Creationism vs Evolution? The Creation vs Evolution Debate
85
 | Amazon Price: $16.56 List Price: $29.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $5.19 List Price: $15.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $8.96 List Price: $19.95 |
When did it become the norm for religious fanatics to attack scientific theories?
As far as I can tell, it has always been the norm, which is quite a shame if you think about it. Religion has the potential to do so much good yet fails disastrously time and time again, because once you believe you have the word of god in your head, you are immune to suggestions to the contrary, and your ability to make rational decisions is badly compromised.
The current scientific theory under attack is evolutionary biology, and in certain extreme cases, any and all scientific knowledge that contradicts the idea that the earth was created by a supreme being in the last few thousand years. The actual time the earth was created varies from religionist to religionist and seems (as far as I can tell) to depend on just exactly how many hundreds of years people used to live back when the characters in the bible were walking around. I really don’t know why they don’t just say “Noah was actually four million years old when he died, so this fits in perfectly with accepted scientific evidence.”
The guise of this attack is to artificially create a creation vs evolution debate, which does not exist - any more than a god does. There is no creation vs evolution debate. What there is, is a growing number of conservative Christians and Muslims attempting to defend a faith which they perceive to be under threat. I have never quite understood why it is so important to them that other people believe the same things that they do, but I am leaning towards the idea that they do not actually believe it and the more people they can coerce to join their bandwagon, the less foolish they feel. Who know? The irony of course, is the amount of times these fanatics use other scientific advancements to promote their dying belief system, such as computers and the internet. If the religionists had had their way we would still be living in the dark ages thinking that electricity is the work of the devil, asking the clergy to explain what day of the week it was and just exactly how much of our income we should hand over to the church.
I am not going to put forward an argument in favor of evolution here. Of course I believe evolution happens, because it does. The measurable data and evidence is all around us. No – what I am going to do is a “taste of their own medicine,” and this will be a purely emotional, completely un-factual attack on those who choose to attack a valid scientific theory for religious reasons. Precisely the same as their attacks on evolution. :) I am not even going to bother explaining evolution to those ignorant of the process. I tried that once and the ensuing discussion is here - Ignorance is not an excuse.
Evolution and Creation Myths
- Evolution or Creationism?
An excellent explanation of evolution and a few religious spin doctor's arguments taken on. - Egyptian Mythology: The Creation Story
Depending on the different creation myth that you look at, the differences will be slight, but there. - Native American Creation Stories - Goddess Roles
Native American creation stories vary from tribe to tribe, and even storyteller to storyteller.
The scientific community may disagree on the precise nature of the
process, but, by and large, no scientist of any standing would argue
against the evolutionary process. The fact that evolution occurs is
well documented, the various theories put forward to describe the
mechanism is a constantly changing and adapting set of theories based
on new evidence as it becomes uncovered. Which brings me to the first
argument some religious people have against evolution. And I would like
to make a distinction here. Not all - in fact, not many religionists –
are unable to reconcile their beliefs with scientific facts. But there
are enough of them and they appear well funded enough for me to feel it
is worth my energy to combat this.
The problem is – the theory
of the mechanism of evolution is a constantly changing idea. It is not
set in stone, and it is not absolute. These religionists can only deal
in absolutes, and take any discussion amongst the scientific community
as to the precise mechanism as an argument against evolution. At one
point I thought this was just plain ignorance, but after many
discussions with these people have come to the conclusion that it is
willful ignorance based on the fact that they think their belief system
is under attack by evil evolutionists hell-bent on throwing god down
from his lofty perch. They are also conveniently ignoring the
fact that this all-seeing, all-powerful super being could step in any
time and put us all on the right track if He chose to. And I am not
really interested in listening to arguments that He already did and I
should just shut up and listen to the TRUTH you have for me. My lack of
belief in a deity has absolutely nothing to do with my understanding of
evolution. In fact, it is the lack of belief that prompts one to even
ask any questions. If you already know everything – why would you start
looking in the first place? Which is the whole point of teaching
creationism.
Religion masquerading as "science"
One scary development recently is the trend of the desperate believers to disguise their true intentions with science. Creation science. There are a growing number of these so-called scientists, dressing up their religious beliefs as scientific evidence. I totally understand why they are doing this. With the growing availability of mass communication and increasing education amongst the poorer members of society, the power of religion is waning. Gone are the good old days of just being able to communicate with the members of your little community and you all believed the same thing. Now those poor people are being exposed to all sorts of other beliefs, and there is nothing more scary. Plus - you can speak to the world using these technological advances that were once considered the work of the devil and the temptation to widen your audience must be pretty irresistible.
Take this gentleman for example - Dr Kent Hovind. This is a perfect example of a human male at the current pinnacle of our evolutionary development. Clever, articulate, persuasive and charismatic. What a fantastic specimen of human development. And what a shame it is he chooses to use his considerable energies persuading children they are being lied to by large group of the adults on the planet. Just imagine what a positive contribution to society some one with his obvious skills could have made – instead he wastes all his time abusing children to protect his irrational beliefs. I do not think he is stupid, or uneducated, he just knows which side his bread is buttered on and it does not matter how much damage is done in the process. And as for Ken Ham. I wonder how he gets to sleep at night.
The "Institute for Creation Research" has been in and out of the news as they unsuccessfully attempt to gain accreditation as a serious school. Perhaps not quite as insidious as the "creation Museum," which is squarely aimed at children.
 | Amazon Price: $0.00 |
 | Amazon Price: $10.47 List Price: $12.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $1.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $0.00 |
Which brings me to the point of this hub. I have now come to the conclusion that the people most aggressively fighting to falsify evolutionary theory are actually the cleverest amongst the believers. Now, I am not talking about the foot soldiers of god, those worthy individuals who go out into the world repeating the questions they have been trained to ask which are asked merely to throw doubt onto scientific facts so that a god can be added to the equation. We have dozens of them here. Thousands possibly. No doubt there will even be a few links to their irrational justifications in the box on the right. In fact, I was prompted to write this hub when I came across yet another one of these foot soldiers pushing the idea that questions should be asked of scientific theories. This is the one – JimLow, and he has a bunch of articles written attacking the scientific validity of evolution, and attacking Darwin as being doubtful as to the validity of his theory. (Edit - this person has since removed their articles and left the site.)
Quite honestly, I don’t care if Darwin recanted everything he ever said, burned all the copies of every book he wrote he could lay his hands on, joined the Church Of The Flying Spaghetti Monster on his death bed and died uttering the words, “Forgive me Lord, I have sinned grievously.”
It will not change the facts. The theory of evolution is a scientific theory, not a religion or a political party.
Now – I am a big fan of asking questions about anything – scientific or otherwise and this includes evolution. But when you start asking questions with the sole intention of casting doubt rather than in a genuine quest for knowledge, you step away from the scientific arena and into another realm. The realm of politics, which is where religion belongs in my opinion.
Anyway, this is where I get a little controversial. As I said, the people pushing against evolution being taught and promoting the idea that the earth is just a few thousands of years old are the fittest of their species. They must have come to the inescapable conclusion that I, Richard Dawkins, and many others are coming to. They are the ones that best understand the evolutionary process and they are scared. Once you fully understand the evolutionary process there is but one inescapable, unavoidable conclusion:
There cannot possibly have been a divine hand guiding the process therefore god does not exist.
This would imply a developmental destination, and also imply that the
conditions to reach this destination where deliberately manipulated to
achieve said destination – which was us, according to the religionists.
This is why the Catholics dance around the subject of evolution, and
the evangelicals get all bent out of shape, start calling unbelievers
fools and liars. There is no debate about creation vs evolution. All
there is, is a bunch of religionists protecting their gravy train. If
you throw a predetermined destination into evolutionary theory, it
makes the entire theory worthless, useless, and invalid.
It is
no longer a workable scientific theory for several reasons. First – if
evolution was started with us in mind, why on earth would a god go to
all that trouble instead of just producing the desired end product? Why
piss about trying out the dinosaurs and all the other dozens of extinct
species that are no longer around? What an illogical way of approaching
a problem. Talk about your original lousy design. “I know - what I want
is humans made exactly in my own image, but I will, throw a few cells
together on earth, try out a few other things first and then wait 4.5
billion years.”
Secondly, the theory must be discarded if there
was a hand guiding the process, because the theory relies on adaptation
to natural changes in the environment or internal mutations which are
either successful and passed on or fail and die out. The moment you
introduce a Guiding Hand, is the moment this theory goes out the
window. So for all you guys out there who say, “sure evolution happens,
I can hardly deny this much evidence, but there must have been a god
controlling every single step over the last several million years,” you
might want to rethink that one. ☺
And I seriously recommend reading Richard Dawkins’ book, “The Blind Watchmaker.”
 | Amazon Price: $8.29 List Price: $18.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $7.50 List Price: $15.00 |
| Amazon Price: $8.96 List Price: $19.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $22.33 List Price: $39.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $1.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $14.84 List Price: $19.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $3.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $29.50 |
 | Amazon Price: $12.57 List Price: $19.97 |
![Evolution: The Anti-God Religion of Death [VHS]](http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51YN8WM42QL._SL75_.jpg){kind=small} | Amazon Price: $12.98 List Price: $19.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $0.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $12.55 List Price: $18.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $3.03 List Price: $8.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $26.06 List Price: $45.00 |
 | Amazon Price: $1.99 |
 | Amazon Price: $49.49 List Price: $109.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $41.99 List Price: $121.95 |
 | Amazon Price: $5.58 List Price: $17.00 |
 | Amazon Price: $0.99 |
Please feel free to use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data, ability to repeat discredited memes, and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Also, be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. Any irrelevancies you can mention will also be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.
vote upvote downshareprintflag
- Useful (2)
- Funny (2)
- Awesome (3)
- Beautiful (1)
- Interesting (3)
CommentsLoading...
It's OK, Mark, but it's also a bit of a rant in places. Being right doesn't always hold up against 'Methinks the lady doth protest too much'. Anyway, stand back for the deluge ;)
@ ralph - thanks.
@ paraglider - yup - that is what I said it was going to be lol
Good and funny as always Mark. Did you read that the Vatican went on a field trip to C.E.R.N. this past week. Apparently the Holy See has no problems with science because "it will back up the beliefs and show that God created the world" WTF?? HaaaHaaHaaaHaaaaaa!!! What happens when it proves that there is no God? I've got a commenter on one of my sites trying very hard to tell me the big bang couldn't have happened in this dimension and it was all God's work. He has yet to send me the data backing up this theory. Of course this was the same person who tried to tell me binaries don't exist. Have a great day.
LOL - I did not know that. I don't see how a particle accelerator will do any such thing. The best I heard lately was the guy I mention in this hub has written some "teaching" about how the earth really is old, but there were a bunch of angels living here before we were created last week. :lol:
Oh no...lol. I guess he's been watching Kevin Smith's Dogma and reading way too much Paradise Lost and The Book of Enoch. So is he saying the Jews didn't bury all the dinosaur bones across the planet in 1924? Too Funny!
I hadn't heard that one. lol I like it though - it has a ring of authenticity to it.
Another good hub Mark.
Great hub Mark and you know I agree. I'm sure there will be some very interesting "comments". Enjoy.
LOL - I very much doubt anyone wil stop by. They know I am an evil evolutionist. But we shall see lol
Hi Mark, I have listened with interest on the forums , and felt that this hub was a coming, and a very interesting read it was. Agreeing with you is not difficult as evolution is....Good one.
I may have to produce a few more - this was or in the nature of a rant lol
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31126794/ here's that Vatican visiting CERN article. Quite entertaining.
LOL Yes - entertaing is the word. I have a feeling this was the same official that bought pressure to bear to have atheist bus advertisements stoppd in Rome. lol
Mark...Good Hub! Those of our thoughtful "ilk" constitute a minority of humanity. I consider believers in incorporeal supernatural entities to be the lesser "evolved" of the human species. I spent 2 1/2 years in baptist seminary in my early 20's. I was asked to leave because I asked too many questions and couldnt accept "ya gotta have faith" as an answer.I am not an atheist because I do not know how I can "deny" this god thing which I cannot know, which cannot be defined (factually) and is inexplicable.
Hi quark,
Unfortunately you are right. "You must have faith" is a very weak, yet powerful argument for much of the population. At the end of the day, it is the easy option because it requires nothing but closing your eyes. I prefer to deny the god of the religionists because I am 100% certain it does not exist. ;)
hi mark!
i'hav read ur hub and all that i can say is people who blindly believe in religion exist because they have been feeded ever since they came into this world and they have not applied their thoughts or mind towards understanding the real truth.. just like the elephant and the chain story...
Hi Maverickmonk,
I am not familiar with that story. Care to share?
I really do not understand why there is so much debate over creation over evolution. It seems that for many people, evolution equals "no god". If evolution can be proved, that means that there is no god.
But I can also argue that God created our universe. And he created it such that if the proper conditions exists, intelligent life such as us will evolve.
So, why the big deal over whether we evolved or not?
Wandererh, as an agnostic I have no problem with someday discovering that a god or gods or superbeings created the universe. However, evolution does not even ask who did that. I simply states that life as we know it on Earth evolved from lower forms into higher forms, using energy that is readily available from our sun to overcome the obstacles otherwise presented by Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics.
That Law is often used by Creationists to say that evolution is impossible, yet they always forget that by that same law, if it weren't for the sun's energy. ALL LIFE would be impossible!
Science does not make a big fuss about Evolution as compared to religion, and both have lived comfortably enough until some people got it in their heads that creationism is science and therefore should be taught in schools.
In Spain we reject this idea as ridiculous and very backwards. We want our scientists to have wisdom and knowledge of the real world, not some fantasy world of predictions and revelations. One would think that the U.S. as a world leader would see the same thing, but apparently enough people want this psuedo-science introduced into the school curriculum, and that bodes ill for the educational system in the U.S.
Evolution huh......Who wants to have a Father as a monkey, I will rather stick to Gods creation, and so will the monkeys. It amazes me how far people have let their minds drift away from God,
God once said
Psalms:14:1: The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good.
Proverb:12:15: The way of a fool is right in his own eyes: but he that hearkeneth unto counsel is wise.
Proverb:26:12: Seest thou a man wise in his own conceit? there is more hope of a fool than of him.
Its ok to say men made technology, and made cars planes buildings roads etc.
But its not ok to say God created everything else like clouds, water, trees, wind, sun,stars, animals, and people.
Man kind is totally thick.Scientist or not
@ wandereh - It is s big deal because people will not accept that their beliefs are false.
@ Ivan - The same here in France, but let's face it - the catholic church is reticent to admit that evolution occurs and have sensibly chosen not to have that battle. What you have in teh US is a bunch of provicncial backwoods churches afraid fof knowledge if it sounds like they are wrong.
@hoowantsto - that is a pretty lame argument for anything. It s not a choice whether you evolved or not lol
Sorry Mark, that was not what I meant to show you. I hope I get it right this time. I would appreciate your feedback (on this hub please). Thanks.
HOOWANTSTONO, science starts with "I don't know and let's find out." It seems that you are starting with "I know and how can I prove it."
Mark Knowles, I agree that many people just refuses to have their belief systems challenged. Or maybe they just don't like monkeys. :)
It's ironic that people who do believe they were monkeys also refuse to challenge their beliefs. As for me, I'm still seeking for the truth and I challenge everything.
I just don't understand why there are still monkeys around and not the other creatures that are supposed to be part of the evolution. It just doesn't make sense to me.
For some, it is just more comfortable to believe in evolution because it "proves" there is no god. For others, it is more comfortable to believe in god and ignore all other belief systems that they preceive to challenge that. Just human beings being themselves. :)
@ rob - Entertaining. I am not sure what that has to do with evolution though. And there ae certainly enough possible interpretations of a translation of the Qu'ran to say it says just about anything you want. Although - are you saying that the muslim faith proves evolution? Yet at the same time, still think we evolved from monkeys?
We share a common ancestor with monkeys. In fact, if you go back far enough - we share a common ancestor with all living things. Just like it says in the Qu'ran ;)
@wandereh - I think it is important to make a distinction between believing something you have measured and believing something unmeasurable. I mean - I "believe in gravity" because I see it working every day and it is a measurable force.
Forgot to comment before now, Mark - I wanted to see how this went down :D
You hit the nail on the head - like the Catholics, the Greek Orthodox church skirts around evolution. Not so much because of the science, but because creationism is extremely poor philosophy - I know an archbishop, and even he does not believe that the Bible is literal. Being able to read the NT in the original language probably helps!
We were all sea-squirts, once. :D
Hi Sufi - they have no choice. Imagine if the Pope stood up and said "evolution doesn't happen - we are not descended from monkeys." lol
The American creationists on the other hand are still in a position of being legally allowed to remove their children from teh school system and teach them that evolution is a lie at home. :(
@ wandererh
Keep wandering its been happening for thousands of years and we still the same. Trying to figure out things already figured out and recorded.
@ Mark Knowles.
Some humans turned into monkeys thats why they are searching for their ancesters. LOL
Thank you Mark.
"Men do not reject the Bible because it contradicts itself, but because it contradicts them.” –E. Paul Hovey
“Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system. I see the earth at the right distance from the sun to receive the proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance." –Sir Isaac Newton
“DNA is like a computer program, but far, far more advanced that any software we've ever created.” –Bill Gates, founder of Microsoft
And what exactly does that have to do with a scientific theory?
Bill Gates - no mention of religious objection to a scientific theory.
E Paul Hovey - Priest who made his living selling salvation
Issac Newton - Died during a time of heavy religious indoctrination where claiming atheism was likely to end in being killed for heresy.
What exactly is your point with these quotes?
Hello Mark,
This was a well written hub, in some places a little ranty, but it is an emotionally charged subject. I subscribe to creationism as my thoughts on the creation of the universe. The reason I do so is because scientists have yet to assess the beginnings of the universe. I do agree that evolution occurs, and I reconcile this in my religious belief as we do not know how long a day was as the sun was created on the "fourth day." I imagine God's days were not based off of the Earth's rotation around the Sun being the Sun wasn't there.
I imagine that you most likely believe in the Big Bang Theory. This theory is well thought out, but it also lacks a true beginning. All things require energy, and matter. Scientists agree, so much so that they call it law, that you cannot create nor destroy matter or energy. If this is the case, then how did the universe come to be? It is a great scientific paradox that has yet to be answered.
The Big Bang Theory requires a tremendous amount of matter and energy to work in the way it is described. Until this process can be explained, both belief systems require faith. It requires faith to believe in a God in the sky creating life, and it requires faith in scientists to believe a theory with a beginning that isn't yet understood. And please, don't construe my words as an attack, I believe science is a wonderful thing.
At the risk of sounding cheesy I think of science as the study of God's work. The mathematics involved even in the simple snowflake are astounding! Either way, whether I agree or disagree, or whether you agree or disagree, life is too short for these two factions to fight with one another. I hope that the more extreme religious people can take a peaceful stance, and vice versa.
I wish you a wonderful day Mark, and once again, a very well written hub.
Sincerely,
Debris
Sorry to say this Mark but I think that you are way off target. It is only a small section of Christian religion that refuses to acknowledge evolutionary theory.
The Catholic church is at peace with the theory except for a very small number of dissenters. In 1996, Pope John Paul II called the theory of evolution ''more than a hypothesis," while declaring that science and Catholicism couldn't clash because ''truth cannot contradict truth."
The Anglican Church has no problem with the theory.
This only leaves the populist evangelical churches with their uneducated leadership.
In short, it is only a significant problem in the US. And the only really serious outcome is that science in general is brought into disrepute at a time when science really needs to be used to save our planet from enviromental disaster.
Why not get to the root cause of the problem and tackle populism itself? It is the root cause of so much misery in our societies when people decide they are experts on aspects of life where they have little education and even less knowledge.
So Mark, you were saying something about no one stopping by?
@ CWB - LOL Spoke too soon. I have just proven their god does not exist so I guess I should get a reaction. :)
@ debris - actually, I am undecided about the big bang theory. It sounds too much like a scientific version of creationism and like the religious version - I think it started from the mistaken assumption that there was a beginning.
@ Will - I disagree. Tony Blair was instrumental in allowing the resurgence of faith schools that teach young earth creationism in the UK. The root cause is a desire by the religious sects to retain power. And the pope still dances around the subject - for the same reason the American evangelists attack evolution. Just a few month ago, the catholic church in Italy was able to prevent the atheist bus ad campaign - why would they do that?
God caused the Big Bang
Ge:1:1: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth
So who cares how old the earth is, but life on earth is not that old, recorded history goes back to the closest of 10000 years.
This is where it gets interesting men trying to prove the Biblical records wrong through their blindness and rejection of the fathers of history in the bible, and substitute it for their own distortions.
There was a period on the earth that had no Polar caps, because the earth was a suitable vapour dome where it didnt even rain,Life during this period on earth lasted much longer than today, it was inhabited by humans and animals alike, reptiles never stop growing just like today.These conditions have been recreated in mini environment projects and the exact same evidence was reproduced in reptiles and mammals. The dinosaurs reached immense sizes because of this perfect atmosphere, and humans got very old even big, recorded.
Ge:6:4: There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that
Ge:5:5: And all the days that Adam lived were nine hundred and thirty years: and he died
Ge:5:8: And all the days of Seth were nine hundred and twelve years: and he died
Ge:5:27: And all the days of Methuselah were nine hundred sixty and nine years: and he died.
Then the earth had a catastrophic event either by a close passing comet or meteorite impact that caused a climate change due to volcanic, earth quake and tsumi globaly occurences. The vapour in the atmosphere began to condense and it began to rain consistantly for 40days and 40 nights. All living creatures were coverd by the deluge. Thats why we find Fossils today, life caught in an instant.
We see mini events like this taking place around the earth every day we have seen what volcanoes do when they explode, and affect global weather for two years or more
We have seen what floods do, and tsunamis
Did not take millions and billions to happen.
hoowantstono - No - sorry. The problem comes when proven facts contradict your irrational beliefs and you try to make those facts fit a fairy story stolen from other religions.
Realistically - you are throwing your common sense out the window when you are stating that the "biblical records" show men living to be 900 years old. Use your brain man. That is what your god gave it to you for. It is not painful - I promise lol
Hello Mark,
So you don't believe that there was a beginning to the universe? I believe science has done a good job of proving that there has to have been a beginning because of the way the universe is expanding. They can tell it is expanding via light spectrum analysis and they also see that it is expanding at a decreasing rate which suggests that it could go into a contraction cycle.
To believe that the universe existed without a beginning requires more faith than I could muster. It would also violate the laws of Physics in that perpetual motion cannot exist as you cannot derive more energy from something than you put into it. That single law tells you that the universe must come to an end at some time, when? At the current rate, I wouldn't hold my breath.
A certain amount of energy went into the universe's beginning, that amount of energy continues to exist today, but it cannot perpetually drive the motion in the universe. It's amazing how this whole system works.
-Debris
Comment by neighbor of Steve Reimink of Grand Haven, Michigan, owner of the website which has been promoting James von Brunn's anti-Semitic, Nazi, white-supremicist book: Reimink neighbor Jo TenBrink defended him Wednesday night. "He is a great neighbor and a nice man," TenBrink told a reporter. "He comes from a very Christian family and is very helpful. We wouldn't be talking with him if we believed he had any part of this. I don't believe he has anything to do with" von Brunn. Enough said.
@Ralph - If we are to use a misguided person as the prime example of a Christian, when the teachings of that religion are clearly contrary to that, then I feel we are using a flawed system for presenting an example. It's easy to pick out the extreme examples, but I'd think you'd be spending a terribly long time at your keyboard trying to catalog all the good that religion has done in this world as well. It's not religion that creates the problems, it is people's misinterpretations of it that leads to the problem. Do people blame the Beatles for Charles Manson? I'm sure a few do, but I believe most don't.
Extremists exist in every system, ideology, race, gender, and creed. But to categorize the majority, by the actions of the minority is irresponsible and hateful.
-Debris
@debris - I think that science has jumped to the conclusion that the universe is expanding means it must have had a beginning. Much like the religious books. I think, therefore I am the most important thing ever, therefore there must have been a beginning. And my hub really discusses the arguments AGAINST evoloution. lol
I certainly don't think James von Brunn is a "prime example of a Christian." I personally wouldn't consider him a Christian. However, there are plenty of extremist, fundamentalist "Christians" like him who are trying to impose their "moral" views on the rest of us. What I consider extremist Catholics demonstrate in front of the Shrine of the Little Flower built by the famous anti-Semite supporter of Hitler priest, Father Coughlin, with signs saying stop murdering children, etc. In my opinion this incites whackadoos like James von Brun and "Rodent" Roeder to commit mahem. I blame the Catholic hierarchy for encouraging the inflammatory demonstrations which make it impossible to have a respectful dialog.
In my opinion, religions do a lot of good in the world, but they also are very divisive and do a lot of harm, historically and currently. The fundamentalists of most religions are the most guilty of promoting strife, terrorism and wars. They share much in common--a belief that they have a monopoly on truth and the only route to the hereafter, and for some strange reason most of them share a sick preoccupation with rules about sexual behavior, tending to be extremely intolerant about homosexuality, fixated on virginity, abstinence, purity of women and the rightful dominance of men over women. Most of them oppose comprehensive sex education which reduces the need for abortion much more effectively than "abstinence training."
