I ever spoke to could agree on a given interpretation about anything in the bible I dared question as a child. Atleast the scientific community can swallow their own 'sinful' pride and concede to agree on a given theory supported by evidence avail at the time of questioning and further concede they were wrong when further evidence points to a different conclusion.
I think a stubborn and conceited refusal to except new information, not to mention self evident living proof, and the blatantly dishonest and deliberate attempt to save face when you realise that humanity dosent have all the answers in a book, and that the world is more complex than our ancestors imagined, is an insult to your own concept of God.
Where does it say in the bible, "Ye shall be ignorant as sheep, no matter what you seeth or learneth about thy world in my absence" ?
Supposing the bible said all the world was land alone, no water therein but which falleth from the heavens.
Would you still say there was no evidence of oceans and create your own interpretation of it to fit your belief?
I respect your right to believe that, but the thinking world take glory in the intelligence and ability to learn we are blessed with, and we have moved on, and not all have left God behind.
You have contributed nothing to this thread whatsoever, but an angry self righteous defiance of common sense. You have either mis-intentionally or deliberately chosen to ignore the basic understanding of the theory , which is self evident from your comment about missing 'intermediate' fossils.
Your belief makes no difference to reality, anymore than a child's belief in santa clause.
Didnt people still refuse to believe in god, even after Jesus preformed miracles infront of them, This is because they chose not to believe, and so do you my friend.
God bless you.

Some might say this thread evolved, but has now devolved! Thankyou ABbuggin

Agree with you 110%!! I believe that percentages more than the whole are possible. And it's true, this thread was actually somewhat enjoyable to read. I like seeing what other people have to say, especially on a controversial subject. But then this happened: pure ignorance and totally derailed the civil, somewhat logical discussions that were occuring.

 

[Johnny909]

lol, religion is designed to do exactly whats going on in this thread