Mark Knowles
So where is the evidence that people never got old, we have the fossils to prove there was a big reptile .I know this might hurt your old brain, but, get real and step into the real world the same one thats been around for along time. I use the biblical evidence , there is no better. It has been around far longer than any other, compared to what has been generated in the last 200 years, and still deduce men are from APES.
LOL
@Mark: I understand your Hubs intent, but to properly address the subject the scope widens past what has only occurred on this Earth. How can one call Christianity silliness (not saying you have, just being more general) when they subscribe to a belief system that hasn't yet been able to understand its beginning. Or to even believe that there is a beginning. Everything in the Universe operates off of a beginning and end. The Sun is known to be dieing, and we've witnessed Super Novas, which falls into line with the laws of physics and the impossibility of Perpetual motion.
It would be simply myopic for one to try and acknowledge the beginning of mankind without trying to acknowledge what lead up to the beginning. The beginning of the beginning if you will. It's like watching a movie from the middle, but not wanting to even attempt to deduce what lead up to that point.
And please, don't take my words in any way but discussion. You're obviously intellectual and I enjoy this discussion.
@Raplh Well worded my friend. Please forgive that I assumed you were trying to encompass all Christians into an extremist mould. Believe me, I have my qualms with the Catholic Church. The bible has been rewritten many times by their figures in history.
-Debris
@HOOWANTSTONO: Anaximander, 610 BC–c. 546 BC, proposed evolutionary theory after looking at fossils. The Greek philosophers came up with some good ideas, too - their wisdom has also been around for a long time :)
Good for you, Mark, for "going there" and inviting - and taking on - the crazies. That took guts. I've done it myself, too many times, but now realize I'm wasting my time: Those who would listen/read, already agree with me. Those who don't, will not bother to even try.
I recently did a hub titled Ongoing Evolution and just knew it was going to be blasted by fanatics -- but it wasn't. The comments, even a religious one, were civil and intelligent. I was proud of my fellow hubbers.
If you really want to freak-out a Jesus-freak (and don't deny it's fun once in a while), remind said bible-thumper that Satan (Beelzebub, Lucifer, whatever) is a Catholic/Christain creation. If not for them, there would BE no "devil."
Here's the "Ongoing Evolution" link if you'd like to check it out: http://hubpages.com/hub/From-Worms-to-Man---Evolut
PS: Hey Sufi, what's hangin'?
What bothers is me is that it's all fake, all of it. Relgion and science are not opposed. Evolution is a theory as you explain well here, so it isn't in competition with any religious view--in fact, if any religious person can refute any aspect of it within the scientific community, using science, any scientist will tell you great, hooray, add that to the list of new stuff we just learned.
But the whole battle is fake. It's not about any of that. It's just about ignorant bullying and backwater politics and I'm so sick of it I could puke.
Welcome the new American Fascist State as previewed in "A Handmaid's Tale." It's on its way, mark my words.
@hoowantstono - Where is the evidence that people never got old? What sort of a question is that? Where is the evidence - and I use the term in its correct meaning - that people lived to be 900 years old? I mean - does that make any sort of sense at all? Biblical evidence is no evidence at all. Fairy tales stolen from previous religions. You are the one that needs a reality check my friend. @debris - My hubs intent is to wonder at the attacks made by religionists on a proven scientific theory. We all want to know where we came from, but dismissing science because it does not agree with the "facts" in your religious book does not make any sense. I cannot jump to the conclusion that there is a beginning or an end to the universe, and I certainly cannot jump to the conclusion that there MUST have been a divine creator. Why can you?
@Artisan Walker - Of course it is fun. I rarely (but occasionally do much that isn't ) lol ~I will check out your hub. @ prgrundy - Yup. Scary is the word I think you are looking for :).
Reality check you sure need it in your dreamy world, of make believe. You dont know what religion is,so it seems,I Dont think you were ever there to know the difference between False religion and Religion, You cant even tell me what is True and what is False judging by your hub. So again you cant prove that people didnt live to 900 plus years,
I can't prove that people didn't live to 900 years plus? Surely the onus is on you to prove they did.
There are many things I cannot prove did not happen. That doesn't mean they did.
Before the flood of Noah, the earth and it's atmosphere was a lot different. The concentration of oxygen was much higher, which allowed the animals and people to grow much larger. After the fountains of the deep were opened up and the canopy of ice over our atmosphere fell down as rain during the flood, no longer was there a shield against the uv radiation from the sun.
After the Flood, people and animals would never grow to the same heights nor would they have the long lifespan. Previously, lizards never stop growing due to the presence of a high oxygen rich environment. That allowed them to grow very large, aka a dinosaur. Men were two to three times larger than they are now. For people, our forehead keeps growing as we age. If you lived 600 years for example, you would have a very thick frontal bone, aka one of the "prehistoric" human species.
Darwanism and environmentalism are religions for those who have rejected the truths of God and the Bible. They are haters of truth and goodness and will never be satisfied until we are all athiests and worship the creation, not the Creator. We are in the last days. God Bless.
So you are saying that the entire Greek Orthodox church are haters of truth and goodness. No problem with accepting evolution here - we are happy to be Christian and accept science and philosophy. I will pass your 'scientific' theories on to the local priest - he will appreciate the laugh.
And where are you getting these "facts" from? LOL Lizards? lol Much larger? If I lived 600 years? LOLOLOLOL - That is the best one yet tonybeck. I will be laughing about this one for quite a while - at least 600-700 years.....
Sufi - I see you responded to that one. Hard not to really -
@Mark My studies of science prove that there must be a beginning and end. If you want to know, then you should study Perpetual Motion, it is probably the most important area in science when it comes to understanding the beginning and end. As I've said before. It requires faith. Whether you believe scientists or the Bible, it requires faith. No human will ever be able to fully understand the complete innerworkings and outerworkings of the universe and life. So it is up to us to use our faith, whether placed in God or Man, or to die not really believing anything.
We can only believe what we have faith in, or what we completely understand, and unfortunately we can understand very little fully due to our finite life span.
-Debris
I know - I try to stay out of the debate, but that is worthy of a place in the Evolution Hall of Fame. That must be a perfect '10.' We will be laughing in the taverna tomorrow.
Must admit - I am enjoying following the 'Beginning of the Universe' debate - an interesting philosophical discussion :)
@debris - What studies are those exactly? My studies of science clearly show that every living thing dies. They also show that there is absolutely no evidence of anything living forever. Faith and scientific studies are anathema to each other. I understand evolution. And it proves there cannot be a god involved. And what difference does it make if I die not really believing anything? I will still be dead.
@sufi - My "belief" is that it has always been there. Mainly because I cannot conceive of anything that is not there. If it was not there - there must have been something else there. I need a drink. He was definitely 10/10 though.
@Sufi Glad you're enjoying it :) I wouldn't call it a debate so much. I just like to describe my beliefs. I'd be naive to say that what I believe is the absolute truth, but my studies have proven to myself that there must be a beginning and an end. I should be more concise with my wording. My previous comment made it sound like everyone should believe me.
-Debris
@ debris - we were talking about the comment made by tonybeck. You are making a good argument. But his.......
@Mark I believe we're having a miscommunication. I completely agree that everything lives and dies. What I'm explaining is that everything follows that pattern as well. I believe the Universe has a beginning, and will have an end. The laws of Physics encompass that with their theory on perpetual motion being impossible.
I just always have trouble understanding how people point to evolution and say "see, there is no God." When they fail to address the true beginnins of life, which is the creation of the habitats. Even the best scientists dare not to take on the paradox of the laws of conservation of matter and energy VS. the creation of the Universe.
-Debris
@Mark I hope Hubpages introduces a chat room, that would make this so much easier, LOL.
Enjoy your drink my friend
OK - what makes you "believe" the universe has a beginning? I point to evolution and say "OK - I understand it. I see how it works. But - it is a natural process with no end goal. This means no god. And evolution does not explain "the beginning" It explains how we came to be.
It does not assume a beginning. Only you are doing that - with no evidence.
@Mark My belief in the universe having a beginning is firmly based off light spectrum analysis demonstarting galaxies moving in opposite directions, and in unison from a central point in the universe, but at a slowing rate. The Earth's spin is slowing, and the sun is slowly dying. These all run in line with perpetual motion theory.
A certain amount of energy has been put into the system, but it can only go for so long. Much like a top, you put a certain amount of energy into spinning a top, it can only go for so long. If you provide more energy, ceterus paribus, then the top will spin longer. With everything in the universe slowing down, or beginning their stages of decay, this demonstartes to me that perpetual motion is not occuring.
If perpetual motion is not occuring (which scientists have basically proven, and agree is impossible.) then their must have been an initial shot of energy to set things aspin. This is what makes carbon dating possible, they look at the nuclear half life and they can tell the age. The nuclear half life proves that things are continuosly decaying, or dying. All of this suggests an adherence to the theories on perpetual motion.
-Debris
But that doesn't really address the problem. I agree there is movement and apparent "expansion" but I do not see what could have been before, or what there will be afterwards. Because what you are implying is that there was and will be nothing. Which is something.
And I am still unsure how you inject a god into this without any empirical evidence.
Archaeological records show that life forms have been around for a very long time. Sentience is far more recent. Though imperfect, it's arrived. And as it's highest exponents, we've started wondering where we came from, and even why. Some of us have given up, saying 'this is too hard for my little brain' And some of these have invented 'answers' and rebuffed all argument by insisting the answers are from God. Some of us are still searching, and being mocked for our efforts by the recalcitrant children of the creators of God. It's less than ideal.
I still just wish there was a way to state god without this "it" being associated with Jesus, Allah, Peganism, etc...
But whatever, I am over it.. though
"But when you start asking questions with the sole intention of casting doubt rather than in a genuine quest for knowledge, you step away from the scientific arena and into another realm. The realm of politics, which is where religion belongs in my opinion."
I think that is a narrow minded statement. I love to ask question for the sole purpose of casting doubt. Without it, no one would feel the need to keeping "searching, learning and asking more question."
When Kepler or Nostradomus or Caprinicus (sp??) and all those ancient astrologers were staring up into the Heavens, questioning everything and acknowledging the presence of some sort of "force" ( which they called god, but we know is not the commonly held tradition of god) well....
That is my idea of god and has always been. Anyways, good hub. Hope you are having a wonderful day. :) and I totally agree, "religion is politics".
@Mark without getting to far off the trail, yes nothing is something because of matter and anti-matter, but the rationale behind it is, if you walk into a room and see a top spinning, would you assume it's just been spinning, or would you assume that someone injected energy into it to bring it to a spin? If you saw the top slowing down and wobbling, would you believe it is going to stop spinning?
Empirical evidence doesn't exist for very many things, so that's where my faith comes in. I believe God set things aspin. Some others believe a big bang set things aspin. Either way, little empirical evidence exists for either, and that's where faith comes in.
There's even a new theory that the universe collapses and expands perpetually. I don't believe this theory just because I've seen no proof of perpetual motion. Hopefully this clarifies my beliefs a little better.
-Debris
@Sandra: I agree with that - I do not even like the name 'God', because it implies a masculine and personal entity. Sadly, if we propose anything different, we get called 'New Age Jerks' or other such abuse. 'Force' is certainly a better word :)
Pretty much agree with Paraglider - it is the searching that is the key, and assuming that you have all of the answers is intellectually lazy.
@ Everyone. I have to go now, but I certainly have enjoyed discussing with everyone and I hope you all have a wonderful day!
-Debris
Yeah Sufi, Ixxy named it Bob. I like that!
In the beginning, nothing exploded, "Big Bang," and the earth magically associated itself at the perfect distance from the sun for life to exist. Then the hot earth cooled and it rained for millions and millions of years to stir up the primordial soup. Once the soup was seasoned just right, we then slithered out of the pond. After a while, we developed a large brain, arms and legs via another mysterious concept known as macroevolution. This allowed us to became apes so we could later be analized by Darwin and his followers. Then we finished it off with a few minor tweeks and added a soul. Shazam, you have a modern day man! Studies suggest this creature can be found on college campuses and online where they tell others that they knowles than them.
Well done! While I'm not an athiest I do love Richard Dawkins’ work. I would classify myself more of a scientific illuminist or gnostic if you will. Any religion without brains is anathema. The intelligence of America continues to decline everytime some child is taught that "intelligent design" is an actual scientific theory. However, I also can't go all the way to the athiestic side...after all the Buddhists are still the best cognitive scientists in the world. They've none for centuries what American science is only now starting to investigate. But I guess not everyone can dedicate their life to meditation, heh.
Debris - if still listening: The Universe is certainly expanding and the more it expands the closer it approaches what people used to believe it to be: an infinite Cartesian space. The expansion is against the pull of the gravitational centre, hence the gradual slowing of the rate of expansion. Even Classical physics can show that a body has or has not enough residual momentum to escape 'forever'. If it hasn't, it's inevitably going to head back to the centre eventually. This oscillating universe doesn't require perpetual motion, nor does it explain where what we see as the 'initial' singularity came from. From a previous contraction phase? Possibly, except that words like 'previous' can't apply at a singularity. All good fun stuff!
@ sandra - yes - try calling "it" something else and you may find that the rules associated with "it" magically disappear in a puff of smoke. As for asking questions:
There is a HUGE difference between asking a question to learn an answer and asking a question with the sole intention of casting doubt on evolution so you can interject the answer you already have ;)
@debris - yes - you "believe" based on nothing. I think paraglider took care of the perpetual motion. Enyoyed discussing with you.
@tonybeck. As opposed to a magical super being creating us and then foolishly providing a lot of information and measurable data to show he didn't. Now that is true faith right there.
@Temperance - I agree - I also do not have time to medicate all day long. ID is a joke and the sooner these people are educated the better.
@Paraglider - nicely explained. Up to a point lol :)
@Paraglider What you say we agree on. I don't believe perpetual motion to be possible. I do not address where initial singularity came form, but I simply cite the impossibility of perpetual motion as a great base for proving that initial singularity did have a beginning. Mark has mentioned that he didn't beleive the universe necessarily had a beginning.
@Mark firstly, paraglider simply proposed what I've been stating, except he thought I was trying to reference the specific event, but I was really just citing that there had to be a beginning. But your brushing off of my beliefs as baseless when they are heavily founded upon scientific theory that have been tested and scrutinized by many for a long time, including by Albert Einstein. I'm afraid that your abrasive method to addressing your fans that provide an alternate point of you not only makes you a perpetrator of what this whole hub speaks against, but it has also lost you a fan.
I put a lot of effort in trying to properly describe my beliefs to you and the scientific theory that backs it, in a discussive manner, rather than a tirade of holier than thou attacks, yet I feel you've presented me with a similar disrespect that you so vehemently addressed in this post.
I'm fine if you disagree with my ideas and beliefs, but your choice of belittling words is disheartening to say the least. To stand higher than me, cast your finger down, and say that my beliefs are based on nothing shows a gross misunderstanding on the quantum physical aspects of the universe, to which I would suggest you study before you call my beliefes baseless. My degrees are all based in science and mathematics, including physics.
Mark, when it comes to some things I don't even say I believe in them. I just know them to be true, such as fire burns and gravity works. I don't HAVE to believe in it, because as you say, I see it working. I also know that if gravity did not work then we'd all be in trouble.
So I also don't really have to believe in evolution because I see it going on all around us, yes, even today in spite of what some creationists might be saying. Evolution is occurring in our times and if anyone stops to see it, recognizes it, they will no longer have to believe; they will simply know it is true.
@ debris - You said " I believe God set things aspin" - just exactly what scientific theory are you claiming to base this belief on? Sure - you have some scientific background - but where on earth do you make the jump to a god?
And yes - I think that jumping to the conclusion that there was a beginning is a mistake.
@ Ivan - no argument here.
@Mark - That is the only part of my belief not based on scientific evidence, remember I spoke of faith in previous comments. You have faith invested somewhere, when you get on a plane, you don't know everything about it, but you place faith in the people that are in charge of your safety. Faith is a semi-blind trust that everyone uses everyday.
To address your reservations on there being a beginning: The first step in the scientific method is to make a hypothesis. If scientists didn't jump to these conclusions, little would be done in the way of science. Forming a hypothesis is jumping to a conclusion. You think of an end, and figure out how to get to that conclusion in order for it to be true.
So I wouldn't call the scientific process a mistake. If you have a better theory or idea than a beginning, backed by scientific principles, I'm all ears. Currently you don't believe creation, and you don't believe there is a beginning, what exactly do you subscribe to?
-Debris
I wonder which side will get the last laugh?
@ debris - You said " I believe God set things aspin" - just exactly what scientific theory are you claiming to base this belief on?
This is scary stuff. Do I need a scientific theory to choose the colour of my clothes, or who I vote for, or who I fall in love with?
Life and death are bigger than the simple minded truths we clutch at in our fear of the unknowable.
Sorry, if I'm being hard on you Mark but there must be a (none too rational) reason for this zeal in the defense of the Church of Secularism. After all, there is no threat to secular thought.
What I see is the anxiety of traditional belief systems which have served their members well for hundreds of generations being attacked and reviled by modernity for no reason.
Meaning and truth play out a long game in any culture and shouldn't be rushed.
Science or Religion... Big Bang vs Evolution.... All notions being identified by man... who either evolved from Apes or were created in the image of God.
The Bible (and all other religious artifacts) were written by flawed humans... either because we are created that way, or we haven't evolved enough yet.
And to my bud Will Apse... really... "What I see is the anxiety of traditional belief systems which have served their members well for hundreds of generations".... are we only talking about Evolution and Creation when we make this statement??????????? (I hope so... otherwise I would have to believe "If we continue to believe it it must be true" .. the whole idea of all men being created equally until someone mentions they are homosexual and then they aren't 'equal" doesn't bode well for people of 'evolved' minds and thoughts).
"Tomate-o... to-mato... pot-ate-o .. po-tato... let's let the whole thing go"
I don't believe there is an answer which will accommodate those of 'faith' and those of 'fact' but it sure makes for interesting hub reading.
Thanks Mark
@ debris - "That is the only part of my belief not based on scientific evidence," which is precisely my point. You have baseless faith that there must be a god. And if you had actually understood the theory of evolution you would see that there is no place in it for a god. And I do not get on planes because I do not trust the people in charge to have my interests at heart. lol
@ will - Of course I am scared of people who tell me evolution did not happen because their god says so. Aren't you? I take it that you did not read my hub and just stopped by to tell me how scared I must be. Take a wander through any history book and see the damage that has been done by blind faith in a nonexistent being.
@ enigmatic - yes we seem to have a bunch of believers upset that some one does not believe what they believe and have wandered somewhat off track as to how wrong I am for not believing in their super being. As usual.
Mark, you should remind yourself of the only organised attempt to replace religion with secular, humanistic and rational thinking and remind yourself that it didn't end well.
I can't imagine you would be comfortable with the gulag system.
I would rather have the irritation of the most blinkered evangelist knocking on my door than the tyranny of reductionism and science in my personal or cultural life.
Science is great for making airplanes fly and computers beep but it should stay out of human affairs because it has no answers for the dilemmas of the human condition.
Will - what on earth does that have to do with anything. Clearly you do not undestand scientific theory - it is not attempting to answer the "dilemmas of the human condition. Do you even know what the theory of evolution states? If not - I suggest you go educate yourself.
I don't really care that you are happy to have evangelists running the world which is their goal. Fortunately, there are enough educated people around that we are unlikely to return to the dark ages you are proposing.
Sorry - no more forced indoctrination and burning at the stake. lol
@Mark You are avoiding my question with your attacks. Please note that you're doing exactly what your hub argues against. I believe it's because you feel threatened. I'm not talking about evolution. I'm talking about your theory on the universe.
I'm asking you point blank right here: What is your belief on the beginnings of the universe. You don't believe creation and you don't believe big bang. What is your belief? Or have you not thought this far into it and your avoiding the question? I've never seen someone be so evasive about a question.
And believe me sir, I understand the theory of evolution better than you could ever imagine. I have read the origin of species, which I'm wondering if you've ever even seen. So please don't try to get into an intellectual battle with me sir because I assure you, while you're a very proud man, I can tell by your posts on this subject that you have litle formal scientific education and your opinions are merely deduced from the latest yahoo news headlines and some hotshot scientists that you've watched on TVs.
-Debris
@ debris. First of all. I do not understand why you are bringing the beginning of the universe into this. I wrote this hub specifically about the religious objection to the scientific theory of evolution.
You have somehow changed that into a discussion about the beginning of the universe. I do not believe the universe had a beginning. I believe it has always been there.
I have reached the conclusion because I do not accept the big bang - the underlying assumptions are much the same as the religious assumptions. The only real evidence is that the universe seems to be expanding, therefore it must have started smaller (infinitely small) and will eventually reach a boundary and stop expanding.
The conclusion I have come to is that the universe has always been here and is continually cycling through a bang/crunch scenario that did not need a beginning.
Now - I cannot prove this because I do not have a strong enough grasp of theoretical physics.
If you genuinely understand the theory of evolution - where does the guiding hand of a god enter the picture exactly? If there was a destination pre-planned for humans, thsi casts several doubts on the whole idea of evolution.
1. This was an awful waste of time and it would make a lot more sense if a god had just gone straight to the end product.
2. This implies that we have finished evolving and that is clearly not the case.
The theory does not make anysense whatsoever now, because there is no longer natural selection, and the measurably random genetic drift is no longer random.
Now - this means that the theory is invalid. So - where does your faith that there is a god have anything to do with the scientific theories we are discussing. You have interjected a god. Based on what?
And if you are interested in my grasp of evolution - this is the last time I attempted to explain it to my religious friends.
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/7572
Sorry if my tone upset you - that was not my intention. :)
@Mark Firstly, I certainly appreciate the apology, as I was unsure if you were intending on sounding condescending. That is greatly appreciated. I apologize if my previous comment was slightly sharp. I appreciate your well thought out explanation. I'm heading out right now, but tonight I will attempt to adequately answer the questions you have posed. I wish you all the best sir. Have a wonderful day.
-Debris
Mark, I would rather have the 2 thousand years of trial and error that is Christianity organising the society I live in or the 2500 years of Budhist philosophy to give me insight into the life that I lead than Occams Razor and Logical Positivism. Why? Because humans are not rational beings. They are social animals that invent reality in a mysterious collective endevour that science will never penetrate.
Also, you really should read through the French Revolution and the history of Soviet Communism. There were plenty of well educated and highly rational people who felt they do without the insights and experience of religious thinkers. The result was a nightmarish turning away from human values.
It doesn't matter to me if God exists or not- though it would be a surprise if I ended up in either heaven or hell. What matters is that Christians, Budhists Confuscians etc, as a mass of people have a basic set of values that make life tenable. As such they deserve my respect.
As for my own science education- the thing I learnt most was that even scientific truth is extraordinarily elusive. And science only asks the easy questions.
will - buddhists do not believe in god. And you are justifying the deaths, murders and maiming of countless people based on the fact that you think the way christianity was forcibly spread across the globe is better than what would have come out of - let's say for argument - Native American mythology.
Science is not attempting to anser the "difficult questions," although there are plenty of phsychiatrists who would argue with you ;)
I do not consider attacking scientific knowledge to be a value that makes life tenable. You should read a little on the auto da fe and the various attacks teh catholic church has made on science in the past.
Mark & Debris - why get so wound up about belief? Belief is unnecessary. Either something has been falsified or it has not. If it has, then to continue to believe it is irrational. If it has not, then it might be true, but since there can be no proof, just reserve judgment. No need to side with it. Because that's irrational too.
lol - I guess so. Although I think evolution proves the nonexistence of a god. In that regard, I am with the Buddhist view point.
On the other hand - like yourself - I do not believe in a god. Which is not the same as believeing there is no god. ;)
Evolution does not prove the non existance of GOD. It does not prove or disprove anything. Beginning to ponder over evolution, one begins to ask questions, like what the force or power is, that has fuelled evolution. Some will say GOD, others will prefer not to answer. The rest will say it is the power of nature. To whom would you give credit for evolution? GOD or nature? :)
@ quicksand - Of course evolution proves the nonexistence of god. Surely no god would have created us in such a roundabout fashion?
You mean GOD should have created us as perfect individuals? It is the imperfect nature of us (me too!) that creates the imbalance which in turn requires balancing. It is for that reason that we all run around in circles trying to equalize. This is what makes life interesting and adventurous. The experience we gain for the "last few overs" could not be had otherwise.
Had nature created us we would have been perfect. Just like the consistency governing the laws of physics.
So, it follows that nature did not create us. Then who did? :)
@ quicksand - No. You completely missed the point - of course
The point was - that we were not "created" - we evolved. And we are perfect, so nature got it right.Thanks for making my point that there cannot be a god.
If your god created us - what an awfully roudabout way of doing things. LOL
What a debate. I frequent a number of "political" forums and this has been a hot topic of debate lately.
I am still confused! You say we evolved, and I believe you attribute this to nature. In which case, nature is responsible for our evolution, right?
LOL -
Now I am confused. Are you saying nature is a person and this was all planned and evolution did not happen naturally? And I am just using the wrong name for nature? And do you happen to have the right name for me?
Changes in the environment and random mutations are "responsible" for our current evolutionary development.
So - I am unsure about you - are you an "evolution didn't happen" or an "evolution did happen, but it could not have happened without a god" sort of guy?
G-d created Adam out of the dust, and we the tribe of Israel are His chosen.
Well, Mark, I am uncertain whether evolution did happen or not. I have no way to find out either. The fact is, we are all here. We were either created or we evolved. If we did evolve, then we evolved from something. There has to be a starting point. That "something" from which we evolved did not just come into existence all by itself. It had to either be created or evolve from something else. If it did evolve from something else then we need to keep going backwards without any hope of seeing a source.
If we did evolve from something else, then that something else was created by nature, then we have found the source, nature itself!. Whether nature permitted evolution to take place or caused evolution to take place or just did a "Hey presto! You are created!" the fact remains that nature DID create.
Do you believe in nature? :)
DO you believe in Magic... presto change-o.. you're an aemeoba(spelling not my strong point in scientific lingo).
"To be or not to be"... we don't have that choice. We are.
"We are family!".... no matter what way you cut the onion we are all from the same strand of existence. Animal or plant .. we survive. Isn't that enough some days?
@ Quicksand
Your observation regarding nature being our creator is redundant of the obvious - a declaration which is ultimately based on lexical and (in limited application) cognitive semantics.
Had you bothered to take your thought one step further into the realm of formal semantics, you would've realized that "nature" is a deceptively loose synonym for the realms of physics itself, declined to make a comment in the first place, and saved me a half-awake rant.
Physics literally represents the observable presence of mathematics in the universe, and technically encompasses the actualization of all that can be qualified and quantified.
Therefore, yes, nature did create us. Energy became matter and vice versa, matter interacted chemically until some of it interacted biologically. Biology is chemistry is physics. It just happened. My evidence? It is observed in space-time.
And simply because we're intelligent and can perpetuate our intelligence through procreation, does not allow us to conclude that therefore, we were created by an intelligence. To presume that our existence is so grand that it is above the laws of probability in its [chance] creation is absurd mathematically! Mathematics is literally the ultimate authority and truth. Even the simplest organisms are basically just chemical constructs - biology could be considered organic chemistry. Chemicals react with other chemicals. That's how life came about - however improbably.
OMG it is Sunday! I should go back to sleep!
Thanks!
@ quicksand - That is the thing. You do have a way of finding out that evolution happened. There is more than enough factual evidence to prove that it happens. The precise mechanism is up for debate - but there are really no dissenting scientific voices.
Your rather silly attemt to give nature a personality in an attempt to get me to say "sure I believ in nature," then say "Well, nature is really god - you are just using the wrong word," is not exactly a valid argument.
Random mutations and adaptations to a changing environment are what caused us to evolve to our current state. It is not possible that this was a pre-determined state either. Which takes a god out of the equation. Sorry.
@ Enigmatic me - No argument here. We are all make of the same stuff. No matter how offensive soime seem to find it that we are related to monkeys lol
@ Hedera Segnis - Well said. Enjoy your nap :)
Mark says: "actually, I am undecided about the big bang theory. It sounds too much like a scientific version of creationism and like the religious version --I think it started from the mistaken assumption that there was a beginning."
Debris says: "There's even a new theory that the universe collapses and expands perpetually. I don't believe this theory just because I've seen no proof of perpetual motion."
Mark and Debris, this is very interesting. Somebody mentioned the buddhists, and you might be surprised to know that they, like Mark, do not believe that the universe (s) ever started, and they do believe, like this new scientific theory mentioned by Debris, that universes start and end and from their residual potentialities they start again and end again... without end. This "new" theory that the universe expands and collapses perpetually might be new to the Western scientific academics, not to the buddhist sages. And it's true what Mark says, they don't believe in a creator God.
But one should not be too quick in using them to enhance atheistic beliefs because they do believe in a bunch of things that would make an atheist or an agnostic faint.
Buddhists are difficult to classify as religious people. Most among them are just believers like any other "religionist". They believe by tradition, they believe because of the usual causes to believe, they believe their clergy. But a few are people who "see directly" what is hidden to the ordinary eye. These people teach anyone who desires to learn the way to acquire the capacity to "see directly", they don't keep knowledge to themselves. Their way to "get there" is a mixture of strict rational logic with contemplation in a special meditative state.The main characteristic of buddhism is to be a science of the mind. And they have old beliefs about the universe that match modern scientific theories.
From the point of view of knowledge this religion is the most free and open system imaginable. Think of the owners of the power (knowledge) doing everything they can to teach you how to get by yourself to the place where they are themselves.
From the point of view of society, as any organized religion, it is known to have similar flaws as the other organized religions. We humans have our way to misuse many a precious thing, from our environment up to the most sacred messages imparted to us.
I believe in a divine Creator ,and I have no problem with Science , why would I ,God created that along with everything else. It is always man(kind) who separates ,Atheists were made in the image of God ,just they prefer to use their creative skills do detract from God Creativity, if they never have to acknowledge their maker and creator ,then they can continue to serve themselves only.
One thing that really has amazed me is this , why do atheists seek to pull down or cast doubt on what Christians value , why dont they just talk about what they value instead?? seems a gross insecurity there. I have seen some very good debates between both parties , but I guess at the end of the day ,its just like God said it would be in the end. Some beleived , some turned away...thankyou for sharing your views Mark-to your best life!
I dont have enough faith to believe in Atheism.
@Mark - "Random mutations and adaptations to a changing environment are what caused us to evolve to our current state."
Well, I find it impossible to accept that nature is capable executing things in a "random" and "haphazard" way. The very same nature which created the laws of motion, and other laws which were discovered by Newton, Einstein and the other greats.
I am certain that there could be at least a pattern to this "randomness."
It is still not clear to me whether you attribute this "random mutations" to nature or to something else.
There is a very simple formula/fractal (see, "The Mandelbrot Set") that is said to potentially be "the thumbprint of life" . If, in fact, it is true that this "fractal principle" is at the root of all growth/life then what appears to be random would not be.
I've never understood why the idea of a basic design without "thing-thing-by-thing, hands-on, involvement" of a Creator is so objectionable to people who believe there is a God. Or, another possibility could be that some higher power actually "operates" on a spiritual-level only, and does not affect the day-to-day, small-stuff, goings-on in the world on a "hands-on" basis. One might even consider that even a very powerful spiritual entity could be limited by not having the physical traits needed to do "His own work" in the world, and - who knows - maybe that's why so many people seem to naturally come by a wish to do "God's work".
The point is I find it hard to believe that even if there is a Creator He would create people with the minds and instincts toward pursuing scientific answers about life/the Universe if He didn't want them seeking those answers. At the same time, I don't see why it's impossible to imagine a set of scientific principles manifesting themselves without a "mind" designing them. Then again, there's the possibility that there is someone or something "out there" that operates completely differently than the God to whom many attribute human thinking.
@ rosario - I am married to a Buddhist :) The only reason I mentioned them is because of Mr Aspe's comment that he prefers the value system they have developed because they believe in god - which they do not.
My theory that the universe has always been there actually fits in with the BB theory that time started withe the BB, therefore it has "always" been there lol
@Eaglewiki - Condescending hypocritical garbage. What a pity you prefer to preach it rather than live it. Oh well.....
@quicksand - "I find it impossible to accept that nature is capable executing things in a "random" and "haphazard" way"
So - despite all the measurable data and proof that this happens - you just cannot accept it. Seems a little irrational to me.
And you are missing the obvious trial and error of nature.
@ Lisa - God's work often co-incides with one's existing goals lol
@Mark - From your statement I understand that you attribute these "random mutations" to nature. That's quite ok.
LOL - Whatever you say dude - "Nature" created you lol And "Nature" is just another word for "god" lol
"Nature" has a purpose for you lo
"Nature" planned for you to be created in her image lol
"Nature" did it in 6 days LOL
But - I would be keen to know the answer to the question I posed.
@Mark - Ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! I wonder if nature has a "Boss" of some sort!
Jokes apart, we should now start discussing the qualities of nature, leaving everything else out of the equation! That might lead us on to something really and truly interesting!
OK - What is your take? As far as I am concerned, "nature" is a word we use to describe those things that occur "naturally."i.e - they are not created, or set in motion intentionally.
So - a storm for example is a "natural occurrence." Don't get me started on the possible influence man has on the natural world - and I guess you could argue that nature is no longer "natural" :)
If I was going to get critical of Christianity, it would be the built-in-from-the-very-beginning desire to incorperate everyone into its belief system. Religions prior to Christianity were not evangelical. Even the immediate precursors of Christianity, the Jews, had no desire to convert any other race.
This evangelical spirit has permeated every aspect of western civilisation and justifies every kind intrusion into other peoples cultures. People who don't see the world in the same way that we do are just wrong!
And of course, the evangelical spirit burns fiercely in the veins of the Dawkinites and the Knowlesists as products of that culture. We will open your eyes to the truth! You will believe in Darwin! Nothing else is acceptable! Exterminate!
I wonder how the Daleks evolved- do you have any metal parts, Mark?
lol - Will - If no one stands up to the evangelists - how do you prevent it from spreading? And accusing me of being an evangelist because I stand up to it is not really beneficial to the discussion. I understand you do not like m, but please at least try and have something to say.
Evolution happens - Simple facts. And I have chosen to stand up and be counted in the fight against the evangelical christians who would teach their children it does not. I don't really care what your motivation is - but it seems to be trying to contradict me because I said something.
Not exactly constructive is it?
I say what I say because I believe it is true.
I would seriously ask yourself why you are so identified with the theory of evolution and why it seems to be a matter of life and death for you.
As for standing up to the evangelists... The appeal of extremist religious groups increases if religion appears to be threatened. Extremism in every area of life is a reaction to threat.
If you want to argue with people about their most deeply held beliefs (which is often nescessary) then you need to do so in a way which recognises the importance of those beliefs.
I don't believe you understand the huge benefits religions bring to societies or how profoundly you have been shaped by Christianity as a European. Not believing in a Christian God is one thing, escaping the all pervasive influence of Christianity is another. In fact, as far as I can see, 99% of humanists are simply Christians who don't believe in God.
All this stuff about the Auto da Fe that you drag up, reminds me of Belfast Catholics who can't forget the Battle of the Bog in 1562. Old conflicts and bad behaviour five hundred years ago is no reason for a war now
As for my personal motives in this debate, I think it comes down to a sort of horror at the relentless aggression buried away in western culture and the lack of acceptance of others.
I see - So you bringing up the gulags is OK but me bringing up the inquisition is not? Mirror mirror on the wall - who dragged up the past first? Oh yes- you did.
Of course I have been shaped by the irrational beliefs of Europeans - And horrified at the culture we have created.
I have chosen to question it and do something about it if I can. Just exactly what values are you so fond of? The relentless pursuit of money? Our god-given right to rape and pillage as we see fit? The complete non-acceptance of anything that threatens our power base?The vast wealth and power poured into our religious, political and banking systems? The slow degradation of the rights of the individual as we move towards being completely subservient - not to the church as in the past, but the financial insitutions? What a wonderful culture.
I think you should be asking yourself a few questions Mr Apse, because all I see you doing is making an attack on my choices - You are certainly not adding anything constructive to the discussion.
I have only really reacted to your attacks on others and given my reasons.
In truth, I sense an old radical who has yet to uncover the personal motives for his most cherished beliefs and rages.
C.G. Jung had a good line on disidentification- he reckoned if you give up attachments to ideas which have no real personal meaning things can open up a bit. Of course, Jung spent the last few years of his life painting mandalas on the shores of Lake Geneva just to keep himself sane, so I wouldn't recommend him as a role model.
Anyway best of luck Mark. And bye for now.
@Eaglewiki - Condescending hypocritical garbage. What a pity you prefer to preach it rather than live it. Oh well.....
you created ( pardon the pun) a new name for me mark ,maybe theres a compliment in there. ....I dont need your pity either ,since you have no idea how I live. Remember every time you point the finger at someone , there will be four pointing right back at you!
EW - You said - "Atheists were made in the image of God ,just they prefer to use their creative skills do detract from God Creativity, if they never have to acknowledge their maker and creator ,then they can continue to serve themselves only."
A demonstration of exactly what you now accuse me of.
Condescending hypocritical garbage - you have no idea how I live my life yet you attack my life style nontheless. I suggest you look up the words "condescending" and hypocritical" in a decent dictionary. LOL
I know what those words mean ,and if I didnt you certainly remind me every time you open your mouth.
I have never attacked ( such drama) your lifestyle?? ssshesh I dont know your lifestyle ,so what ,its your life anyway!
I have commented ,expressed my opinion, credited God with creation.,challenged your thinking?....and thats condescending.....
I think you just to argue for the hell of it, oh and thats my opinion too....
So - what does "They continue to serve themselves only" mean?
self-seeking , self-orientated, concerned with only what serves you best.
Like I said - condescending, hypocritical garbage. Thanks for the input :lol:
What a shame you are so condescending. I refer you to my opening statement - "Religion has the potential to do so much good yet fails disastrously time and time again,"
Because you are so full of your irrational belief in a non existent person you fail to see everything., Oh well.......
Thanks for being honest - you think you are better than us unbelievers. LOL
I am Mark Knowles. I think I will say abunch of obsurd things that I don't even believe myself. I will eventually get a whole bunch of unknowing imbicles to believe what I say often enough or loud enough. Then, because there are lots of those unwise people I will get them to be my audience. Then I will write a book. Then I will be invited on the Oprah show. I will be hot and will begin arguing with people, such as I did on this thread. It will be simple. All I have to do is call everyone I don't agree with stupid and funny and put the letters "LOL" behind every comment I make about them. All my listeners are so stupid that I will never have to fear being called wrong. What a joy this will be. I never really have to be right. I certainly do not have to prove anything I say. I can even act as though I really know what I am talking about. If you don't believe that, just watch Jay Leno and find out how intelligent the average person is. This is what I will count on. The real joke is on those who believe me.
Sounds like a religion to me. Maybe L Ron had it right?
Im not better ,but I am saved....
Atheism poses a great threat to all mankind.
"Why?" You may ask.
Because, in a system where there is no GOD, the threat of punishment for evil acts does not exist either.
So, this gives an impetus for criminals to carry on their activities without any fear. Here nature is helpless as it cannot distinguish between evil and good, and lacks the capacity to judge and either reward or punish. Thus, nature becomes mankind's number one enemy!
LMA&BO!
nice post, but religion and science is not goes equally.
EW - Guess you must be pissed now that you have realized evolution proves there is no god and therefore no being "saved" lol Sorry - too bad.
quicksand - what happened to the interesting discussion you were after? LOL You religionists are a joke with nothing to say. I wonder even why you stopped by. And your argument that no one commits crimes because there are churches doesn't really hold water. lol.
@Mark - You got it all wrong again. You should not take me literally some time and "decipher" hidden meanings in what I say at other times. That would be totally unfair.
First of all, I am not presenting any "argument." Arguments are the result of total contradictions. I never contradicted anything. I am merely forwarding my opinion for analysis.
I am seriously pointing out the negative side of atheism. It is up to you, who has been identified by many as the CEO of atheism, (since I cannot use the word messiah!) to "fix" the problem.
Please let us know how this flaw in atheism could be corrected. That's all I ask.
:)
lol
quicksand - there is no "flaw" in atheism. It is not a political party - unlike the religions. Clearly you do not understand what atheism means. In fact - the only reason atheism is becoming so prevalent is the fact that the behavior of religions pretty much proves that there is no god all on it's own. Now we have scientific proof that there is no god it is only a matter of time before religion goes the way of the dinosaurs.
And the last tine I checked - we had laws and courts to prevent crime.
ciao
So atheism, the "ism" without any flaws is hell bent on "doing away" with religions, huh?
LMA&BO!
Mark Knowles
I think your ideas of religion and evolution will go the way of the dinosaurs.Creation older than Evolution,
Fortunately Im not religious. now to watch some Rugby and Cricket
cheers
did someone say rugby?? do I hear a hell yeaaaa
mark- you speak like a true believer. shall we break out the racks? maybe burn all those evil creationists at the stake? how dare they question the god of atheism?
LOL
Guys - no matter how many times you say it that will not change the fact that atheism is a LACK of belief in a god, not a belief in something. I know this is a difficult concept for you to grasp but just try using your brains for a moment.. LOL
@Mark - Hey, there is nothing complicated about atheism. Nothing at all, it simply says there is no GOD. That's it. I am certain that even those guys who write books on marketing cannot define atheism with more than one phrase ... not even those who write the TOS and disclaimers for online products. :lol:
... or is there something more that is "waiting" for the "right conditions" to be revealed? :)
It says I do not believe in god yes. How complicated is that? Not sure what you mean about the other stuff. Care to explain?
I have to become a fan. No this is not a "bow to my master" kind of gesture, its a "Hmm... interesting hub, like the content not the conflicts, and seems like there is a lot of angst created".
What more can a reader ask for?
I'm just gonna say this, as a non-practicing Catholic (one who used to believe in the sanctity of the church as a pre-teen.... like before I knew I could think and chose for myself), religion is man made conecpt that keeps us in balance in how we view the world. I get it.. there must be evil and good, darkness and light. Some NEED this distinction. Some don't. We are. That's truly what matters (sorry no pun intended). The fact that some believe in an afterlife is awesome for them. I myself am not so sure. And that's ok. We live our own journeys. I'm up for the conversation and the enlightenment should it arrive.
As for religion itself, I fear its becoming more and more unneccessary. I don't mean that from a stand point of 'its never needed any more', but fear that youth of today care not for things they cannot make tangible connections to. (Please let me rant). As the churches influence diminishes over time anarchy is something we will see. But, because people Need something to believe in. And I fear the all mighty dollar and the green leaf get more of look these days.... sorry.. interrupted. Be back later.
Richard Dawkins said, "Life has no rhyme or reason; no justice; no design; no purpose; no meaning; no good; and no evil." This completely dissolves morality and leaves us with a hideous world. Dostoevsky said, "If God does not exist, everything is permissible." Atheism is at the heart of Marxism and combined they always lead to totalitarianism and mass murder. 100 million are dead because of the Atheism of four men: Stalin, Mao, Hitler and Pol Pot. As a value system or system of ethics it is bankrupt. History is littered with failed, murderous Atheistic utopias. If man is evolving to Atheism the 20th Century is a sorry example of the results. The Holocaust, the Gulag, the Killing Fields. You have a hard worldview to defend if one will cast a gaze at the results.
Luckily, that is not true. Religion is not dying. It is dying in Europe—and what is the result of that dying? The whole population is dying off, only producing 1.3 children, not enough to perpetuate their societies. It is waning a little in America. But it is booming in Africa and Asia. In the past 20 years, Christianity has grown at a higher rate than the increase in world population.
I will assume that you are not in favor of mass murder. If I am correct, this means you expect to be differentiated from Atheists who were the most evil men in human history. It would seem then, that the same courtesy—differentiating individuals who believe in a Creator God—would be extended by you to others. Not all religions are the same and not all spawn fanaticism today except in a few aberrant individuals.
What an interesting comparison can be made in the histories from 1917 to 1989 of the US—overwhelmingly Christian—and the USSR—officially Atheist. I assume the USSR would have been your choice of where to live since it was compatible with your belief system. If one were to stand in 1989 and look back at the results of the two belief systems in the lives of hundreds of millions of human beings, there is no question under which system the human race thrives.
I don't believe in the God you don't believe in, either. Science can tell us facts—but not meaning. It can tell us that the odds of an Earth teeming with life as a result of some random accident are more zeroes than I can put in this box: to one. I believe in God because of the evidence—the sophistication of the mechanisms in the universe. No one has ever seen a fish turn into a bird in 6000 years of humans writing down their observations. But you believe they did. So you believe in things you have no proof of. A Darwinist will deny he has any faith but he does. He has faith in his own ideas.
No doubt technology, science and learning in general are evolving, which makes sense since we can stand on the shoulders of those who came before us. But are human beings themselves evolving? If so I would have expected the birth of hundreds of writers who can move us with words far better than Shakespeare; thousands of composers far better than Beethoven; countless political leaders with more integrity than George Washington; maybe millions of political writers gifted with prose of a much higher plane than Tom Jefferson or James Madison; multitudes by now of painters capable of art so vastly more beautiful than the Sistine Chapel that no one would look at it any more. Where is the evidence of this human evolution? You?
LOL - @ James - I am really sorry your irrational beliefs have been proven wrong. Sorry - it is not OK to have sex with little boys in the name of god any more. Oh dear, what will you do now? :lol:
But keep arguing in favor of burning people for not believing and having sex with children. Like it says in the Bible. lol
Christianity encourages intellectual inquisitiveness. Even Dawkins admits "Science grew out of the Christian tradition." The Christian worldview is that the same God who gave us this universe, this Earth in particular, to live in; also gave us a brain capable of learning about the world He made. Christians believed long ago that since we were created by a Lawmaker, the universe itself must be ordered by laws. Hence the Scientific Revolution. Science does not divide Christians from Atheists. Their understanding about the meaning and purpose of life—that there is such versus that there isn't—is what divides them.
Evolution is a Theory, not a fact. A Theory is something believed to be true. Believed to be true. Believed. Something someone has faith in. Evolution does not tell us about the origins of life; only that species adapt to their environment. Well, who can't see that? I adapt to environment every single day. If I am cold, I put a coat on. Astronomy tells us that this universe was made out of nothing with precisely the necessary requirements for Earth to be teeming with life in this immense void. No argument with Geneis there. The Big Bang seems to prove old Moses right. The common ancestor sure could be Adam and Eve—but couldn't have been Adam and Steve.
Dawkins says he wants to emancipate us. But from what to what? Emancipate us from believing we are made in the Image of the Living God with a divine purpose for our lives versus we are smarter apes up from slime and that life is meaningless and pointless. Some emancipation! Thanks!
I do understand the remarkable hostility and vitriol displayed by Athesists toward Christians. Those living in Darkness always hate the Light.
As opposed to the "facts" of religion? lol Not a shred of evidence and continual attacks on real knowledge? No thanks.
I understand why you hate the light though. It must be scary to realize that your irrational beliefs are just that. Sorry the proof disturbs you so. Oh well....
Great Hub.
I think we evolved from unicorns.
Darwin's assumptions became a theory. The theory became a belief. A very strong belief, which provides the ultimate license to scream "there is no GOD." That's ok because he provided "proof."
Science has conditioned us to ask for proof before accepting anything as "truth." Darwin provided available evidence only of evolution. I still fail to see how this proof of a transformation from one species to another over a period of time, and caused by nature, proves that nature has no "Boss." Random mutations just happened. There was no plan. Ok, ok, fine!
Why is there an idea which supports a theory that creation has to be instantaneous? Why can creation not take place gradually, over a long period of time? I am not certain whether any of the scriptures say that Adam was created in an "instant." Even if it does, one should examine what an "instant" signifies. In the absence of intelligent consciousness to absorb time, an instant could be a billion years.
It is not my "willful ignorance" that prevents me from accepting that evolution is proof that there is no GOD.
Mark,
What proof are you talking about? There is none. Show me concrete proof.
"Of course I believe evolution happens, because it does. The measurable data and evidence is all around us."
What do you mean you believe evolution happens because it does?
I just looked around me and find no "measurable data" and "evidence" of evolution at all.
Wait! I think my watch just turned into a car. Oh no, I think I'm beginning to sprout wings. Just about time coz airplanes are annoying. Ok forget about it, you win.
Rob
Religion and science are both nonsense.
@ quicksand. So - what you are saying is that this wonderful design that is us was designed by some one who was not capable of creating us as we are? Doesn't seem like a very good design to me. lol Accept the facts man. There is no god and there is no room for a god in your "theory" of creation.
@ Rob - I think you should do a little research for yourself. Denying all the evidence for evolution will not make it go away.
@Mark - You say if GOD had created us, there would have been no imperfection at all, and we all should have a hub score of 100? :) :) :)
lol - Some of us are more perfect than others it seems. :)
Thanks for a great Hub, a littly ranty in places as admitted, but thought-provokiing.
I would just comment on James Watkins' comment about mass murder as a result of atheism - I think as much murder has happened as a result of religion, and perhaps even more. The Christians slaughtered thousands of Moslems during the Crusades, the Moslems slaughtered thousands of non-Moslems in other times, we see almost daily evidence of people killing others who are of the "wrong" religion, or even the "wrong" variant of the same religion.
Atheists do not have sole property rights on killing.
I was going to write a Hub on evolution myself, but Mark has saved me the trouble!
Just a word about a theory - most knowledge that we have, about the world or ourselves, has come from people putting forward hypotheses which, in the course of scientific research, are tested. Evolution is no different - it is a hypothesis which is constantly being tested and so far, has not been found wanting as an explanation of how the world and living creatures (maybe I should rather use the word "beings"?) has come to be.
People also seem to think that if they say something is "just a theory" they have negated its worth or usefulness. On the contrary, Kurt Lewin once said that there is nothing so useful as a good theory.
Religionists use "proofs" such as quotations from their scriptures or holy books, which are only true if you believe in that particular religion and have no persuasive power to those who do not believe.
Science does not take away meaning, but makes it clear that meaning resides in the individual. There is no such thing as a value-free science as humans are programmed to find meaning. We will find meaning in anything that we undertake and that meaning can be life-promoting or life-denying. Science tends to be more life-promoting than life-denying. Think of the millions who have been healed from all the diseases that have plagued humanity through the millenia by the advances of science.
A final word just about the title of this Hub - I don't think there is necessarily a contradiction between "creation" and evolution - the contradiction is between "creationism" which is a pseudo-scientific ideology and evolution. Evolution is a hypothesis which is well-supported by huge amounts of evidence collected over the past 150 years or so. And in my mind there is no problem with calling each new species which evolves a "new creation" - jthere is no need to say that it is "created" by some deus ex machina. It is created by the forces of natural selection and so is a creation of evolution.
Evolution is, to paraphrase Lewin, a damn good theory.
Just my tuppence-worth!
Love and peace
Tony
Thanks Tony - well said. I was going for ranty with the intention of giving my religious cousins a taste of their own medicine. lol
Great Hub Mark,
I presume Mr Watkins interprets Richard Dawkins words in the same way as many selectively quote and misquote endlessly from the scriptures in order to suit their needs.
Richard Dawkins said, "Life has no rhyme or reason; no justice; no design; no purpose; no meaning; no good; and no evil."
Which I presume he has got from here, which is better read in context in my opinion!
"The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease. It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won't find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference."
Not denying proof. There's just no proof, it's all made up to fit the theory. Sorry.
Rob - LOL - OK Whatever you say lol
Rob, I can't believe you actually contend there is no evidence and even proff for evolution! What outdated 13th century text book have you been using to formulate your thoughts, my friend!?!?! Evolution indeed is still going on and will continue to go on for as long as life exists. To deny that give me the image of someone hiding under the bed and protesting that as long as they stay there, the world outside the covers will go away.
Evolution does not trash your religion, my friend, religion may trash itself by making idiotic (sorry, I cna think of no other way to express that) claims that all life rose up in one week and simlutaneously existed on all continents and Noah captured all the animals and kept them alive in his ark. Millions and millions of animals? Just the feed for that would have taken centuries to gather! It would also be physically impossible for Noah his sons & wife and daughters to go around and care for the animals, feeding htme, mucking out their stalls, etc.
Face it, carnivores eat meat, and Noah would have to have included enough food for them as well!
Oddly enough, I agree with you!
No, no Ivan.
The god would have magically made all this possible for Noah. As to why, if it could do that, it didn't just take care of the whole thing itself, I can't begin to imagine.
I'm sure there's a perfectly logical explanation.
You just don't seem to understand how simple this is.
Let me explain.
God is real because the bible says so
and the bible is the word of god because the bible says so
and that proves that god is real because the bible says so
and the bible is the word of god because the bible says so
and...
Got it now?
How hard could it be?
You guys aren't even scientists and yet you're so certain of it. How funny. Even Thomas Edison said we know only one thousandth of one percent of everything. Science is in the business of uncertainty yet it's people like who act like fanatics defending something even the scientists are not sure of.
Why else would not all scientists agree on evolution?
You know just a little bit of what the scientists know and act like you know everything. LOL. Then little people like you go out and spread all this falsehood. Where is this proof you speak highly of? None. Show me.
Ok. So what if you're wrong? If the so called religionists are wrong, nothing happens, we're monkeys, so what.
My, my, it has been busy.
Mark just for the record:
@Mark-"LOL-Guys - no matter how many times you say it that will not change the fact that atheism is a LACK of belief in a god, not a belief in something. I know this is a difficult concept for you to grasp but just try using your brains for a moment.. LOL"
Websters online defines atheism as:
1archaic : ungodliness, wickedness2 a: a disbelief in the existence of deity b: the doctrine that there is no deity (DID YOU CATCH THAT? "DOCTRINE")
I would say use the word "agnostic", but you have made it obvious that atheism is "doctrine", to you.
@dotslash- "The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference."
Well, I guess if you are planning euthenasia, abortion, genocide, or a holocast; that is a god theory to live by.
I hope you have plenty of Zanex to get you though the night.
Confusion reigns, atheism floats, believers swim. That's it! So, atheism is a doctrine after all! Cool! Certainly does not occupy any space. Just one phrase, "there aint naw Gawd, maaan," that's all.
Well, Noah! Yes, what about him? What he carried on board his ark were DNA SAMPLES of all forms of life!!!
I don't remember who stated this in order to give him/her due credit. :)
Next you may ask how the hell he knew how to extract DNA and store it? Go ahead ... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! ha!
@ LG - Me?
@ CWB - You naoied it. Circular "logic." :lol:
@ Rob - No genuine scientsists disagree with evolution. Sorry.
@ observer - now try a genuine dictionary instead. I recommend the Oxford English.
@ quicksand. Excellent - now do you see just how much "interpretation" you are going to need to do with the true word of god. lol
Rob said: "You guys aren't even scientists and yet you're so certain of it. How funny."
Actually, I am - a biologist, so understand evolution perfectly well, thanks ;)
@observer
"Well, I guess if you are planning euthenasia, abortion, genocide, or a holocast; that is a god theory to live by.
I hope you have plenty of Zanex to get you though the night."
It's not a theory, or a way to live my life - it's what actually happens - I don't need a 'god theory' or a even a 'good theory'. It's why I can accept that horrible things happens to wonderful people, innocent children and the helpless and wonderful things happen to evil and cruel people.
I don't need to work out why a 'god' allows horrible events such as babies being born with aids and people dying sad deaths as though it's all in some grand scheme or plan - that's your problem mate.
I'd rather trust science to help people when it can (not a particular gods will) and why I don't require Zanex and sleep wonderfully, thanks.
LOL. No genuine scientists disagree with evolution. Now where did you get that? LOLOLOLOL.
I'm surprised to see how some people get so offended when other people won't believe in their god (or in a god at all).. Excellent post Mark (and to respond to Rob as well... I also am a proud biologist... :)
I'm not really seeing the logic in disputing God based on a book that you already deemed invalid. Just because you don't believe God made the world in 7 days or that he made man in his image does not mean that he didn't do it. Just because there is evil in the world doesn't mean that God doesn't exist. You're defining God by religion. You're not free thinking at all if you want to put God in the "Bible box" and leave him there. If you don't believe the bible or christianity, that still doesn't mean there is no God.
If you remove the bible or any religious doctrine about God, then you might be able to define him based upon other things. If you don't believe in the bible or other religious book, then just discard them and find out what God is for yourself. But don't say he just doesn't exist.
Just wanted to say it's late and I might not have made sense in my post below. I hope I did, though. I'm saying that just because you find the bible invalid, doesn't mean that god doesn't exist. God can exist without the bible.
If you stop reading the bible or any other religious book, then it might free you to really see what He, God, could really be. If you doubt Christianity, then you can't use any of its premises to say that God doesn't exist. All you wind up doing is questioning religion, but not God. I just see everything that's written in the article as an argument against God's existence is null and void unless compared to the bible.
Without the bible, do we even know what God is? Okay, maybe God was a huge mass of matter that exploded in the big bang and spread throughout the universe. We don't know. Just cause we don't know doesn't mean he's not there. Doubt Christainity and whatever other religion you choose, but that still doesn't mean there's no God. Probably won't be back on this page after tonight, but these are just my thoughts.
@ not really understanding what I wrote:
I never mentioned the bible. I wonder if you even read what I wrote. `Evolution happening proves there is no personal god intervening and directing the process - as it says in the bible. Now, if you want to call god an impersonal, indefinable, naturally occurring mass with no set of rules and no religious books to fight over, I am not going to argue that one does not exist.
in terms of physics the begining was the big BANG.that begs the question what was before it?as a devout physicist i can tell you that all things physical and nonphysical exist on a continum,therefore,there are no absolutes,only a question of movement along the continum that you are engaging at the point of focus for your individual mind.the notion that there was a beggining of any sort is simply a way of avoiding the eternel admission that WE DON'T KNOW.
Isn't it strange how belief stirs up so much emotion.
You apparently haven't caught up with the fact that Jay Leno has been replaced.
Very intriguing hub.
You sure stirred up a hornets nest with this one. I am amazed at the way the belevers think that there would be no morals or justice in the world simply because one chooses not to beleive in their god. Good people will be good people. They're not good simply because they fear the wrath of god. On the same token bad people are going to do their thing. Oh and the thing the believers failed to understand is that they actually gave them a way out. Just do what the hell ever you feel like. God will forgive you.
LOL - Yes I did. I agree their political doctrine makes very little sense if you understand it. As they do not seem to. They are always fighting amongst themselves as to who has the "correct" interpretation of god's word. Pretty sure there is nothing in there about attacking scientific knowledge though :)
"When did it become the norm for religious fanatics to attack scientific theories?"
A theory exists for the purpose of being 'attacked'. That's how science happens. If the 'attack' is valid, the theory gets modified. if the 'attack' can't be supported, the theory survives. Theories aren't supposed to be unassailable.
LOL - @Nicomp - Semantics - that is all you religionists are capable of. That is the funniest comment I have had - Thanks for the laugh. LOL
I suppose you are too ignorant to understand the difference between challenging a scientific theory with new knowledge and attacking a scientific theory because it goes against the word of your bronze age book.
Hi Mark,
All I did was quote your thesis and expand on it. I used your semantics. A common problem with atheists is their willingness to dip into semantics when it fits their argument, and then cry foul when semantics is used against them. Unfortunately, science is all about semantics. "word mean things". Any peer-reviewed scientific publication is dissected for incorrect semantics. I've been on both ends of that effort. How many research papers have you peer-reviewed or submitted for peer review? Walk a mile in those shoes, and then try to brush off semantic arguments.
If semantics are inaccurate, research will be rejected or even vilified. As a scientist, if you plan to use the word "theory" you'd better be sure you apply it correctly. We don't use the word in the colloquial sense; it has a specific meaning in the science community that we take very seriously.
I suspect, based on the thesis if your article, that you aren't sufficiently familiar with the formal definition of the word. If you are simply trying to build traffic to your hub, it's all good.
See my last comment. ;) I used the word "attack" - that is different to challenging a theory based on new evidence - which is the scientific method. Attacking a theory because it does not agree with your ridiculous beliefs is something else.
Now you are dipping into intent. If you purport to know why anyone would 'attack' a theory, you are a mind-reader. Typically a scientist 'attacks' a theory because the theory is attackable. It's the responsibility of other scientists to accept or reject the 'attack'. Another hallmark of atheists is the abject terror of having their theories 'attacked'.
What are you afraid of? If the 'attack' stinks, it only solidifies your position.
A scientist who 'attacks' a theory through ad-hominem strategies ( I think this is one type of 'attack' you are bemoaning with your thesis) will be rejected soon enough. The atheists need not be so scared. A scientist who 'attacks' with valid scientific evidence will be vindicated by free-thinkers. It all works out.
Remember, a theory is supposed to be 'attacked'. That's the nature of a theory. Applied science will discern the validity of the 'attack'. If it withstands the attack, the theory persists. It's still a theory, however.
LOL
Now I am scared? LOL
I am not worried that the theory of evolution would be proven wrong, and you are being deliberately obtuse. I understand - that is the only way you can score a point. Very funny though. LOLOL
10/10 for laughs. Religious attacks are different to scientific attacks. I undestand why they are doing it but still, it goes against the grain of everything your religion is supposed to stand for doesn't it? lol
I get the message. You ignore my points and toss out ad-hominen attacks. I conclude that you are simply trying to build hub traffic rather than exchange ideas.That works for me. I assume your science background isn't sufficicient to rationally discuss peer review mechanics or applications of scientific theories.
I'll try once more; a religous 'attack' plays directly into your hand. All you have to do is apply your science to discredit it. Rather than do that, atheists cry foul and resort to whining about unfair 'attacks'. There is no unfair 'attack' ; simply use your science to gainsay it. Your standing improves and your theory gets stronger.
You get a good hub out of your strawman argument and as an added benefit you profit from a stream of comments that makes Google think your page is well-visited. It all works for you. That's all you have because your thesis is flawed and you won't (perhaps can't?) address my points.
I am not sure what points you are trying to make. I agree the religionist attacks on the theory of evolution can not and will not disprove it.
That is not their intention. Their intention is to sway ignorant believers into thinking that the theory of evolution is wrong.
This is different to a scientific attack on the theory based on new information.
My "straw man" is alive and well and living on hubpages. See the link I added to the forum discussion.
I made no thesis - I merely pointed out that I was going to make an emotive attack on religionists who attack TOE for the purpose of misleading their followers - which is what I did.
And thank you yes - this actually gets quite a lot of traffic and has some interesting incoming links.
Question; Can a lifeform evolve from nothing on it's own,without some instructions from D.N.A.?
@someonewhoknows: it can't. Information cannot self-assemble. Regardless of how many millions of years you might be willing to wait, it's not gonna happen.
Hey mark, loved your hub.
Thought id drop a few lines and share my opinion.
Firstly id like you to know that i am actually atheist myself.
Although i do believe people have the right to believe whatever they want, that's what makes America what it is today. I say this because of your previous comment about people pulling their children from school to teach them creationism instead of evolution.
I actually read something in the news about a city petitioning to have creationism as well as evolution taught in their science classes. Which i thought was just ridiculous. Public schools are here for a GENERAL education. To teach our kids FACT. While i do not have a problem with people believing what they want to believe i think that things such as religion should be left for church or whatever it is you do to "worship".
I also was reading several pages online about how many multiple times the bible contradicts itself. I find it rather funny and entertaining. Although most people will say "Well it can't be taken literally"
"God apparently took 4.5 billion years to create Adam. Not sure what his problem was - If I was all powerful, I could have done it in a day." Hell... we can do it in 9 months.
Thanks for the comment. Yes - I certainly agree that the public schools should not be coerced into teaching anything other than facts.
And I agree you can believe whatever you want to believe. Just don't get upset when scientific facts prove you wrong. :lol:
A case against evolution:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HgcDm5UkcBc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mvq1spr9ZlI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bW5FWJFlqg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kps_-7ZNIAQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50MsFXvNAnk
Evolution is not fact. It's just an opinion. You're right, believe what you want to believe but dont teach the kids lies.
Remember the Piltdown man (is that how it's spelled?). It was supposedly the missing link of evolution. Scientists were writing books and thesis about it and it turned out to be a hoax. How clever.
Kim - that is not a case against evolution. Sorry your beliefs have been proven wrong. Bur facts are facts - don't shoot the messenger. You go ahead and believe what you want - and if you want to teach your children these ridiculous fairy tales as true - that is your business.
I am very surprised that no one has brought the Anunnaki into this discussion. When Zakariah Sitchin translated the many tablets found in Iraq (Sumeria) the whole story of our beginnings were there to see. We were gentically engineered by splicing genes from the Anunnaki and the most developed two legged ape/primative together. Sitchin wrote 12 books on these beginnings which were found amongst the ruins of the first cultural on this planet! The Anunnaki from planet Nibiru were here on planet earth mining gold and wanted lower beings to mine it for them - we are those lower beings!!!
And just for laughs - Planet Nibiru is on its way back - it has a 3,600 year eliptical orbit and is due here in 2012.
And just for laughs again - whos telescope is the largest and pointing right at it to make sure of the tract it is on - the one belonging to The Vatican!
Namaste
PS All of this information can be checked by searching on any searh engine.
"First – if evolution was started with us in mind, why on earth would a god go to all that trouble instead of just producing the desired end product?"
Argument from incredulity.
LOL
Absolutely. The idea of a god is pretty incredible. Now go look the word up. ;)
"Argument from incredulity" is a fallacious debating technique wherein a point is (incorrectly) dis-proven based on an inability or unwillingness to understand why the point could be true.
For example:
"I don't understand how macro-evolution could have caused life to develop a certain way, therefore it didn't happen."
Making an argument and stating a fact are two entirely different things.
Evolution happened. Fact. Evolution is still happening. Fact.
You say a god created us. Not fact.
And if a god did create us - I cannot believe he would be daft enough to do it via the evolutionary process over 4.5 billion years instead of creating us the way he wanted us to be.
And once you understand evolution - it is clear that there could not possibly have been a guiding hand involved.
Some all powerful super being. lol
Sorry your irrational beliefs have been proven wrong. Too bad...........
The Argument from Incredulity is commonly used to gainsay an argument that the viewer doesn't understand or refuses to research. Many readers will 'fall' for this type of presentation because it's easy to grasp and it contains little or no science.
For Example:
"I don't see how life could have possibly spontaneously assembled, therefore it didn't"
That is the difference between your argument and mine.
You say "I don't understand," and I say "I do understand and it is incredible."
So, I am not really making an argument from ignorance - as you are.
An Argument from Incredulity begins with an assertion such as "I don't see how "X" could possibly have happened this way". The debater is building a logical foundation based on his/her ignorance or, more kindly, incredulity. From that specious basis, the debater attempts to imply that "X" cannot possibly have happened in such a manner. In most cases, another source can be provided to prove "X" or explain why it could have happened.
Actually, the Argument from Incredulity is dangerously easy to promulgate because it plays on emotion and requires no research. It's all too easy to relate to, therefore many readers accept it without applying any critical thinking.
It is quite often embedded in a series of arguments that may or may not be valid. Often it appears in a summary statement. Unfortunately that summary statement casts doubt on the entire argument; the Argument from Incredulity should be avoided at all costs.
I suspect you are now just being deliberately obtuse. LOL
I am not making an argument from incredulity. I am not starting my statement with "I don't see how "X" could possibly have happened this way"
I am making a statement that starts with an IF.
IF god created us - for which there is absolutely zero evidence - I do not believe he would have done it using the evolutionary process. LOL It is incredible. Unbelievable even. And once you understand evolution, you logically deduce that there cannot have been a creator involved.
Your argument on the other hand is 100% based on incredulity and ignorance.
The simple fact is - you do not understand evolution, and it clashes with the truth you already know.
Sorry you have been proven wrong. Too bad your god does not exist. Oh well.........
I see - the argument from incredulity:
I can't be arsed to read the Theory of Evolution, therefore God did it.
You will have to do a little better than God of the Gaps ;)
Hi Mark - Crossed post!
Hey Sufi - long time. This one keeps on coming back and I feel obliged to respond or his comment will be the last one lol
Yup - Been doing the commercial Hubs thing, and staying out of the forums. Too time consuming!
This Hub jumped out at me today - I have just written an article for the science resource site, about reproducibility, which included a nice, long scathing attack on Creationism.
I am in the mood today :D
Yeah - I have had to cut down on my forays into the forums lately. Too busy - and the tone has gotten decidedly nasty, with a bunch of cut-and-paste religionists able to produce 2,000 words at the drop of a hat.
Much like this guy - regurgitating someone else's arguments
Much the same in the politics forums - little Keyboard Warriors, safe behind a computer screen. Really cannot be bothered - If I want a personal debate, I can go to the taverna and swear at Kostas the Goat Herder.
Summer is quiet for academic writers, so it is a good opportunity to up the hubcount. Besides, writing about septic tanks and portable toilets is so interesting :D
lol
I haven't had that particular pleasure. Probably the least interesting series I did was on reproduction furniture fr article directories. I could barely stay awake long enough to do the research.
You can D.N.A. all you want but you can't explain why it does what it does or where it originated evolution or no evolution.
lol
But - YOU have an explanation? LOL
LOL man you have been had!!
How do you define evolution? I believe in variation within a kind(Genesis), but you guys just piggyback off that and say "Well give it millions of years anything can become anything." That takes a lot of faith, and Macroevolution has never been observed just assumed, and implied. Which completely distorts the Scientific method.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b5PKukgkEbU
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVKj01po-YU
Why is Haeckel's "law of biogenesis" that ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny still used as evidence for evolution after being exposed as a fraudulent claim?
All of the "transitional fossils” are either drawings or partial bones that show nothing. And some fossils had been proven to be animals still alive today. but the evolutionary imagination must go to work and make up what they want to see and to keep fools like you in the dark.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G1RUhkgqjug
The problem is you can't bring themselves to reject darwin's evolutionary lie, because they have already chosen to reject God. Darwin’s Evolution has been proven by real science to be nothing more than a tarnished hypothesis with pretty pictures that is riddled with lies and fraud. But, evolutionary atheist would rather embrace lies of satan and men than acknowledge The Almighty Creator. News Flash Appendix is not vestigial! And you need a tailbone for many "important" things and diet change explains wisdom teeth. Creationist Win! Praise be to the Creator.
Proof dinosaurs(ie dragons) were just big lizards and roam the earth today.
http://gmy.news.yahoo.com/vid/15222735
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=USRpv1g7pRs
Most of Americans don't believe the darwins evoluntionary lie. Wake up Mark!
Praise Him!
Romans 1:22-25 (New King James Version)
22 Professing to be wise, they became fools, 23 and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image made like corruptible man—and birds and four-footed animals and creeping things.
24 Therefore God also gave them up to uncleanness, in the lusts of their hearts, to dishonor their bodies among themselves, 25 who exchanged the truth of God for the lie, and worshiped and served the creature rather than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
"Most of Americans don't believe the darwins evoluntionary lie. Wake up Mark!"
No one ever accused the American public of being that stupid before. Interesting that you know what "most of Americans" do or do not believe. lol
And I am the one that has been had? Deary me. Sorry you are prepared to ignore the mountains of evidence in favor of a fairy tale with absolutely zero evidence. You must be getting pretty desperate t use youtube as your "proof." LOL
Deny, Deny, Ignore facts, Deny! Let me guess you didn't view anything and responed with nothing to counter my facts. Right out of the evolutionary atheist handbook. It was a considered earth sat on a turtle too, but that’s wrong. And that the appendix was vestigial organ. Wrong again guy, but enjoy your willful ignorance. Angry teen or not. You are without excuse. Have a great day!
You mean the proof that the darwin married his first cousin and lost his daughter thus giving him reason to hate God, and wanting deny his existence. That why he concocted this hair brain joke so he wouldn't have to think about God, must be just sheer coincidence. He doubted his theory so much when died he recanted most of his own work. The joke died with him, but you guys are trying(to no avail) to keep this joke going in order to advance your materialistic views. Now you are censoring me? Proof positive you know I right, but your pride is keeping you in your imaginary evolution world. Thanks for proving me right have a great day! Atheism=Materialism=Fatalism.
lololol
You are getting more and more funny with every comment. Do it again. :)
And no - I am not censoring you - your comment was automatically marked as spam by the hubpages system. I have now released it from there.
One day we will know but we want be able to share so why all the fuss.I really dont care about who's right or who's wrong at the end of the day did I add something to life or did I take.I just want to lead a life that will be example of how to futher the devlopment of the human race,and the God I have discovered allows me to help other I have a personal story of making a differance on the side of good that works for me because I was a negative froce in the world for a long time
Mark,
I can agree with the sense of your hub but at the same time I have my own version.
Creation, (God, Religion) and Evolution can be valid in degrees only because we don't have hard evidence.
I believe in limited evolution as a means of specifies adapting to the environment for food and protection. The problem that I have with Man evolving from some other creature like monkeys or apes is that Man should have replaced them. Monkeys and apes should have disappeared once Man evolved. The same is true with fish that grew legs and lungs.
God was created by man when they created their religions.
A creator like our scientists is the most likely scenario.
@ opinion duck - that is because you do not understand evolution. Try reading a few books on the subject before coming to a "belief" :)
Don't expect him to define anything. He is baiting you to generate traffic on his hub.
nicomp -- must be true, I believe it.
Even Einstein believed in God and here's a former atheist explaining why he changed his mind. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SNkxpTIbCIw
Here's that former atheist on a debate when he was an atheist. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=maoGItxwTTA
lol
More "evidence" from youtube.
Jun - I do not care how many people you persuade to join your cult. It will not change the facts. Sorry dud - your invisible super being does not exist and some else deciding to start believing is not going to make any difference. LOL
You guys are really getting funnier by the day.
@nicomp - I have defined a considerable lot more than "god is love" LOL
Hi Mark, just thought I'd rock in and say hi. Can't believe I didn't comment before, I know I read it. What more can I add anyway. Good you're all tucked up safe and handling the onslaught as per usual. Have to say you are doing a great service to those awaiting to be saved. Cause to get people to feel their angst means less cues at the psychologist's office. I noticed a few getting a bit tizzy here, frustrated at not moving your mountain :)
Hi Jewels,
Yes - I had noticed an increase in the level of animosity. I have also been getting personal messages from quite a lot of them. Oh well, as they keep telling me - Jesus was attacked for telling the TRUTH. LOL
My, you have a lot of faith! "There cannot possibly have been a divine hand"--such an authoritative claim needs some evidence. I am a Christian and an evolutionist because of evidence. You give two reasons why there is no divine hand. The first is no reason, only a statement of ignorance. "Why would God...?" is not a reason. He is God and works according to His reasons, not yours. Why would God call Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob and go to all the trouble of producing a nation of Israel over hundreds of years when He could have just snapped His finger and did it? Because He is God. You know Mark, today I took a long walk to get to the grocery store. I went the long way, through the woods. Illogical to you? Perhaps, but that just proves you don't know me. The Bible shows a God who doesn't do things your way. Your first "reason" is based on your assumption, nothing else. How can you assume so much about a God whom you do not know? Then your second reason is again based on your assumption of what it means for God to guide the process. God created the universe with laws and principles that we are still discovering. Those laws make the formation of water inevitable. Those laws make the formation of carbon inevitable. Elements have the propensity to make bonds. And even though we don't know yet how, those chemicals can form an amazing chemical called DNA. God's hand is in all of this. I can't prove it, I see it. I find everything of science completely compatible with the God of the Bible. You can't prove your idea either--it is your leap of faith. Please explain how God-created physical laws make the existence of mankind impossible, for that is what you are saying. Thanks for the post!
So - first of all explain to me the theory of evolution as you understand it.
Then we can talk. Because if there was a "guiding hand" the theory is worthless.
I assume you do know what the theory says - right?
Or not - LOL
I agree with Bill Maher when he says that people that don't believe in evolution should just pray away the swine flu if they get it! Well done, another good book is "God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything"
lol
Hadn't heard that one. I do find it entertaining how many of them seem to have that devil machine - a computer. :)
Its refreshing to see real scientists confronting you Mark, seeing that I am so less than average at science. Call it force, call it God, call it collective subconscious, but there is something beyond the world of the physical that is bigger than any theory.
BTW Saw nothing in Egypt to advance your Horus hypothesis. The Coptic missionaries, I am told, were happy for the parallel, that's all. But I plan to learn Arabic and return to take a deeper look at Egyptology; fantastic country.
LOL
Real scientists? These must be imaginary scientists - like your imaginary friend upstairs. ;)
I agree about Egypt - fantastic country. I have no desire to learn Arabic though. Next on my list after I am more fluent in French is Italian. :)
Chris Hutchens obliterates religious dogma and I think that the late great George Carlin was a master at understanding how religion truly functions. Evolution can be understood by most religious fanatics as just plain-ole adaptation. People, animals, plants, dung beatles all adapt to survive. Over time, adaptation is, in essence, the basis for evolution.
I have noticed in the past 50 years (I'm telling my age here)that children seem to be getting smarter or more technologically intelligent (if I can say it like that). Also, I have noticed that children a being born with there eyes open. When I was a kid, this was almost unherd of. Even in the place that I live, I have noticed that the leaves on trees are more resilient, and don't just evaporate into decay when they fall off in the fall, like they did when I was young. The only thing I can attribute this too, is that they are adapting to the level of pollution that exists were I live; I guess leaves have become more sturdy and resilient to resist the affects of man-made chemicals in the air.
I have personally witnessed things evolving over time. The best commet i can make about religious zealots is that, they seem to posses a peculiar kind of ignorance about reality, whereas things or events that actually happen can be "rationally" dismissed as if what is actually real is illusory.
Lastly, those who are skillful at logical argumentation as religious zealots are very dangerous. they blurr the line between how one rationally understands things and the relaity of things that can exist beyond the rational. That is, is that "ultimately" we cannot "know" the origin of existence; it has a source that is quite profound and unexperiencible. Similarly, skillful religious argumentors view the exact same thing about "God" as an inference. But the origin of the univerese is not the same as an evoltuionary consideration of life.
At the end of the day, all we evolutionary quacks are really saying, is there is a limit to what we know, and that we should probably stick to what can be experienced as something real that can be shared by everyone self -evidently. Religious zealots and their arguments fall apart when this is thrown into the equation. that is, if God is so asolutely real why can't people literally experience it as such? Like the sun, or the moon, or the freak'in planet we occupy - self-evident in every way; something so real as the biblical God should be capable of being experienced no matter what the hell I believe personally.
Great hub; good topic!
Thanks Tien Kai
I agree with you there - it is like the climate change that is not happening. In my life time I have seen observable changes. I grew up in Holland and when I was a kid the canals always froze. They have not frozen in more than 10 years now.
Evolution is a Religion!
Pope- Charles Darwin
Pastor- Richard Dawkins
Asst Pastor-Hitchens
Members- Haters of God, lovers of sin
Holy Text-The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life. The God Delusion and God is not Great.
gods- satan, Father Time” Time is the god of evolutionists. The evolutionists' claim their time-god is very slow but infinitely powerful. The time-god is credited with the ability to accomplish anything and everything given enough time. It simply takes the time-god millions or billions of years to accomplish it. Scientifically impossible events are credited to the time-god. Evolutionists keep their time-god close at hand where they can watch their god's hands move around slowly, slowly, slowly trying to evolve new species but never succeeding.” and Materialistic naturalistic junk(FSM)
Faith Creed- Even though we have no concrete proof the evolution(macro ,cosmic, Stellar and planetary Organic) is real we must believe at all cost, because wants to believe in a designer who will judge us for are sins.
Actions-Always be sarcastic never think you are wrong. Whenever a creationist shows us proof, deny and unleash hell on their character and use big font, and smiley’s and by all means completely ignored the argument. When ask about in other forms of evolution, call them names and insult their intelligence tell them to read a book. Never question the "holey" theory no matter how ridiculous we sound.(0+0=1). Show no respect after all we are just animals. When anyone brings up Hitler and all the murder and racism caused by evolutionist deny and deflect attention to something “Christians” did wrong. Even evidence doesn’t fit ignore the evidence and stick with the lie. When all else fails mock the Bible that will anger Christians and will show they are not perfect (even though no true Christian will claim to be perfect.) Stick your fingers in our ears and yell “there is no God,” to drown out all common sense. Whenever possible use words like "which god?" “sky daddy“, “imaginary sky friend,” “old book,” “Jebus” “Babble” “religious” “bigot” “homophobic” put God in lower case, Bring up old refuted bible “contradictions” deny all the facts in favor of Jesus the biblical account of he life and the 500 eyewitnesses and the fact that even other atheist acknowledge his existence.
Evoluntion is the religion that offers nothing, but the bondage to sin (Now while you Google bible slavery verses and look up a counter "arguments".) Did I miss anything?
You put so much faith is your always shifting, forever sinking sand, because your whole view is skewed, thanks to anti God glasses. You know nothing of the true nature of God, only that you hate Him and don't want to give an account on judgement day. But you will. I got the bible you got a tarnished hypothesis with pretty pictures and bones that prove nothing expect the animal is no longer living. Weak, Lame and most of all sad. You say Creationist must be crazy just remember that the next time you get your MRI, or enjoy many of the luxuries of modern medicine and other creation scientist. I have to end this, but please continue humiliating yourself with denial. I can no longer entertain such willful ignorance.
One last creedo If anyone chooses to leave the evolutionary atheist church(ie finds the truth) For example Antony Flew along with hundreds of other ex evolutionist and honest scientists they are to be treated like creationist see above actions. Before you even think of it The Pope is not a Christian. Nice try. Fool!
Romans 1 18-30.
The truth - I am really sorry your beliefs have been proven false, but there is not really much I can do about it.
I cannot change the facts.
But if it makes you feel better to dump all this religious hatred here - knock yourself out.
Ahh wounded puppy your age is really showing now huh kid? Don't pretend you are hurt by the truth you run around the religious forums practicing your religion and faith daily, but you mock others for doing the same. You are the one with hatred I'm simply calling out your bag of tricks from the church of atheism. You‘re helpless when can‘t re-edit someone words to insult them. "Proven False" by what? Please show me one infallible thing that disproves the bible and God. I given you every opportunity to do this and all I got was sarcasm and smileys brought to me by the church of evolutionary atheism. Everything you believe in has either numerous flaws or is a lie so what facts do you have let's define fact-(according to dictionary.com and yahoo) Knowledge or information based on REAL occurrences, something that actually exists; reality; truth, a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true. God can be proven by these definitions I've experienced him and observed his creation and the bible is my hard proof of Jesus Christ along with other histiorical events and prophecies supported also by other outside documents. All of your facts are highly questionable or proven false(ie geologic column, carbon dating, fossils, radiometric dating, natural selection, Random Genetic Drift) and before you start your Google search mutations and bacteria are not proof of evolution just like fossils don’t prove evolution. If you can come up with one 100% true fact that proves macro evolution one kind changing into another. I bet I can still prove it false. Good Luck!
Like I said - Knock yourself out if it makes you feel better. LOL
Arguing against a proven scientific fact because of "lack of proof". And then at the same time arguing in favor of the invisible super being with zero evidence.
And you do not see the irony....... :)
Thanks for the love.
LOL Case closed. You lose! You got nothing. Get used to it. Thank you atheist you have proving what I've always known. I don't have enough faith to be an atheist. Amazing! LOL
LOL
Case closed? You guys are so funny. Do it again. tell me about the sky fairy some more.........
Listen kid, the more you type the more I’m sure you're just some angry teen hiding behind daddy pic. You rant with no proof and all the smileys were a dead give away. You’ve had many chances to show me one infallible thing against the bible or God, but like every other atheist I've debated I get the same dogma and actions from your church, but please keep defending your faith that's your right, but don't call it science.
Atheist actions- "Stick your fingers in our ears and yell “there is no God,” to drown out all common sense. Whenever possible use words like "which god?" “sky daddy“, “imaginary sky friend,” "invisible super being" “old book,” “Jebus” “Babble” "sky fairy" “religious” “bigot” “homophobic” put God in lower case. Classic!
Have a great day!
Deary me, you are upset. Sorry your beliefs have been proven worthless. oh well......
And if you think this is a debate, you are sadly mistaken.
Any evidence for a god? No. Case closed. LOLOL
lol, Upset no, fed up with the willful ignorance of you atheist Yes! "let's define fact-(according to dictionary.com and yahoo) Knowledge or information based on REAL occurrences, something that actually exists; reality; truth, a truth known by actual experience or observation; something known to be true. God can be proven by these definitions I've experienced him and observed his creation and the bible is my hard proof of Jesus Christ along with other histiorical events and prophecies supported also by other outside documents" You atheist are without excuse!! It's just a denial game now! I can only entertain such childish babble for so long. You’re wrong go find out why. I’ve proved my side so grow up kid, wipe that black emo eyeliner off your face that embarrass your dad and pray to that God you hate so much for wisdom. I gotta run, please continue with the denial and keep practicing your faith after it is your right. You’re so done Next!
Whatever happens in your head does not constitute a fact. Keep trying though - this is quite entertaining. The proofs for the fact of evolution are all around. The fact that god spoke into your head is a little difficult to prove and does not actually count as a fact outside your head. Sorry dude. Try getting some real facts. Then we can talk.
Yawn! Like the "facts" you provided? oh wait! You can have the last word kid. Goodbye!
"The proofs for the fact of evolution are all around"
There's some science for ya!
LOl
What is the point of providing you with the factual evidence? You already have a bunch of cut and pasted spurious arguments ready to go.
Seriously - you have looked at fossils and decided they do not count. LOL So what is the point?
Any proof of a god? No. Case rested.
Praise God! Hello thetruthurts2009, I love the evolutionary atheist dogma religion clause you put up. It’s so true I can attest for it myself when I debate evolutionary atheist. Spot on! I find it funny you predict what the atheist will do and they still do it funny stuff. You clearly won this exchange, but don't expect much from mark. I don't think he's a angry kid, but I might be wrong. Thanks for proving once again evolution is a anti-Science religion. Evolution is a joke, Christians just get the punch line! You got a fan today! I found this it will make you smile! Keep up the good work! Feel free to respond mark I also give the last word. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Fmh8PCmrlk
LOL!! Thanks spiderpam. That was funny! LOL
Anytime!
Well spidersham - I don't think I have had the pleasure of one of your comments on a hub of mine before. Odd you chose this one.......
Thanks for spreading some of Jesus' love and reminding me why I despise your ridiculous religion.
Sorry your beliefs have been proven worthless. Too bad..
Keep up the ummmmmm "work" :lol:
Hello mark, I hope you are well. Thetruthurts2009 is sent me a PM regardng this convo and I had to check it out. They got your number and it's fun to watch you defending your faith. Have fun!
Like I said - thanks for the Jesus love and a reminder why I despise your religion. Just can't take the hatred it causes . Oh well, that is just me........
Okay mark, whatever you say, your religion causes more hate than any other, and it's government funded. You can deny and deflect now(wow it works everytime). "The message of the cross is foolish to those who are headed for destruction! But we who are being saved know it is the very power of God." 1 Corinthians 1:18. See ya later mark. Bye!
LOL
Quoting scripture and spreading the hatred again? Wow - Thanks for your stellar contribution.
Sorry your silly beliefs have been proven worthless. But thanks for brightening my day with your loving comments.
You are a true follower of jesus.
lol! The only you've proven is you're afraid to actually debate thetruth, because he would win heck he's already won. There's goes that dogma again. Just like reading a script! oh you didn't say “jebus” too obvious huh mark, keep believing you're right. Just forgives us for laughing at you! Lol.
There is nothing to debate.You are the one with the dogma.
Sorry it has been proven wrong.
Why should I forgive you for laughing at me. That is the reason for the animosity between us.
You laugh at me because I do not believe.
This is what christians do.
You also say
"I am doing unto others as I want them to do unto me."
And you are too ignorant to understand why that makes others laugh right back at you.
As for reading a script. LOL - Who is the one quoting from the bible?
Hi Mark, I drop by because i see this interesting hub... hehehe scientific theories that lacks substance, credibility, and proofs, can easily be refuted by science facts...
Thats the trend now Mark, many theories of yesterdays are now a laughing stock of today... get updated...
Well thanks for the comment - I had not realized that you were quite that uneducated. What a shame. Did you frighten any children with the bad god that sends people to hell today?
Because if you didn't you need to get out there and put the fear of god into them before they start making educated decisions.
Good luck finding some facts to back up your fairy tale.
Hi Mark. I have learned many things over the last year to enlighten myself. Many of your writings have also helped. With regards to the Big Bang, it is simple. It was created by the banging of two parallel universes colliding with one another. The energy needed was there all along and always existed. Fascinating science and theories that are hard to argue with, like string theory. Great hub Mark. Kudos
What a commentary you have written man about religious testament verses science. It's really hilarious especially the tag line under photo that god took......... Hi hi hi
Thanks ralwus
@ Clara - 4.5 billion years does seem a tad slow for an all powerful creator lol
hehehe i'am looking up to you mark, and now not anymore... you blasphemed me of being uneducated wow and a religion fanatic, this are lies since i'm not a preacher to start with... you dont even know what facts means you are indeed as funny as a clown...
i will not stoop down to your level mark...
hehe - Like I could care less what you think heheheh.
Your opinion is about as much worth as........ actually I can't think of anything quite as useless to compare it to.
LOL
Facts LOLO
Blasphemed you? LOLOL
Are you god now? LOLOLO
Do it again. Please..... :)
Maybe you will get a 4LOL next time.
Remember this bozo,
hehehe there is what we called "jargons" mark... words in science might be different from real life words...
e.g. >>>
weight in science is different from that of the real life. in science weight is affected with gravity, and writing this in equation we have weight equals mass (kg or lb.) multiplied with acceleration due to gravity which is equals to 9.81 meter/seconds squared...
or simply w=mg, and weight is related to force, both have Newton(s)/dyne as units...
in real life weight is how heavy or light you are. this is actually equivalent to mass (kg. or lb.) in science...
look before you leap mark...
the fact i'm dealing with is something that passes the acid test of scientific method, not with what you're dictionary is telling me, by the way what's that again, oxford's, i really dont need that, i will not bother...
i'm using encyclopedia and you're not... hehehe
i know my science sir hehehe...
nyahaha you just run away from this reply... darwin's puppet...
Conceding a simple debate about facts, coward...
LOL on you 4.5 billion times...
Great HUB there Mark.
I have come to the conclusion that it isn't religious ideas that people are defending - it is their individual identity. I came to this conclusion many years ago after witnessing two families in the same religion grapple with a set of facts that became exposed to them - one family escaped the dogma and another defended it. The attacks of the 'defenders' on the other family were some of the most unpleasant and 'un-Christian' things I had witnessed until that moment. Actually ... a whole 'congregation' rallied to defend the dogma when it was questioned and this family was hounded out of this religion.
My point? You see, people will spend 20, 30, or 40 years 'investing' their emotional energy in a set of beliefs. If there is no flexibility in that 'belief system' i.e. it's an all-or-nothing set of dogmatic rules ... then if one rule is invalid all of them are. This is a threat to the 'identity' of the individual - if they dare to admit that the rules might be wrong then they have to admit that their emotional investment may have also been meaningless.
So logic has nothing to do with fundamentalist defenders of the creation myth; rather it is a literal (and often unconscious) fight for survival of the persons identity. This has a logic of its own. Defend everything at all costs.
Just a thought!
LOL LOL LOL LOL
I am really sorry your ridiculous beliefs have been proven wrong. I cannot change the fossil record. 4LOL - well done.
@ how to hypnotize - makes sense to me. My theory is more along the lines that they don't actually believe it, and are scared of being caught in a lie :)
This hub seems to keep you busy Mark :)
Charlie, I like the picture of one universe banging another :D
Whether or not a god or gods exist is a matter of personal belief. I happen to believe not, yet I still am. As for science, while it self-adjusts & corrects ideas to meet and accept new credible factual evidence, religion, it seems, is mired in the same old stuff as if no change is somehow a great and envious thing. No change allows species to come to extinction. Are we next?
Like I said, I have learned. I have learned a lot because my mind is open. And Misha, yes it is a very possible answer to how our universe was started and it was a Big Bang. Now this in no way dilutes my own faith. But along with the expanding universe so goes my mind also. This is a very well written and informative hub. Thanks Mark, with all the due respect you deserve. peace, CC
lol funny stuff, your church got your working overtime defending your faith, huh kid. I have to say you're doing a great job ignoring every argument, but use more big font and more "sky daddy", talk "Sorry it has been proven wrong." Used about 6 six times brilliant mark keep that going, but never no show proof of that statement or your church might not let you hold the holy text next mass. lol
@spiderpam-don't waste any more of your time with him. Until he debates me he just spitting dogma. Ignore him and move on sis, again thx for the link. He's all bark, but it is fun to watch.
Sorry your belief has been proven wrong. What is there to debate?
You merely calling into question a theory you do not understand in favor of "god did it" is not what I consider to be a debate.
I know you guys are big fans of the If I attack some one often enough eventually I can make them see that there is a god.
You know what that sounds like?
"Plleeeeeeze believe there is a god."
Sorry - evolution happens and if you are too ignorant to educate yourself as to the facts of the matter, I am certainly not going to bother. LOLOLOLOL
“Attack” you must mean the hundreds maybe thousands of attacks you make on Christians in religious forums(thread hi-jacking insulting other people faith and God) Do unto others my friend. You can dish it, but you can't take huh kid. Typical of all atheist "question a theory you do not understand" there goes that dogma again. You are so predictable. There is a God, you just hate Him is all, so you leapt at the darwin myth to suit your materialistic views, I‘ll say it again you are without excuse. "Ignore and insult their intelligence" keep up mark, you're doing great! When the bible says in 2 Thessalonians 2:11 "And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie:" he wasn't joking you really believe in that tripe you spew. It’s simply astounding(now go google old refuted bible “contradictions” and type “old book” in your next response. lol this is hilarious!
Take it? I can take it all day long. All you are doing is reinforcing my belief that people who believe in god are ignorant, aggressive fools interested only in conflict.
Thanks. :)
Count all the comments you've made in the religious forum against Christians and than count every comment I've ever left you than look up the word aggressive. Thanks to you as well for never doubting your dogma, it's leave something to be desired, and for finally admitting what you hold dear is not science or reason, but in fact they’re your beliefs.
Let's see how you did:
*God in lower case-check
ignorant used-check
name calling-check
smiley-check
See ya tomorrow
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL Feel better?
Like I said - all you are doing is reinforcing by belief that people who cannot face reality and need to invent an invisible super being to watch over them are ignorant, uneducated fools intent on violence.
Sorry you do not even seem to understand what the word "ignorant" means. I suggest a decent dictionary.
Thanks to you and you predictable nonsense! use big font-check! Yep! lol
That’s right ignore all the violence hatred and murder thanks to evolutionary atheist and point to Christians typical, that’s it I'm recommending you for deacon of your church they would so proud to learn of your blind faith to the dogma “deny and deflect“ "ignore and insult". I knew you were brainwashed, but programmed too!
I can see this hub and it commementators arn't evolving or there would be some kind of middle ground where there is room for evolution alongside creation or should I say creation alongside evolution? Either way is fine with me.
There is no middle ground when the evolutionist is just trolling for hits anyway. Any argument is a good argument.
I am not a creationist, to say first. But some creationists believe in creationism because they see that with each mutation there is a loss of genetic information (true) and evolution is processing backwards. Looking at this whole article and looking at people such as Richard Dawkins I would easily believe that...
great hub
After looking through your hub Mark,it seems people can learn nothing if they don't want too.I was raised as a christian,but I don't get how people deny whats right in there faces as truth.At 14 years old,I new that the bible was a story,and how people can't see this is wierd.Why can people not understand,how dumb they sound telling you your wrong.Mark good luck guy,They can't accept no life after death.they need more to live for than now.Your new fan Chance.
LOL Mark, thetruth is making a monkey out of you. Congrats! LOL
What are the odds that there is no life after birth? please explain how you figured that out mathimatically.I know it's just logical,because no one has ever come back to prove it.Small minds think alike.Where did you come from? I know you were born.You believe consciousness is a brain function alone,and that we are simply animals without the ability to change our thought processes.So that's why you can't think outside the box.I have a nephew who works in the movie business who told me that anything not seen everyday is just what exists in the movies.I try to tell him the movies are full of reality,although much of it is fantasy.Even myths have a reality behind them that may surprise those who are naysayers.In fact their would be no fantasy without reality to choose ideas from however unbelievable they may sound.Like flying,self propelled vehicles,radio,televison,cell phones,blackberry,i-pods and other technilogical devices all of which came into existance within the last hundred years or so.Todays fantasy may become the next new hi-tech device.That in itself is a kind of evolution.
Very Interesting! Here's a good one too: http://hubpages.com/hub/spiritualpath
Mark, you are an outstanding writer!! I don't agree with your thoughts, so we will have to agree to disagree. I have never called anyone who believes in evolution a fool, I'm sure that was a generalised statement... What I would like is for you to research the other side and make a cmparison. Now, your comments about Ken Hamm were a tad unkind!!
Nah, just telling the ugly and evil truth about Darwinism, Evolution and Eugenics. mark is just a side show clown in the big circus of the evolutionary deception.
@ spiderpam check this out http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=84BED6CD38
That’s a great documentary, thanks for the link. You've made your point quite clear with mark(btw very funny), he wouldn’t debate, and he never will. He’s so wrong, but we know why he thinks he’s right(2 Thessalonians 2:11 and 2 Pet 3:3-9). You and many other Christians here have planted the seeds of truth, let him go and pray God reaps the harvest. May our paths cross again.
In Christ
Spiderpam
You're right! Thanks! "The Lord will give strength unto his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace."
--Psalm 29:11
May God bless you and keep looking up.
Deary me.
There is nothing to "debate"
Evolution happens. Period. If you people have some evidence that a magic super being clicked his fingers - and you really need to get your stories straight first - go right ahead and provide som.
After 20000 years you haven't managed to find any proof. After 200 years - evolution has been proven.
Oh well. Guess that ends the "debate."
Add another youtube rant - maybe that will make you feel better.
As for the peace your lord has blessed you with - LOLOLO Sure - real peaceful here.
Mark, nobody snapped their fingers, He spoke :) Enjoy the weekend.
I am never more amazed at the atheist, and Evolutionary Theorists. They claim to have it all down pat. They stand without regard point their crooked and bony fingers, and spewing out babble and diatribe. Railing against God's existence, railing on those who won't believe in their doctrine of Science. I will be more apt to believe in Evolution once there is evidence of creatures who have been found in the fossil records in mid-morph. Where is the half ape half man? Where are your evidences that Science suposedly must have to prove its theories?
I wonder how the male-female thing came into being. Evidently at first Evolution, I guess, would declare that men and women just came about. But, then how does the interaction of male-female be explained?
If nature created mankind without an interaction by this female bearing the egg, the males fertilizing the egg, the gestation, the birthing, the nurturing processes, how does the Evolutionist explain or babble away at this?
Insects, male, female. Fish, male-female. Birds, male-female. Plants, male-female. There is a pattern here. That is also why I do not have to mention the aspect of Holiness, or the laws of the Spirit to explain that homosex is deviant to nature itself. I, merely, have to point out the laws of nature and show the animal kingdoms to give proof of sexuality. So, the unnatural and deviant amoral can hold their peace, and if their desires are unnatural and if their practice is found to be contrairy to nature, then they indeed are both unnatural and deviant from the established norm. Evolutionary theories can give the foundation for this understanding.
To say that the Earth was not in existence, and that Christians believe that mankind was made in 24 hour period, well, I don't think that this is the case.
There Earth was without form and void. It existed. It was and still is the domain of fallen spirits. If one wishes to, they can see that there are 3 dimensions of our existence but I have heard that science says there could be more than 11 dimensions. Quark theories, and String Theories. I give belief and credence to Science. Science and the purpose for studying and drawing conclusions based upon factual evidence is a way to get to know the Intelligent Designer.
But, to think that the Scriptures is a Technical Manual or a How The Earth was Created for Dummies is rather humorous, not just plain ole ludicrous. I teach a theory that a superior being had to create mankind. Do I have proof? Well, not proof to show anyone "Viola, here it is!"
Yet, I know that there is a God, and He is revealed in the face of Jehoshua Ameshia, aka Jesus the Christ. How claimed to be God in the flesh of man.
I am amused at that chart that has the monkey, transmuting into mankind. Oh, and by the way, that chart has missing links, it is the works of Evolutionists who simply were able to draw out their theory. It is just as valid of a graphic proof of Evolution as me drawing a great big box of a boat and saying "here is Noah's boat, the ark." Or painting a picture of some old man half naked reaching down extending a forefinger and touching the finger of another younger man reaching up and the two of them touching at the fingertips. I could say here is proof of God. See, it is drawn out.
Where is the proof of science? I admit that Creationism is a theory, because I can not, nor can anyone else say "here it is". But the ungodly, those who think that mankind came from the chimps and apes from the jungles of Afrikka, they are not willing to say or admit that this does not make sense neither.
If mankind came from apes, then why are there still the apes in the line of evolution today? Why has not mankind been found being birthed by the apes today? Again there is no proof of fossil records of the "Missing Link" and until we find that missing link, then Science can not declare Evolution as a probable fact.
So, even if those superior minds and those who won't yeild themselves to a greater being wish to defiantly declare that Evolution is a fact, they reveal their ignorance and their voices defy the very definition of what a fact is, and they also waffle on the purpose of what science is, and how science establishes truths and theories.
You all might not wish to admit the truth, so I will declare it for you..."Evolution is a theory". There are a multitude of flaws, unanswered questions, and probabilities to such a theory. So, babble on, get all defiant, and spew out your supposed theories all you want.
But proof of a God is done on an individual basis. It is too late for you to proselytize me. You see, I believe in the paranormal, I believe in fallen angels and demons, I believe in the concept that there are dimensions that my simple human mind can not even conceive.
I believe that somehow that blood that was shed from an innocent and murdered man still has power to cleanse mankind from a sinful nature, and the rebirth of a man's spirit accomplished by the infilling of the Spirit of this God, for He is a Spirit, and He was both seen and known of by His creation, and they rejected Him and murdered Him. But the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus the Christ is a mystery to the nonbeliever.
His fulfilling the promise of renewing my spirit which happedned when I received the Holy Ghost, and not the 3rd person of a godhead, but it is the active force proportioned gift of His Spirit that God will give to any that seek for it
It is too late for you boned headed ungodly hedonists to tell me that God is dead, or that He does not exist because Charles Darwin found plants that were similiar to other plants or very similiar to those found on another continent.
That only would be evidence for Pangaea. The Greek word meaning "all lands."
We see that Science can not even come to grips on the age of the Earth, there are even debates on what killed the dinosaurs....some have said the Yucatan Penninsula 65 million years ago, but of recent I have heard another theory but the desctruction started up in Europe not Mexico.
Some astrophysicists think of the New Earth Theory, some are more prone to accept and believe in the Old Earth Theory. I just recently also heard this brilliant mind declare, and declared is what she did at first...then she backpeddled and said " it is thought that".
She was so proud of her participation and belief that the young Earth was struck by some other mass, and this started its rotation.
But then I immediately laughed a good chuckle. Because that would mean that that would have had to happen to all of the rest of the 7 planets, excluding Pluto which has been demoted for now. Can you imagine what size of mass it took to move Jupiter into a rotation around its axis?
But then, how did all of them start rotating around the Sol Star? All in the same order of direction? It appears to me that these planets seem to protect the Earth from extraterrestial debris. We can see this in rather clearly that these planets take the pounding for Earth's protetion.
The type of sun that the Earth circles, the proportion of distance and size of our solar systems planet, the very location of where the Earth is in the Milky Way, the Expansion of billion of billions of star all expanding out from some force that came about...."The Big Bang".
We both would be fool to think that there is no other life, but there. But the probabilites of life as we know it, well how how does the Nth power go to?
Look, I can not prove that there is a God. But when I preach and the Spirit of God starts to move upon those whom hear the Word, and lives are changed, and sicknesses cease and desist, and alcoholics, drug addicts are released from the chains of their addictions. When fragile broken and bruised human spirits are mended and revitialized, this is proof enough for me.
Because a carnal/physical creation, wants and needs physical proofs. But they sneer and curse the concept that God is way more concerned with the spirit and soul of mankind than he is with the flesh of man. It takes a man with eyes that see beyond the physi
knowles
You are the analog of people that believe in God, neither of you offer any proof to support your belief.
Faith from one and arrogance from the other.
Can you guys keep it down - I'm trying to sleep!
Science is by its nature about doubt. Religion is by its nature about certainty. And, by the nature of people, they will always submit to certainty over doubt. In a world where to doubt is to be ashamed of the certainties, the path of certainty is followed by all but a different few. Which means Darwin will always be wrong and plane hijackers go straight to paradise.
Mark,
I hope I am not repeating this, but I simply did not want to read all of the comments. my question is-
Why does your first picture say "God apparently took 4.5 billion years to create Adam. Not sure what his problem was - If I was all powerful, I could have done it in a day."?
I am currious where you got that information. I study "confusion" and "false preaching".
Considering the great contributions you have had made to HubPages I think I gone overboard... I could've played it very conservative...
Hope you all the best, although we've clashed in a fierce argument few days ago...
More Power Mark Knowles...
Sooner than later - lol - it was a joke.
Ah Mark,
I thought so, but I wondered if you were referring to our belief that God has existed for eternity.
BTW- Human nature does not like "wavering" on any level (like seen in elections). One church in particular is responsible for more false preachings than most combined. It also has secret works. It's followers are generally not scripturally literate either. (but they seem to be outspoken) I feel this has caused many people to leave God- because they can find no truth.
With that being said, evolution has many changes and wavering as well, but science and it's publishers are subtle in the way they release their "flaws" (often times they dont at all). in fact- most evidence that is "proven" is later retracted. Alot of "proof" stems from artist renditions based off of incomplete fossiles found. I have seen flying lizzards made up from just a jaw bone.
Of course the theory of evolution is "wavering" - if by that you mean "constantly adapting to new knowledge."
Do not fool your self that that means it wrong - as we learn more, it evolves to take into account new knowledge.
As for the stuff about leaving god - what are you talking about? Evolution has proven god does not exist.
And as for the other rubbish about proof coming from artists renderings -= I think you have had a few too many religionists shouting the truth at you.
Do some investigation because it appears that you too are ignorant of the facts. There is a massive amount of measurable proof that evolution happens - go find it and ignore the "science" produced by desperate religious leaders who see their income vanishing.
Mark,
please tell me the "facts". take it away.
Evolution has the same evidence that I have and that is- Life Exists.
I am not ignorant of the "facts". you seem to be ignorant of the "facts" that aren't... well "facts". I wonder how many "facts" you hold to that have been discovered incorect by the same scientists who discovered them in the first place. your hub is so pretty with its artist renditions of the rise of man. I saw that in my "factual" science book from the 50's.
Evolutionists claim to be the "smartest" around. Then why am I soooo dissapointed? You are in fact "Creationists" in a large sence because you create "facts" all the time. If I am a squirrel and am looking for a nut all the time but can't find it, I suppose I would be happy to find a pine cone. I suppose then that I might cherrish my little pine cone because I have done sooooo much work to get "something". But in the end I never found the nut- did I?
And you sir- confuse adaptation with evolutioin. I have seen animals adapt hunting techniques from other animals, I have seen fish other than the "Clown fish" swim in sea anemones(never before thought possible). But, I have never seen "proof" that any species derived from another, nor fossile evidence that suggests the same.
Now when I was an evolutionist I challenged myself like I am challenging you. The Ace in your hand cannot continue to be "I am ignorant" because honestly sir, I am not.
LOL
You are not challenging anything - you are defending a position of faith.
Evolution happens - there is plenty of evidence for that. The very use of the word "evolutionist" tells me all I need to know. You are indeed ignorant of the facts - willfully so it would appear.
Sorry you ridiculous faith has been proven worthless And there is no god.
Oh dear - now you will have to take responsibility for yourself. Facts? LOL
Don't make me laugh - accusing "evolutionists" of making up facts when all you have is blind faith. LOLOLOLOL
Get an education - then we can talk.
I have a theory ,based on the idea that a race from this or other planets that are much more technologically advanced mixed their D.N.A. with our less advanced lifeform at somepoint in our past and this could be the reasoning behind the biblical idea of God creating us in his own image.Zacariah Stitchin's book about the "Annunaki" which in ancient arimaic litterally means "those who from the sky came" which was written in cunniform on egyption clay tablets found in egypt and interpeted by him as one of the few individuals who can read and interpet that language from the worlds archiologists.
no offense to anyone but religion was created by men however well meaning.
Of course it was. And if they understood their book - they would see that is what it says. :)
just as I suspected.
The giggly escape.
I'm sure you know this, but a weasel makes a chattery noise when it trys to escape a confrentation with a larger and far superior adversary. A shifty creature. I suppose it got that trait over millions of years of evolution as a survival tool. Works for them, works for you.
Now before I dismiss class, I need to give you some homework. Go back home and collect all of the "evidence" and "facts" that you hold fast to. When you have done that, research if those "facts" are upheld in your theory or if they have been abandoned.
The first theory that you will find obandoned is that we did not infact evolve from monkey's like you picture suggests. So to catch you up on your own belief- you guys now believe that monkeys and humans evolved from a sub-species. Man evolved from this species in a better direction than the monkey (hence we are more advanced).
Mark, you need to catch up on your own argument. Honest to God (haha) your theory is abandoned.
Someonewhoknows-
God is well known for making his entry from the sky. So, the egyptians ackowledge an entering from the sky? Interesting. I guess that would explain why many of the last egyptian rulers practicing Monotheism.
Mark says;
"Of course it was. And if they understood their book - they would see that is what it says. :)"
No use in debating Mark. He has a doctorate in Evolution and estensive knowledge of the Bible. More so than believers in fact.
Sorry - Laughing at your "facts" is not exactly a giggly escape. What esle do you want me to say|?
There is evidence that you choose to ignore in favor of LOL a book written 2000 years ago that you do not understand.
You keep saying "your theory is abandoned" over and over and over will not change the facts.
Sorry. I cannot change the facts. Say some more facts.
LOLOLOLOLOLO
Although,I wasn't referring to the bible,there is historical proof that there has been an effort to change the original bible,even leaving the admonition at the end of it,not to.Which I find an interesting fact in and of itself.Who ever changed it, not wanting anyone else to change it.Today there are many who claim that God would not allow it to happen.If,thats the case then why the admonition ?The admonition would be unnecessary.There are ongoing plans to change the wording to placate certain people.
But Mark,
You are the one with all the "facts", I havn't claimed any facts, I have just challenged your facts. you say "learn the facts", "ignorant of the facts", "measurable proof that evolution happens".
I'm waiting.
Giggle box. LOLOLOLOLO
I just wonder how educated you are in your belief. I havn't seen anything except attacks on believers. But that is what your type does when there are no new "facts". It's a way to keep busy until Popular Science releases a new edition.
I'll get you started. If you believe in evolution, then you must believe in;
1. The earth is millions of years old? yes/no
2. Anual ice rings in the arctic poles? yes/no
3. Man evolved from monkeys or apes? yes/no
4. Layers in the earths surface separate millions of years? yes/no
5. Single cellular life combined to make multi-cellular life? yes/no
6. Macro-evolution must have happened? yes/no
7. Fossiles exist because creatures were completely engulfed in mud and/or volcanic ash multiple times in history? yes/no
Ah - so you have no facts to back up your alternate "theory"? Thanks. Like I said when I wrote this - I am not interested in arguing the specifics of evolution - if you are too stupid to understand it that is your problem. I wrote it in response to the amount of ignorant religionists who attack evolution and claim they have an answer with ZERO evidence.
Now that you have admitted you have no evidence, I think we can leave it at that. If you care to educate yourself a little - we can talk.
There is a god with 100% lack of evidence - yes /no?
The bible says "The word was God"
Did you know that the Hebrew alphabet has it's origin in Human D.N.A.?
google it.
Someonewhoknows-
you are right, man has been trying to change the scripture for a very long time. It is to discridit the word. there is a true Apostolic Faith in existance. but she is a rare gem to find.
Sir Giggly Wiggly (Mark),
I didn't say I don't have facts. I said I havn't stated them.
Turns out I'm still not "Stupid" as you are the one who cannot read.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO (best I can replicate)
BTW- I would not want to argue the "specifics of evolution" if I were you either.
First of all, you would lose. Furthermore, you are behind in your theory as far as science is concerned (that is very evident). And Finally, you prefer the "you are ignorant, go get an education" bow out, and as I sated before has the characteristics of the highly evolved "Weasel".
You have some people dooped in thinking you are smart, but you really never say "anything" do you.
Once a weasel is cornered, it bears its teath and lashes out. Is that why you have called me "stupid, ignorant and foolish" most recently? Looks like a weasel, acts like a weasel.... well you know. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
then you say "If you care to educate yourself a little - we can talk." Sir Weasel, I am educated- trust me. I used to be an evolutionist. Not a mag reading one either. Amaze me.
Smarter yet, admit you really don't know anything and bow out- but please do not repeat the words "ignorant, stupid, educate" again.
LOL
I think we need to define educated here - Merely thinking that we evolved from monkeys does not do it for me.
Yup Jeebus loving you all right. :lol:
Ignorant, stupid, in need of education. Sorry - the truth hurts.
Stop by when you have read a book or two.
Just as I suspected.
Too bad huh? I suggest Richard Dawkins and a decent dictionary.
Jeebus would approve.
What if I told you I knew you would say Richard Dawkins as well? And what dictionary would you suggest? It must not be more than 2 years old because science has proven so much recently. (yes that was sarcasm)
Good, now we know where you got your education from. A dictionary (evidently 20 years old) and of corse Sir Silly Dawkins
I can see your Dawkins education- because like him you think all the "facts" are there. Even the Imagionary ones. You know the artistic renditions like posted on your hub above. You ever seen him retract comments proven wrong? Me neither. Old school. haha
You need faith more than me. Faith that those artistic paintings are really how it was.
my book has witnesses even from the enemy. Dead Sea scrolls note Daniel from outside of Babylon. Isn't that interesting given the date of the scrolls and the date "scientists" gave for the book of Daniel. (accused it of being much more recent) - I know you wouldn't know that.
BTW- I like your picture of Dawkins holding one of God's creations. LOLOLOLOLOLOLO
How silly to waste a life calling an orange an apple. So, angry he is too. But that's your leader. Silly Dawkins.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
That's all folks.
Sorry you are so uneducated. I feel for ya.
But not much..................
Anyway,
I think you have done enough harm to yourself for one day.
It would be extremely difficult for you to hear Jesus calling. One day you will meet Him, and I will too. Difference is, I will be prepaired- and you??? Well, I hope.
He says he calles us all. You know when. Maybe you were drunk, maybe you were younger. Why you did not listen is up to you. He did give us free will after all.
When he comes again- He does it from the sky. He never touches this mud ball again. He gives us a new flesh (new body). We live for eternity in a paradise with streams, trees, new animals... to much to mention. No prideful men, no boasting, no theft, no death... you get the point.
I hope you join us. Jesus loves you, yes. I would hate to believe in Him when He reveals Himself at my judgement. AKA Too Late.
LOLOL
I already met him. What is your problem? LOLO
Guess you don't get it huh? Too bad Jeeeeebus lub ya. :lol:
No, I didn't meet him yet. Were his feet on the ground?
Well, it doesn't take a genius to agree with this hub, but...
Long story short, I sometimes prowl around the forums watching you defend this subject to an undeath, and I like it. I also like that your name says 'know-les'...as in:
'Why don't you noodleheads try knowing less than you think you do, and maybe one day you might learn something...??'
I've decided to fan you, No Less.
The saddest thing about religion is that it is cyclically rational. In fact, Christianity is quite rational not spirtual; that is, it is rational in the sense of justification of ones's beliefs. This is my take on its obvious almost unbelievable flaws that "believers" "miraculously" overlook.
How is it possible for atheist to exist at all?!! If the believer believes that all reality has been created by God, how could we -existing "in" reality- somehow not be included? I don't understand the beliver's level of ignorance; I mean its almost preposterous. But let me continue. Suppose we take at face value that atheist exist because of the influence of Satan; how in the hell does Satan exist. In the apocryphal books Lucifers' "most perfect creation" designation is described. The masoretic text tell us that Lucifer was created by God as "his" most perfect creation as an "angel" but chose to dissent, and wage a coupe against God through war on his own; that is he "rebelled" against God.
How is this possible? An omniscient-omnipotent being created something "he" didn't realize what it was going to do?! Ridiculous! It is ridiculous because not knowing what one creates in the face of absolute power is an utter contradiction in terms. But, it is poignant to note here, that contradictory behavior plagues believer's thoughts and behaviors. Be that as it may, omnipotent power and all-knowing omniscience is incompatible with the "facts" of the account of Lucifers' perfection status and Gods overall being.
Another thing that invetibly seeps in a believer's rationalizations is this thing called "free will." Free will suggests that sentient beings have the ability to choose what they want. Beliver's and especially these new-agey Christians are keen to offer that as a rational argument for the ability for things to be "free" to follow their own path. The problem is, is that this is utter nonsense. If God created a being to make decisions, whatever decisions it makes -it is doing what God himself -omnipotent and omniscient- created it to do!!!! There is no such thing as true autonomy for something that was deliberately created to make choices that involves what it does and thinks as it exists!! If you make choices, you were created to make choices in the first place; everything you do is incontravertably a result of God - good or bad. I am somehow reminded of Lucifer when I look at this.
Not only is righteousness created by God but evil too!!! Christianity and other religions that rely on this duality is sadly createing people who cannot reason past the noses on their faces. And why should they, when they have this ridiculous cyclical dialectic constantly making them battle with their own thoughts. I can understand why they just give up, and relinquish thinking alltogether.
This process makes them mindboggling - almost spectacular believers in faiths. Someone made a very astute comment earlier that believer's defend their faiths they way the do, because they have invested large anounts of energy and time into assimilating it into their lives. I would go further and say the key factor in this investment is sheer emotionalism. Emotions are the pathway to manipulation; emotions are also the crux of the physiological. The Russian behaviorist Pavlov proved that you can get a dog to respond to a bell as if it was the basis for why he exists as a dog; make him salivate and beg for food - give him a little tasty treat, and he believes in the bell as if his life depended on it! We can only stand back, and watch them. With their mindsets they have a fundamentally paradoxical faith disposition that is irrational by category. Stop trying to reason with them - everyone. You're just wasting your time.
It would be easier if you just joined the light.
anything more is wasting you time.
If I join the light - does that mean I have to start behaving the way you people do? Not sure I could do that......
explain how you act, and I will tell you if you would need to change.
sbeaker- wants to have your baby.
He wrote "Well, it doesn't take a genius to agree with this hub"
So, I guess that's why I don't agree with this hub. I am a genius.
The two are not neccessarily mutually exclusive. God can be the reason why and the spark that set the human condition in motion, but not neccessarily how we humans came to be.
Also, insulting the intelligence of people who adhere to a belief other than your own does not make your argument any more valid. It just makes you a jerk.
Iron Viper- that's absurd.
Mark,
On a serious note- I have read some of your other hubs, and they seem to be written well. I have concluded that you are probably no dummy. Why then does this hub seem influenced and shallow. Religion is not your passion and I can see that, but Dawkins has really clung to some dated and false info to have a best seller.
It seems influenced and shallow to you because it proves your beliefs are worthless garbage.
Look inside where all the answers are - like it tells you to in your book - and you will see the real reason it upsets you so. ;)
upset? No, not me. sorry.
surprised maybe, but not upset.
I've read Dawkins works, watched his video's- he holds fast to core evolutionary theory, theory that has been proven wrong. The most amazing thing about him is that he never quits, nor adapts to the changes (which will prove false as well). He also has some devoted groupies(none of which I would want following me around)
The big one to go down next will be carbon dating. It already has some major flaws and the dates are getting smaller all the while(even by your text book scientists). Shoot, give science 2 more years and they will find the earths real age.
LOLOLOL
Evolution proven wrong?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
That was worth a lot of LOLs
1. The earth is millions of years old? yes/no
2. Anual ice rings in the arctic poles? yes/no
3. Man evolved from monkeys or apes? yes/no
4. Layers in the earths surface separate millions of years? yes/no
5. Single cellular life combined to make multi-cellular life? yes/no
6. Macro-evolution must have happened? yes/no
7. Fossiles exist because creatures were completely engulfed in mud and/or volcanic ash multiple times in history? yes/no
These 7- proven wrong.
hahahahaahahahahahahahah aaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha break hahahahahahahahahaha
I like you mark, you are fresh.
Dude - you have already won all the LOLs - But thanks for the laughs. :)
__________________________________________
if the lines represent a layer in the earth
__________________________________________
and the letters within the lines are
__________________________________________
individual species from bones collected,
__________________________________________
Why are the Letters E,I,R.... in all layers?
And why do those layers represent "millions"
of years? Why are those layers flat? Were
there no mountains, valleys in the past?
__________________________________________
if the lines represent a layer in the earth
__________________________________________
and the letters within the lines are
__________________________________________
individual species from bones collected,
__________________________________________
Why are the Letters E,I,R.... in all layers?
And why do those layers represent "millions"
of years? Why are those layers flat? Were
there no mountains, valleys in the past?
____________
I can't claim them all Mark, you are hillarious.
Dude - your ridiculous postings are now being marked as spam by the hubpages software. I am not going to keep un-deleting them.
See - even the spam filter knows you are full of hot air. :lol:
Mark, well done on the hub, its almost a shame the "sooner or later"'s wisdom will no longer be shared here, I don't think he meant to be funny, but I had a fun read regardless. I almost feel like inviting him to mine, just for a giggle.
OK, my two cents on the topic... we would still be living in caves if there were not the odd theory put out there by someone.. some theories are correct, some turn out to be bogus. I suppose if people spend their lives chasing one they become blind to its flaws. Maybe Darwin's utterings were not spot on, but at least a tad more feasible than the alternatives we are being asked to swallow. take care & keep up the good fight
LOL
Well _ I won't be deleting any of his rantings - but the hubpages software will probably mark it as spam if he keeps on dumping the same garbage over and over.:lol:
Now where have I heard that before?... dumping the same garbage again and again- even machines are getting sick of it I guess.
Yeah - but - if you think about it - that is how religion gets spread - people keep on dumping the same old garbage over and over and over and louder and louder.
At least the days where he could have had me stripped and flogged until I accepted jesus are over. :)
darn, no stripping and flogging? what is this world coming to? I have a few provocative blogs on various subjects related to this kind of brain-numbing, if you're bored with your critics, you can have a go at mine.
no, I wasn't sure why my post didn't make it in. then I re-typed it, and there it was twice. Their software can't keep up. haha.
That beeing said, there has been no debate here at all. You can't prove that God does not exist and I have loads of proof that evolution doesn't happen.
"At least the days where he could have had me stripped and flogged until I accepted jesus are over."
I would never flog you Mark, smothered you in gravy and NU-Grow products perhaps. But flog? no
Ugh...I get indigestion reading how ignorant and blind people can be. Why must we all be sheep? Grow some balls and actually question your religion and once you do you will see how much it falls apart.
"I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours"~ Stephen Roberts (defend that if you can)
"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep-seated need to believe." ~ Carl Sagan (this is very sad)
"Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful." ~ Seneca the Younger (this is so true and scary)
I'm just sayin'...
@sooner or later- Great hub, but you must understand that mark all the other evolutionary atheist have nothing left, but their evolution religion so except them to defend their beliefs like the many other false religions(muslims, mormons, and new age), except evolutionist tend to be more violent(hilter, stalin, poi, eugenics labs etc.) but unlike the others they try to call their religion “science“. Darwinist seem to think variations, genetic recombination, adaptations, mutations conjugation within a kind + TIME god= apes to human, but that's simply impossible. "The amount of information in the 3 billion base pairs in the DNA in every human cell has been estimated to be equivalent to that in 1,000 books of encyclopedia size. If humans were 'only' 4% different this still amounts to 120 million base pairs, equivalent to approximately 12 million words, or 40 large books? of information. This is surely an impossible barrier for mutations (random changes) to cross" Dr. Don Batten, Ph.D. The Timegod is their last leg.
The biggest fallacies in the evolutionary atheist argument the are a philosophical pseudo scientific religion with no base they have no logical answer for how it all began, where did the information came from, but without a superior answer to that they’ll still proclaim there is no God. It’s a dizzying intellect.
The only "wise" thing you Atheists have done is not engage at "any" depth. If I wasn't educated on the matter I would not either- furthermore I would not write a highly oppinionated hub on a subject.
Mark told me to get an "education", and his education on the matter is "The Blind Watchmaker" by we ALL know who, and some common dictionary.
@ thetruthhurts,
u are absolutely right. I have soooooo much information that "proves" evolution wrong. Of corse they will not engage.
If Jesus called the Pharisees "Vipers" because they were spiteful, would he call Atheists "Weasels" because of their slippery antics.
lol
Weasles?
LOL - Your christian "morals" are showing. Really people - get a life - read a book or something. Like a dictionary......
Hi Mark, this is topic always gets me worked up.. I just had to respond. To start with I use to be atheist like yourself and admired the evolution theory, or to go even deeper, the big bang theory. It's what I was thought in school and did not know any different. When I became a Christian, I did not even have one person ever convince me to do so. I simply had an encounter with "God" and he reviled himself to me. It was not until after my conversion that it all made sense to me. God made it so that it's only by faith that you come to know him. evolution does exist in the sense that things evolve into different forms etc. All the dogs came from two dogs and evolved into many different kind of dogs... The part that takes more faith to believe than creation, is the belief that we evolved from nothing. If you really want to know the truth Mark all you have to do is seek Him 'God' and he may just surprise the hell out of you!
lol
Reviled? Like I said people - a dictionary is in order here.
@ tyhil - I don't really care that you managed to mistake the bliss that comes with a connection to the rest of the universe as a magical super being in the sky. You are wrong and your ridiculous religion causes nothing but conflict.
And laughter. LOLOLOL
Read this then tell me what you think.
GOD vs. Science
A science professor begins his school year with a lecture to the students, 'Let me explain the problem science has with religion.' The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
'You're a Christian, aren't you, son?'
'Yes sir,' the student says.
'So you believe in God?'
'Absolutely. '
'Is God good?'
'Sure! God's good.'
'Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?'
'Yes.'
'Are you good or evil?'
'The Bible says I'm evil.'
The professor grins knowingly. 'Aha! The Bible!' He considers for a moment. 'Here's one for you. Let's say there's a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?'
'Yes sir, I would.'
'So you're good...!'
'I wouldn't say that.'
'But why not say that? You'd help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn't.'
The student does not answer, so the professor continues. 'He doesn't, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Hmmm? Can you answer that one?'
The student remains silent.
'No, you can't, can you?' the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax.
'Let's start again, young fella. Is God good?'
'Er...yes,' the student says.
'Is Satan good?'
The student doesn't hesitate on this one. 'No.'
'Then where does Satan come from?'
The student falters. 'From God'
'That's right. God made Satan, didn't he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?'
'Yes, sir.'
'Evil's everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything, correct?'
'Yes.'
'So who created evil?' The professor continued, 'If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.'
Again, the student has no answer. 'Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?'
The student squirms on his feet. 'Yes.'
'So who created them?'
The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. 'Who created them?' There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. 'Tell me,' he continues onto another student. 'Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?'
The student's voice betrays him and cracks. 'Yes, professor, I do.'
The old man stops pacing. 'Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?'
'No sir. I've never seen Him.'
'Then tell us if you've ever heard your Jesus?'
'No, sir, I have not.'
'Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?'
'No, sir, I'm afraid I haven't.'
'Yet you still believe in him?'
'Yes.'
'According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son?'
'Nothing,' the student replies. 'I only have my faith.'
'Yes, faith,' the professor repeats. 'And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.'
At the back of the room another student stands quietly for a moment before asking a question of His own. 'Professor, is there such thing as heat?'
'Yes,' the professor replies. 'There's heat.'
'And is there such a thing as cold?'
'Yes, son, there's cold too.'
'No sir, there isn't.'
The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. 'You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don't have anything called 'cold'. We can hit up to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees.'
'Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.'
Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.
'What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?'
'Yes,' the professor replies without hesitation. 'What is night if it isn't darkness?'
'You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? That's the meaning we use to define the word.'
'In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you?'
The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. 'So what point are you making, young man?'
'Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.'
The professor's face cannot hide his surprise this time. 'Flawed? Can you explain how?'
'You are working on the premise of duality,' the student explains. 'You argue that there is life and then there's death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought.'
'It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.'
'Now tell me, professor. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?'
'If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.'
'Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?'
The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.
'Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?'
The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided.
'To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.'
The student looks around the room. 'Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor's brain?' The class breaks out into laughter.
'Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor's brain, felt the professor's brain, touched or smelt the professor's brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.'
'So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?'
Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable.
Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. 'I guess you'll have to take them on faith.'
'Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,' the student continues. 'Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?'
Now uncertain, the professor responds, 'Of course, there is. We see it everyday. It is in the daily example of man's inhumanity to man. It is in the multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.'
To this the student replied, 'Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and
Meaningless crap that shows how desperate you are to have more people believe the same garbage you do?
And you lost a bit at the bottom where the "atheist" professor sees the error of his ways and converts to Islam. :lol:
I still believe in the theory of Adam and Eve. The faces of earlier humans might have been a bit different from us but they were not monkeys. Monkeys have resemblance to Humans but that does not mean that they were our ancestors.
always amusing how a short comment inevitable provokes a really really long posting.... I got all the way to the heat analogy before I dosed off. Not a man of few words myself I have to admire the typing skills, or was that copy & paste?
@ Vizey - LOL And you think I will be impressed with some one who has the IQ of a 5-year-old?
The "theory" of Adam and Eve. Is that the "scientific, peer reviewed theory" ? LOLOLOLOL
Monkeys were not our ancestors. You are right. Luckily the theory of evolution does not say that so you are safe.
Stupid - but safe.
@ Lee - pretty sure that was copy and paste. I don't think the comment box will allow the rest of his tale though.
The Adam and Eve theory should at best be seen as incomplete. a neighbor of mine bred dogs, if you intermix the genes of any animal too much it starts becoming a very weak breed in deed. Besides that, who did Cain & Able have kids with? were the the original MoFus?
at least I finally got Mark to realize that we didn't come from monkeys- but now he calls someone else "stupid" for saying the same thing he did halfway through this. Not to mention his picture in the hub of man evolving from a monkey.
Sir weasel, you are making headway in your theory wich actually means you are closer to mine. haha
incredible. LOLOLO
I hadn't realized just how ignorant people who believe the clap trap in the bible were until I met you guys.
A monkey? LOLOLOLOLOL
Very well written, Mark. I'm surprised your comments section isn't riddled with verbal bullets as your comments in the forums are.
@debris: If there is a god and he has always existed, there was/is no beginning or end of the universe. It has always existed and always will. That's why Big Bang doesn't work for creationism. So if you believe in god, there is no origin to the known universe. Period.
Still astounds me that religionists claim god as their voice and continue to write and say the things they do with such disrespect and disregard for other humans when it is clearly a sin in Christianity to do so.
But I digress...
@ Daniel - it is a waste of time. They already have all the answers so......
I like your digression, but they have a ready made excuse. They are not perfect, but they are trying and genuinely repentant so they are good to go.. :lol:
The whole argument is bogus, as you point out. Science advances through criticism, questioning, and challenges to theory. The best theory eventually wins. The history of science is littered with weird theories that have been discredited. Evolution is still the best theory WITHIN SCIENCE for explaining the origin of species and the development of species over time.
If Creationists want to join the scientific discussion about evolution they can, but they have to play on the terms of scientific debate. It's a specific conversation with preset rules. If scientists want to join a religion they can do that as well, but the religion will have its own rules for discussion. They are two different conversations, parallel in some ways and addressing some of the same questions, but they aren't oppositional. Anyway that's what I think.
I think (if I understand your argument) that you are saying that per Dawkins the theory of evolution proves that God cannot exist? I don't see a need to take the argument that far, although I appreciate why some people do see that need. IMO it's an apples/oranges argument to begin with.
What's more, I think that at least in the U.S. most of these 'creation science' advocates KNOW it's an apples/oranges argument and they are very deviously fighting a battle that is purely political from the start. They know damn well their theories aren't science, and they know you know that too, but they don't care. All that matters to them is, can they force their stupid religion into a public classroom? That's the goal--it only involves evolution in the most surface way, as a crowbar to pry open the door to forced idiocy.
Since religionists are cooking up this fight to begin with for their own political reasons, it makes no sense to debate them on their own idiot terms. To borrow a popular phrase, trying to debate scientific theories with a religionist is like trying to teach a pig to sing. It wastes the teacher's time and it annoys the pig.
But it's a fine hub, Mark. Surprised the dark side is still staying away from it.
LOL
Thanks Pam - these lying sacks of shit are staying away because they know I wrote this for them and will be only too pleased to tell them what I think of them. Child abusers - all of them. Teaching this crap to their children to scare them into believing.
Well...here's my 1.8 cents. Evolution is carnal (physical) evidence and the only acceptable scientific theory. Evolution makes sense and therefore...I accept that it is fact.
Now...God is spiritual (not carnal). The belief in God was never intended to be carnal but religion saw a chance to gain power and finance through manipulation of the masses by mixing up the spiritual and carnal.....AKA..The lazy man's way to riches and power!
God is about emotion, karma,love, hate,good, evil, etc. Evolution is about the science of the physical world. The religious writings are about the works of the spiritual world. The writings try to use carnal things to explain spiritual points. The religious leadership doesn't want people to realize this because they would lose their 10 percent of goodies every week. The threat of eternal hell = preacher's porky pockets. (Don't eat pork really meant don't be like pigs.)
In closing: Science needs to quit defending the facts and get back to work discovering. Religion needs to quit attacking science and get to work on proving their spirituality by actually feeding starving people along with helping widows and orphans, etc.
Let science be science.
Let God be God.
I don't understand what the big deal with evolution is anyway with Christians. I have found through the years, through debates with my fellow Christians, that most people do not WANT to believe in evolution. Most people have been conditioned their whole life to believe themselves to be better then other animals.
Often times in my life I have been criticized by other people for simply saying humans are animals. It is a simple fact, but people cannot wrap their mind around it. One time at work I was speaking to a woman who just came back from maternity leave. I simply stated that it must be hard to leave your child to come back to work, but at least she had the first few weeks to bond with her new daughter. My mistake seemed to be mentioning that, for horses, the first few weeks are the most important time for bonding. My other coworkers had a fit. To think I would compare a human with a horse.
People just use religion to cover their own egos. They do not want to believe that great, intelligent humans like themselves could have originated from such stupid animals. The funny part is it is really easy to show people the principles behind evolution by explaining it through selective breeding.
People do not have a problem with me picking two animals to breed so that I have a baby with a certain trait, but the problem arises from being able to convince them that I could create a whole new animal. I have convinced some religious people that evolution could be possible by taking common equine deformities or mutations to create an animal that would not be recognized as a horse.
No one will ever convince the religious masses as a whole that evolution did happen. The masses do not want to believe we are connected to animals. After all, humans were created in Gods image and animals were created for humans (sarcasm is apparent). The bible said the heavens and the earth were created in seven days. It never said how long seven days was in Gods time. Why could not God have created animals to evolve over time randomly or by his design.
PGRUNDY-
"If Creationists want to join the scientific discussion about evolution they can, but they have to play on the terms of scientific debate."
They do join the discussion about evolution- problem is, your scientists are too proud and won't retract false information. Then my lovely tax dollars pay your stupid teachers to PREACH this garbage to our kids. I've said it once, i've said it a thousand times. if you read above and you read my hub, you will find even a few of these "facts" that are proven wrong(anual ice rings???) 4 one
Then sir Weasel still acts like he knew that people didn't come from monkeys all along. haha
PATHETIC
and you still don't win, you never win. you have government funding and you can't come up with anything that holds the test of time. All you have is pride, Silly Dilly Dawkins(who uses the same denial formula) and his Weasel Groupie Followers Like... mark.
mark foul language shows his true intellect(that of a delusional sailor out to sea way to long)
@pam- put down that darwin kool-aid before OD.
Myself and sooner than later have challengen mark, if refuses as many evolutionist atheist refuses to debate creationist, not because they know they are right, but they fear they are wrong, and mixed with pride that fear is mind controlling beyond repair. You see we creation apologist know of the evolutionary word shell game, and we see right through it, so until you debate mark quite your potty mouth.
sure laugh about it see if I care. I do not consider myself a religious person. It's obvious you have absolutely no concept of God at all! Can I ask, have you ever heard of Ravi Zacharias? You might better be able to relate to him.
@ Tyhill - what has that got to do with evolution exactly? Like I said - I do not care if you have mistaken a connection to the rest of the universe for something with a personality.
But please go ahead and explain why that has anything to do with the scientific theory of evolution.
I think it would be best if you "educate" us mark.
LOLOLO ;)
Dig deep man.
I do not think you are interested in learning anything. You seem to have all the answers you need. And certainly your behavior is very christian. ATTACK IT IF IT SOUNDS SCARY. LOLOLOLO JEBUS would be very proud.
Hey - if attacking scientific knowledge makes you feel better about the fact that your beliefs are hate mongering garbage - knock yourself out - I am happy to provide the free therapy.
But when you stick it in children's heads - that is child abuse. Have you scared any kids today with stories of lying scientists and burning in hell if they do not follow the rules?
Good for you - trust me - they will despise you if ever they get a real edumakashun. Best to keep them out of skool huh? lolololol And the ignorance persists.
"attacking scientific knowledge"
booo hooo hoo
"But when you stick it in children's heads"
you must be talking about the federally funded theory of evolution taught in our public schools?
you are getting smarter mark. wait..... did you hear something? A Bell? ohh, schools out. Good night.
homework you ask? yes, read the book of Matthew tonight and there will be a lesson in the morning.
BTW- if I hear you say "the facts" one more time, you are getting an "F" on the subject.
You havn't stated any "facts", just your weasel avoiding antics.
Jesus doesn't mind if I call a rodent a rat either. it is what it is. He called the Pharisees Vipers- and they were snakes. get it?
Sorry the facts have proven your beliefs to be garbage.
In my country it is illegal to indoctrinate children into cults.
Get it? Oh - I get it all right. Jebus wants you to attack scientific theories and screw up your children LOLOLOL
Does it mmake you feel better?
Mark , you absolutely have to read spoonerthelatter's hub, its hilarious!
LOL - You are right - looks like he signed up just to write that crap and because of me.
That is funny though - I think my favorite line is the one about even the ancient civilizations knowing there was a god. lol
Before this pesky scientific knowledge got in the way lol
He is right about one thing though - I find "creation science" scary because there is no such thing.
Anyone who is prepared to lie to themselves to that extent is downright dangerous and scary.
well DuH! Mark, can you prove they didn't know god "go fish"!
I must admit, I am pretty scared of "creation science" science too, bet those heathens at the inquisition weren't too fond of it either.
People that belief in God are mad and ignorant and so are the people that don't.
Belief is ignorance, you accept blindinly one idea or another.
Myself, I use my own inteligence to found out a resonable understanding of a subject than a master to take me forward.
First, how can a matter, a dead dull matter envolve? This is silly indeed. Life can't possible comes from matter. Life comes from life. I never see my car giving birth to another car, lol!!!!!!!!!!
Proof of God, mark refusing to debate any creationist in order to holdfast to his religious “pseudoscientific” beliefs, but spending 95% or more of his time defending his faith in the religious forums. That's all the proof I need.
mark, your hub was worth critisizing. It is whining and yet so informative into the minds of your superiors.
it also taught me how to avoid "weasel antics" in the future, but the funniest thing that I discovered is the "giggle button" every time I hit "post comment" it was sure to be followed by some school girl giggling.
I had to play "alvin and the chipmunks" songs in the background to get the full effect http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aemOU1OzvAI but you had me laughing for a good long while. thanks.
God versus Evolution, and the beat goes on. Neither side is giving in and both sides believe that they are right.
Neither really has the proof to make their case. God believers say that the evolutionists don't have any link or physical proof to substantiate their claims. The God believers keep quoting from the bible(s) but that is not proof.
If God created us, then he did a pretty poor and imperfect creation. This started way back with Adam and Eve. They were created imperfectly and they failed to obey him. Things never improved after that and it only took a short time before Cain killed Abel. Evil trumped God from the Garden of Eden and continuing till now. People are as bad or worse than they were before BC.
Because the first law of Thermodynamics is at odds with the Theory of Relativity doesn't make the case for the God believers.
Creation doesn't have to involve the God of the Bible. Creation could be part of some scientific experiment by beings that unknown to us. In any case, the experiment is a disaster that few would choose to embrace as their work.
If humans were a manufactured product, it would not be viable because of its some many defects and lack of quality control. Humans are an impressive yet faulty creation. There has not been any improvement over tens of billions of humans have been produced.
This failure also goes to the Earth and its environment. The universe is a work in progress, littered with debris and worthless objects.
So in my view, there is no viable theory to explain why we exist.
oppinion duck-
come to "New evidence for evolution!!! you were created"
a true debate is happening there, with respect for eachother.
sooner than later
Thanks, if there was convincing evidence there wouldn't be any need for debate.
LOLOLOLOL
There is NO debate LOLOLOL
All there is is a bunch of religonists attacking science.
LOLOLOLOLOLOL
science "debates" itself. surely you have seen that?
Giggle button in three, two, one...
Opinion duck-
"Creation doesn't have to involve the God of the Bible. Creation could be part of some scientific experiment by beings that unknown to us. In any case, the experiment is a disaster that few would choose to embrace as their work."
I didn't know people believed the movie "Men In Black" was a religion until now.
sir weasel- hit it. LOLOLOLOLO
I am sorry, I have no idea what you two are trying to say.
Perhaps, English is not your language.
And now I really don't care.
bye bye
‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit that in this one complaint—and Mr [sic] Gish is but one of many to make it—the literalists are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today. ‘… Evolution therefore came into being as a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.’
Michael Ruse
tic toc mark
LOL
Wow - yum reely am skeered.
Evolution does no such thing. Yes - it proves that there is no god, but that is it. You have to develop your own ideology after that. And if attacking scientific knowledge is what you come up with...............
lol! How? The biggest fallacies in the evolutionary atheist argument the are a philosophical pseudo scientific religion with no base they have no logical answer for how it all began, where did the information came from, but without a superior answer to that they’ll still proclaim there is no God. It’s a dizzying intellect. Michael is also an Evolutionary atheist Still waiting for that proof that disproves God. Come on, give it your best shot!
thetruthhurts-
They won't debate on that level, and for good reason too.
I think we should leave them alone at this point.
I don't know about you, but I am excited that Biblical "stories" are being backed by archeological discoveries every day(even confirmed by Pagan Cities) and evolutionists are running out of dead end streets.
If they think they have "truth" let it be. I don't want them in my church. Too proud.
LOL
There is no "debate".
What we do have is a bunch of skeeered religionists who dun relised that they is rong.
Oh well. No evidence of god.
Evolution proves there is no god.
Wachagonado? LOLOLOLOLOL
Kill sum peple - it tha Kritstian thang 2 do.
Jeebus will lub u4 it.
Sticking with your religious actions huh mark? No surprise there. You right sooner, spiderpam said the same thing. Maybe one day he'll question his church dogma and find the truth, but until then see ya around mark. I still hope you're an angry teen though.
Hi Mark
With all due respect,
it seems that you are very committed to your belief in the Scientists that believe and push evolution theory; A theory that completely debunks God from society. Scientists who support evolution and the people who believe everything the scientists clam to be true are "Atheists". One of the biggest reasons why evolution gets so much support in the first place is because it gives people the freedom to do what ever they want! It's also is tax supported by the people, and is the only theory being taught in our public schools. The scientists are continually coming up with speculations to their claims that support the evolution theory. What get's me so angry is that fact that I do not support it! Neither does millions of other angry Christians out there who do not want to pay the evolutionary scientists either and have it taught to our children. That’s why so many christen schools have started, that are completely funded by the parents. This is why I posted a comment to your hub! I along with millions of others are being cheated. Just a thought but do you think it’s by accident that so many people around the world put there trust in a book! Along with the creation scientist that support it’s clams. Or it’s by accident that so many people willingly give large amounts of money to support what it represents. It's all given, not one dollar comes from tax support. You see if evolution were a worthy cause then this world has no hope! I believe if you removed the Christian church from the world the world would go to hell. That’s what the bible says is going to happen too. God has given people the freedom to choose between these two belief systmes. I am confident that if the evolution theory had to pay its own way just as the creation theory does, that it would kill the evolution thery, and it would die slowy!!!!!!!
Tyhil27 - with all due respect, that is utter bollox and your opinion is completely worthless.
Sorry you are so uneducated. Did your parents keep you away from school? Sorry - that is awful. I consider it to be child abuse and it should be illegal.
Your church is responsible for many of the world's ills - and you are just propagating the hatred - right now.
The only correct thing you have said is that a lot of christians are angry people - I can agree with you there.
Stop it mark you know that’s a lie your church has killed more than any other religion period. You insulting someone you doesn't agree with you with no proof to counter his opinion is the maze your evolutionary atheist put down before you decided if they don't agree with you let’s kill them you guys are worst than any terrorist, but you try to hide behind the cloud of science and progress which is a complete lie. If you are going to keep lying, I’ll stick around some has to tell the truth about your religion.
I may disagree with you but you take on the comments to your hubs. Others such as b4U2C fill hub pages with his preaching but doesn't have the answers to take on comments.
He writes, "God alone conceived, designed, and ordered life—all of it, from man to the earth to the entire universe. Only His mind could conceive it; only His power could create it; and only His ability could achieve it."
As for this hub's subject, does it really matter?
tyhill, thetruthhurts-
let it be, he's baiting you. have you ever seen depth? no, and you are not going to. I think he needs page activity for some reason. Let this evolutionary mud hole dry up. come to my page and talk amongst supporters. I have some good facts to discuss with you.
Remember when Jesus told the disciples to stomp the dust from thier shoes? this is a good time to leave and stomp the dust.
Thanks sooner, I'm Done!
lol
I think you guys are confusing "facts" with "desperate need to believe there is a super being that will make me live forever" LOLOLOLOL
Thanks for the laughs.
Sorry your ridiculous beliefs have been proven wrong. Tell me about the dinosaurs again - they died in the flood right? LOLOLOLOL
WOW this is long! This article says nothing about science or facts just angry ranting. It seems to be a trend with you guys. Didn’t you see all the flaws with radiometric dating and carbon dating? Can you really explain why the oldest verified records of human life go to just 4500-10,000 years ago lining up perfectly with the bible? Or the fact that the earliest civilizations drew pictures of dinosaurs how could they draw something they never saw? If we are just random junk you can’t say imagination. And how do your really explain the fact that there are no and I mean NO transitional forms? Ida was recalled after real scientist examined her and stated she was just a lemur. And most of the skeleton in the museum are simply different races of people or different types of apes they put them in order to fool you, but there is no evolution occurring. And a lot of the fossils are things we can still see today with absolutely no change? And why would you believe in something wrought with such fraud over 15 widely publicized frauds and some not so publicized. peppered moths and other were in my textbook even after they were proven lies. And one last thing have you noticed most of your “proofs” are simply drawing by evolutionist of what they want to see? Is that science or imagining art class? I don’t expect you to answer just more ridicule I guess, but maybe you should consider the fact that you have been fed a lie.
I was taught evolution, but something didn’t make sense it took years but now I a Christian and believe in the Creation account and the Flood account because that’s where the evidence really leads. I have noticed that no atheist will ever really debate a Christian. Ever! Maybe they just want to say atheist, hearing the truth would convert them. mark you have no clothes on. It's obvious you no you’re wrong looking at these exchanges, but it's your choice. If ever get sick of defending your beliefs and want the truth just sincerely ask God to reveal it to you. You wont regret it. Have a blessed day.
LOL
I would happily "debate" you if you had anything to say. There is more than enough factual proof that evolution happens and only a fool could "conclude from the evidence" that a flood wiped out the dinosaurs recently.
I have one word - "Fossils"
What is your come back? - "bible"? :lol:
First I must thank you for not swearing in your response. “Evolution? the Fossils Say No!” is a great book I suggest you read before talking about fossils. Fossils don't prove evolution. It simply proves something died, but you evolutionist put your evolutionary imagination to work so that those bones show what you want to see. “The interpretation of the fossil record is not evidence. It is an excuse for the absence of evidence. The creation and flood account correctly predicted that the fossil record would show fully functional, "isolated" populations of organisms that resist change. Fossil evidence confirms the laboratory observations and predictions. The evidence supports the supernatural explanation for species.” Did you see the story about Ida it was retracted quietly after a huge media blitz because in the same rock sediment was found a an ape hand which conflicts with the story they wanted you to believe, but it makes the flood account the more likely conclusion for those not brainwashed by evolution delusion. If there was a universal flood what would the evidence be? Millions of dead buried by water in sedimentary rock(fossilized). When you speak of fossils you must know about the geologic column. Do you know where it is located? Is it real or a chart evolutionist put together to sell their millions of years nonsense. Did you know if there was such a column it would be 100 miles thick! Tell me are the ages of the bones decided by the column or vice versa. And why are there Polystrate trees standing straight up through sedimentary layers that are supposedly millions of years old and why are some of them upside down? A universal flood perhaps? While you’re off trying to find answers from other atheists. Just consider the fact you’ve been fed a lie. 2 Thessalonians 2:11, 2 Pet 3:3-9
LOL
Quoting the bible will not impress me. Neither will your rudimentary knowledge of science. You are the one who has been brainwashed sweetheart. There is more than enough evidence that evolution happens and more than enough evidence that the planet is millions of years old.
Floods do not fossils make. Regurgitating these atrocious arguments is not going to convince me of anything other than the fact you are in serious denial and need therapy.
To those nay-sayers, especially IlikeUKaccents: I've read "Evolution: the fossils say no!" and it is the most opinionated, falsified book I've had the displeasure to read. Evolution is more than a "theory", since in science a Theory is as high up the chain as one can get. Since Evolution can be proven by millions of bits of information that truly qualify as facts, it is accepted by people who really understand science. those who do not hold out for belief and lack of proof as "evidence" of divine creation. Well, maybe God did create everything, but He did so through evolution, which, I might add, continues to occur even as we speak.
the "problem" with carbon and other dating systems is long ago in the past. the techniques were once less accurate because of the newness of the testing. these innaccuracies have been corrected and the testing has been oroven extrememly accurate for more than 60 years now. Get over it and read some up-to-date literature about the subject instead of reading old Chick Tracts that use way-out-of-date info.
To equate evolutionists with atheism is also a false bit of information. I believe in evolution and I am as much a Christian as you are. I simply chose to take the Bible as no speaking to science and science not speaking to the Bible.
I do not dispute your right to read and believe the Bible, but do not pass off the prose written there as scientific fact - it is not and it was never meant to be. It is belief, not scientific fact. As I have been told many times by Christians on these hubs, God does not reveal Himself through facts and tests. One either believes or ones does not, but do not pass your beliefs off as a subject schools should be teaching or say that anyone who holds a differing opinion is somehow wrong because we do not agree with Bibilical accounts.
The place for Biblical teachings is in the church and the place for scientific education is in the schools. I would be heartily disturbed if my minister began to lecture me from the pulpit about mathematics or English literature. So am I also disturbed when people start calling for creationism to be taught as a science, when it is not science and until it gains a whole lot more genuine, fact-based outlook, will never be.
Just as science can not prove that God didn't create everything, neither can you prove that He did. I happen to believe that God usede evolution just as he used physics and other natural laws.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
"Evolution is more than a "theory", since in science a Theory is as high up the chain as one can get."
@Chef Jeff: There is no 'chain' for theories. No theory is 'higher up' than another theory. Science is not performed by consensus. Scientists don't vote on the correctness or accuracy of a theory.
"Since Evolution can be proven by millions of bits of information that truly qualify as facts, it is accepted by people who really understand science"
I have undergraduate and graduate degrees in science and I really understand science. I don't accept macro evolution as fact.
Thank you Chef Jeff. I really do not know what to say to people like UKaccents. There is more than enough evidence that evolution happens - plus combined with numerous other sciences - there can be no doubt that it does. Agreed - the exact mechanism and workings are still not 100% clear.
But - how do you work your beliefs into it? As far as I am concerned - there cannot have been a developmental destination in mind. This is - if there was, then what would have been the point and how on earth could that have been done and still be "evolution,"?
I mean - I could kind of go with a creator that just threw it all into the pot and waited to see what came out. But to have planned it - with us as the destination - and culmination I might add?
Nicomp - are you referring to Popperian, Kuhnian or Feyerabendian philosophy?
Kuhn and Feyerabend proponents would argue otherwise - science is by consensus, hence paradigms. Even Popperian philosophy supports evolutionary scientists i.e. falsification of individual hypotheses.
In fact, some theories are higher up than other theories - Relativity supersedes Newton's work, yet Newton's work is still used and is regarded as a viable 'Theory,' under most circumstances.
I also have a scientific degree and write extensively about the scientific method and the philosophy of science. I really understand science, especially biology, and I have seen no better explanation than macro-evolution.
I am not sure where you learned your scientific method, but you may want to reread your philosophy of science. Ultimately, it looks as if you have as tenuous a grasp of evolutionary theory as I have of computer science, i.e none.
I notice that when Lita and SweetiePie showed their qualifications in the forums, she was shot down in flames. Some double standards going on, methinks.
Well, Mark, what I am saying is that I have religious beliefs that I follow but that I don't allow them to interfer with my understanding and following of science.
It's like saying that I know science is on target with evolution, and if God is behind all created things, then so be it. If there is a God then that god used physics and mathematics and science, etc. to do whatever got done. It wasn't done by whim, but rather following a template, which we call science.
In other words, I do not deny that God exists, but neither do I expect science to either prove or disprove whether a god or gods exist. Science is not in that business, while religion is. Religion should not be in the business of trying to disprove science.
Anyway, it's complicated and I go back and forth on the belief aspect of it all.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Nicomp, Creationists will argue that evolution is "only a theory and therefore cannot be proven." We have seen that over and over in the layman's argument against evolution.
Others will state that because evolution is not in the Bible, it can not be true. They also use arguments such as a bird is not evolved from another creature because the wings take too many steps to evolve, therefore it can't be true. Yet there are many stub-winged birds that do not fly or have limited flying capablility, or who swim, such as penguins, dodo birds, emus, ostriches, etc.
When the word theory is used in a scientific discussion, the word "theory is used as an explanation or model based on observation, experimentation, and reasoning, especially one that has been tested and confirmed as a general principle helping to explain and predict natural phenomena." (http://www.fsteiger.com/theory.html)
As one grounded in science you know this is how the scientific method works, as sufidreamer has said above.
In order to become a Scientific Theory (capitals used on purpose to separate out common theories), a hypothesis must undergo scrutiny by the scientific community. After time a consensus is built to favor one idea over another, facts are found, experiments, when possible, are done, and hundreds, thousands or millions of bits of data are entered as evidence. For a discussion of the differences between Scientific Laws, Theories and Hypotheses, see: http://www.wilstar.com/theories.htm)
The Bible has no evidence other than its own words to back up any theory of creation. In other words, people argue in favor of a Biblical creation based only upon what the Bible says, with no outside corroboration, or at least none that has to date stood the tests of the scientific method.
Yet, some people would chuck out all the evidence for evolution simply because the Bible supposedly tells them that anything not written in the Bible is false. Or they falsely claim that the evidence is tainted, incorrect or otherwise flawed. To me this makes as much sense as saying the newspaper told me to throw out all my food and eat dirt, and because the newspaper tells me it never lies, I must obey.
One of the reasons why evolutionists are angry is because it seems the creationists are coming out with a lot of information that is patently false, and playing upon people's ignorance of science to change how science works. This has been attempted in other areas of scientific work, such as when Stalin demanded that science bend the laws of nature to his whim, or when German scientists purposely created false sciences in WWII to prove that certain people were superior or inferior in relationship to each other.
I know that some people have decided that one must choose either science or religion, but I disagree. One can believe in God and still understand how evolution works. Evolution is an ongoing event and continues to be seen today, even though on a recent TV evalgelist program I saw a preacher tell the congregation that "if evolution were fact, why do we not see it in effect in our times?" Well, we do.
Darwin's finches were not created to be different. Zebras were not created as Zebras. They evolved from predecessors.
The fossil record is but one part of the information that shows how evolution works. DNA sciences also add to the facts, as do many other aspects of different sciences. evolution is backed up by other scientific studies outside the realm of biology.
So far, to my knowledge, Creationists have failed in showing how their version is a better way to explain the diversity of former and present species. I have looked at the data and most of it is really weak and sometimes is even falsified or mistated. Once Creationists follow the rules for scientific study, and present solid evidence that stands the scrutiny of the scientific community, they may, although I doubt it, advance a better theory.
And since scientists have at times taken a long time to redognize the truth of certain ideas, I disagree that it is not a community effort that goes into either backing or shooting down the many ideas that are put forward by explorers of science. Louis Pasteur's work was denied for a long time until the overwhelming evidence proved him right. Would you deny that bacteria, viruses and many micro-organisms exist? religious people a century ago did, again based upon what the Bible either did or did not say regarding the subject. Even today there are people who proclaim that disease is caused by evil spirits, demons, etc. and can be prayed away. I go with the micro-organism idea, myself. Even if I can't witness a bacteria actually doing harm to my body, I know it does. I can't prove that gravity exists other than by the effects it has on my person, yet I reject the idea that we are really held down on the earth' surfaces by invisible rays of magnetism that attract each other, which is another idea floated out there.
I am quite content to say I know evolution is fact. I don't have to merely believe it is.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Over all, Mark, I think some people fear evolution because it takes away their sense of purpose, their belief of being a special creation. I have heard many arguments that to believe in evolution is to set aside the laws of morality, decency, etc. Only the Bible can keep us on the straight and narrow path. I do not disagree that religion is based upon a set of ethics, which sometimes is a good thing, and sometimes not, but I am quite content to believe that one can be a decent, loving human being without ever being religious, or believing in God.
I have many friends who are agnostics or atheists, and they are just as nice as people who profess a religious purpose to life.
Others state that Godlessness has lead to abortions, genocide, mass murders, etc. Yet from history we know that many people have died at the hands of relgious fanatics. While the Spanish Inquisition is always touted as an example of this, we seem to forget the Northern European Inquisitions which may have killed hundreds of thousands. And let us not forget the relgious wars between Catholics and Protestants, some of which still smoulder today.
Next are the Holy wars between, for example, Chrsitianity and Islam, Islam and Bahai-ism, Sunni and Shi'ite Islamists, and so one and so on.
No one can claim the high moral ground in this argument, it seems, and it is up to individuals, whether they have religious faith or not, to act humanely toward each other.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
"Darwin's finches were not created to be different. Zebras were not created as Zebras. They evolved from predecessors.
The fossil record is but one part of the information that shows how evolution works. DNA sciences also add to the facts, as do many other aspects of different sciences. evolution is backed up by other scientific studies outside the realm of biology."
The thing about your science is that by definition it starts from the assumption that everything can be explained naturally. We all have the same facts.
Darwin's Finches are a simple object lesson in dominant and recessive genes. There's nothing in the facts to prove or even suggest that the finches were lizards or dinosaurs or whatever current idea that evolutionists think they evolved from. Homology does not imply or prove morphology.
I do commend you for bringing up specific examples; those are sorely lacking in this conversation.
"Nicomp - are you referring to Popperian, Kuhnian or Feyerabendian philosophy?"
No clue. I wasn't referring to any philosophy.
"In fact, some theories are higher up than other theories - Relativity supersedes Newton's work, yet Newton's work is still used and is regarded as a viable 'Theory,' under most circumstances."
I have not encountered a hierarchy of theories. A theory may apply in certain circumstances and not in others, while another theory may be applied in a more universal domain, but that doesn't imply a hierarchy as applied by Chef Jeff, in my opinion.
"I also have a scientific degree and write extensively about the scientific method and the philosophy of science. I really understand science, especially biology, and I have seen no better explanation than macro-evolution."
Fair enough. I don't know how well you understand science, but if you say you understand it "really well", then you must understand it better than I, because I think claimed to understand it "well". I haven't written word one on the philosophy of science, so I defer to you in that area.
"I am not sure where you learned your scientific method, but you may want to reread your philosophy of science. Ultimately, it looks as if you have as tenuous a grasp of evolutionary theory as I have of computer science, i.e none."
Your ostensible humility regarding computer science is no excuse for denigrating my grasp of evolutionary theory. I have no interest in the philosophy of science at this time, but I'm sure it's very interesting.
"I notice that when Lita and SweetiePie showed their qualifications in the forums, she was shot down in flames. Some double standards going on, methinks."
You'll have to provide examples, although I am confused as you seem to be participating in the double-standard you decry.
My only point to Chef Jeff was to respond to his contention that everyone who understands science believes in macro evolution. That was it, nothing more. To make my point, I used myself as an example of someone who understands science. Obviously I can cite pages of degreed scientists in biology, geology, physics, paleontology, and even Computer Science who dispute macro evolution.
If I'm not a suitable example, so be it.
If you wish to talk about the definition of theories and consensus, then that is the philosophy of science. It is unfair to debate in an area that is not your within expertise, so I will not press that point. If you can, it is well worth reading a little about Popper, Kuhn and Feyerabend, even if you only have the time for the cliff notes, for now.
I actually only said that I really understand science, so I guess that we are equal on that score - I have no reason to doubt your statement. I read more into your statement than you meant, so fair enough. I can cite many pages of people who do believe in macro-evolution, so it looks like we are at an impasse.
Ultimately, I have researched evidence from both sides, and creationists have yet to propose a viable alternative to evolutionary theory. Like Jeff, I do not go as far as to say that evolution disproves God - I have never felt that it is an either/or debate.
However, if creationists do want to attack a strongly accepted scientific theory (and consensus does apply!), they need to propose falsifiable alternatives - I have yet to see any evidence of that.
If you have any reputable experimental evidence, I will attempt to look at it with an open mind.
Actually, Darwin's Finches are separate species, incapable & uninterested in interbreeding outside of their species. They have differing food sources and do not produce viable offspring, yet they all originated from the same original species and gene pool. This is a basic tenent of how evolution occurs. Variations within a species, caused by external pressure of sokme sort, in this case, food supplies, breeding grounds, nesting areas, etc.
Obviously a hub is not a convenient forum to discuss all the facts and evidence in favor of evolution: For that we'd need months and hours of writing. Suffice to say that when you go against something as deeply researched and verified as evolution, it is upon you, as they one who wishes to defy the findings of the scientific community, to come up with the preponderance of reason against the prevailing theory.
Other scientists have done this and won, so the challenge is upon you to convince the scientific community with new, compelling evidence to tell the rest of us why we are wrong and you are right.
I suggest by starting in scientific journals, writing and verifying your data and findings there as to why evolution should not be believed. That is the route by which new ideas are entered into the thinking process, and the means by which any scientific theory may eventually be overturned.
I wish you good luck.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
You know, we can all argue till we're blue in the face. He said, she said, he's right, they're wrong, etc, etc. I'll tell you a fact or two...most of the people who are believers in God that attempt to discredit evolution are suffering from a massive dose of misunderstanding of the source of their beliefs. There's not enough room here, nor do I have the time to get into specifics on either that or the fact that evolution is a theory, but I'll attempt to touch on it. What's the definition of a theory?
1: a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena
2: a hypothesis assumed for the sake of argument or investigation b : an unproved assumption
Theory does not equal fact. I do not personally subscribe to that particular theory as the whole concept sounds completely ludicrous and laughable to me. I am not going to spend time here trying to convince you that my beliefs are more "factual" than yours, but to declare that a theory is an absolute fact because a series of discoveries have been looked at from a particular point of view is, in my opinion, dishonest. If that's what you want to believe, fine. However you've proven nothing. You've no more proven there's no God than scientists have "proven" evolution. It's never been observed. Period. There is no empirical evidence proving that the process actually happens. I can't prove to you that a Supreme Being spoke the universe into existence 6,000 years ago anymore than you can prove to me or anyone else that 65,000,000 years ago all the dinosaurs died. Were you there? Was anyone? It's a theory. An assumption. A conclusion of those in the scientific community over the last 200 years based on their interpretation of their findings. The fact of the matter is, those findings could be interpreted in more ways than one. And not one of those ways can be said to be factual unless it was observed in action. We choose to believe what we consider to be the most intelligent and sound concepts. The fact is it's your belief. You have faith that your beliefs are factual just as I have faith there is a Creator. I have faith there is an afterlife and that said Creator wants me to spend it with Him. There's just one thing you should consider before the day you pass away from this existence. You see, if you are right and I die, I've nothing to lose. It's over and I'm gone. End of story. Just some wacko who's finally out of everyone's hair. But if I'm right and you die, you've lost everything.
Mark, I want to tell you, I've read many of your hubs and I think you're a relatively intelligent guy and I've taken your advice on a number of occasions in the last few days. My comments here are in no way meant as either an insult or an attack. I respect your wishes when it comes to what you believe just as I hope you can respect mine. While I do hope and pray you'll one day ask God to show you beyond a shadow of a doubt He does exist, for now I hope we can respectfully agree to disagree. Have a great weekend and thanks for the excellent hubs.
Oh, I almost forgot. One thing in particular that really doesn't help the theory of evolution: circular reasoning. The following is based on an actual visit to a museum one day by someone I once knew. People were taking the tour. Walking up to a fossil the tour guide begins talking about how many millions of years old it is. Someone in the crowd asked, "How do you know?" To which the guide replied, "We know because of the layer of rock it was found in." The tour continued. Approaching the geologic column display, the guide began explaining how each layer of rock represented so many millions of years. The same person in the crowd spoke up again. "How do you know?" The guide replied, "We know how old each layer is based on the fossils found there."
Incidentally, I must add organized religion is possibly one of the worst things man ever invented. It's managed to pit all of us against one another and has always been run by those seeking control and power, rewriting scripture and creating a doctrine designed to further their own goals. It's also managed to severely damage the reputation of those of us who believe in God, but do not subscribe to their antics.
Take care.
I'm outta here.
Ridicule is not an argument mark it simply show lack, I've giving numerous examples of how for evolution myth is a lie and you in return you insult my intelligence me. You didn't even attempt to respond. Why? Because you little myth blind your would be common since "flood don't make fossils?" lol do you know what fossils consist of? I don't think you do if you did you would make such silly statement. If that how you debate no wonder you always "win"
Mark it could very well be that we are all a part of what some of us call God and that many of us while in the physical body can't remember what it's like to be a spirit entity. Think of it as a test of your ability to retain that spiritual part of yourself that is a part of God.I know from your comments that you think that if there is a God you say; I can't believe God would not create us as perfect beings ,fullblown without having to go through all the mess we have been through.Well since you don't believe in a God ,I know you don't believe in Angels which God is supposed to have created as you think God should have .Perfect beings ,that unfortunately didn't all turn out to be perfect.If you believed in fallen Angels.I often wondered if there is a God why is it the Angels God created were not perfect.One of the answers I can think of is God is not yet totally perfect what ever that is? What is a measure of perfection?What do you measure it against?
Fact- Ancient languages never go back beyond c. 3000 B.C., and radiate outward from Mesopotamia.
Fact- The oldest dates go back to about 3000 B.C.
Fact- The oldest people do not go back before c. 3000 B.C., and were located in Mesopotamia.
Fact- the oldest tree according to the Guinness Book of World Records is a whopping 4,768 years old, but there are other unverified claims of the oldest tree being 9,550 years old. How do you evolutionist remedy this? If you're just going to insult me some more don't bother. Just think about it.
Fact: The cave paintings at Lascaux in France are estimated to be 16,000 years old.
Fact: The Blobos cave in South Africa contained art and beads estimated to be 70-80,000 years old.
Fact: The city of Susa in of the Elamites was founded in around 5,000BC. Since we're talking about civilisations here.
2 minutes on google to refudiate your so-called 'facts' too easy.
Fact,
many cave paintings are dated by their primitive appearance.
My boys drew me pictures that must have been 17,433 years old +/-- a decade and a half.
Fact, Any respectible archeologist never claims egyptian findings older than 3,000 years BC.
Fact, I have close to 20 National Geographic Magazines that printed the egyptians to be over 8,000 years BC.
Get it?
I don't either.
Science can take its pages of disproven "facts" and build a road to the moon. Because thats how many mistakes they have made and that is how orbital these "facts" are.
@ sooner than later - Not really understanding what you are saying here. There are not enough "facts" that are undisputed for you to accept evolution, yet you are quite happy to accept an invisible sky fairy that drew us in the dust with no evidence? Get it? Apparently not.
@ Hovalis - thanks for stopping by. I could not be bothered to find him any "facts," as they are not going to count. lol
@someonewhoknows - that is a hypothetical metaphysical question. What does that have to do with the proof that evolution happens?
@ UKaccents. You insult my intelligence every time you leave a biblical reference. And there is no "debate" to be had here. Sorry your ridiculous beliefs have been proven wrong. There is no sky fairy - get over it.
@ Moseph - no imaginary friend in the sky = no religion. Not that any adherents should be held responsible. Thanks for the compliment "relatively intelligent." I do not have faith in anything I have not investigated. I have investigated the possibility of a creator. And guess what I found? Zip - lots of people like these though. ciao.
@ Jeff - you are right - this is an imperfect venue, but I agree no one has managed to disprove evolution.
I still do not understand how you work a creator into the theory though. And I am assuming that your god is one with a purpose?
As I said - I could accept an "experimentor" but I don't see how it is possible to accept on with a plan and we are the culmination of that plan - because it does not fit at all with our understanding of evolution as a "natural occurrence" in response to changes.
And I agree - a lot of these people are threatened by the fact that evolution does not fit in with their world view. I mean - how can we be the superior "in god's image"| creation if we are related to monkeys? :lol:
@ Sufi - I thought you already asked that question and it was evaded?
@ nicomp - just as a matter of interest - where did you graduate from?
@Hovalis@ You might want to spend another two minutes and get reputable scientist not google guesswork. What is it atheist and google.
@Mark- You may have read the bible, but you don't understand it among other things I'm sure. There is a debate that why people are challenging your rant because we got our education from liberal schools and evolution makes no sense “We really lucked out!” That’s NOT science. We followed the science to where it really lead to the God of the bible the creation account, the flood account, and world end to come, you yourself or fulfilling bible prophecy. But the your mind is under the Darwin’s theory delusion and it’s corrupted with the “theory at all cost“ poison, it seems your running from God. Only someone who hates God wouldn’t even look at both sides of an issue and it's obvious who haven't because if you honestly did that you would know evolution in the biggest lie in history and it hinders science and it corrupts the scientific method. Evolution is a lie therefore God is real. Denial is the first step in finding God, now admit you have a problem, and don't know him.
I Understand the bible just fine thank you.
And now you are lying - why? Is that not a sin? You did not follow the evidence to the bible - you are trying to make the evidence fit your ridiculous beliefs. and then you wonder why you get laughed at. :lol:
I am laughing at you - I have no choice - it is not possible to talk any sense in to you. Even if evolution WAS a lie - how does that give any credence to a god? lollolololol
What dated and false info has Richard Dawkins "clung" to? How about to solid irrefutable evidence?
Mark you have a atheist worldview, and I have a biblical worldview until you look at both sides like I have then, and only then can you say you are free minded, but you never will EVER, because you know where the truth lies and you'll avoid it at all cost. Did you ever find out what fossils consist of?
LOLOLO
Now you really are getting funny. I thought you were presenting scientific "facts".? Now I have an "atheist" worldview"? lol
What is that exactly? I am against slavery and burning people at the stake?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLO
Modern slavery was brought on my evolutionary thinking. Biblical slavery was totally different people volunteered themselves to work for others: for food, shelter and protection and they were treated as family I thought you said you understood the bible. Guess that was a lie. And you left how modern day slavery was abolished with the bible(you need to do more research before you respond next time). Less than 20 people were burned in the Salem Witch Trails(that doesn‘t make it right), but millions were burned, shot, killed poisoned, and slaughtered in Hitler’s Germany thanks to his evolutionary thinking. Stalin and Pol Poi also killed millions to speed up evolution. Why? Because evolution is the religion of time and death. That's why you didn’t place this article is the science column. It’s not Science it’s a philosophical religion to try(and fail) to disprove God. Fossils are made of.....you still didn’t answer because you know a universal flood explains fossils better than your google search of an atheist, from an atheist site where more atheist dish out more atheist lies by other atheist. You denial is sickening. Grow up man.
LOLOLOLOLOL
I understand you ridiculous Book thanks - must nice insult lolol You must be a christian.
sorry sunshine - I will continue to laugh at your BS,
Evolution is a science -not a religin. LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Sorry your beliefs have been proven worthless. But if it makes you feel any less pathetic - please keep leaving derogatory comments.
LOL! That's it! You repeat your dogma ad-nauseum with no proof just gibberish, really that’s all you got! LOL! By calling The Word of God ridiculous proves you don’t get it. 1 Corinthians 1:18 “The message of the cross is foolish to those who are headed for destruction! But we who are being saved know it is the very power of God.” with that I exit, but first one more pearl from God. Mark 6:11 “And whosoever shall not receive you, nor hear you, when ye depart thence, shake off the dust under your feet for a testimony against them. Verily I say unto you, It shall be more tolerable for Sodom and Gomorrha in the day of judgment, than for that city.”
Mark I take it D.N.A.evolved? or is it the reason every living thing evolves? Scientists seem to think that D.N.A. is like a language or program like a computer has that performs certain functions based on that program.If that's the case then it had to either program itself or be programed by an outside source.Do you agree with that?
Well this hub has created quite a controversy eh? This stuff always does. But to be truthful and honest you've gotta accept that evolution is a religion just like creation.
After all, you have to believe that it happened, there's no eyewitness testimony of people evolving or of the earth in it's beginning stages. So to be fair, you can't altogether claim science if you have to have faith in your belief.
Tyson - I do not have to accept any such thing. If you are so uneducated that you cannot tell the difference between carbon dating and a fairy tale in a book - I do not really know what to say to you other than -
"Get an education man - your brain will thank you." LOLOLO
Just checking in to see if you're still defending your faith.
"ignore and insult their intelligence"- check
"deny and deflect" -check
“sky fairy“- check
“old book”
“Sorry your beliefs have been proven worthless.”- This must be your motto, but I’m still waiting for you to elaborate on this. Keep it up mark here are some great facts on the accuracy of carbon dating. Turn to Jesus your common sense, rational, logic and your brain will thank you plus you won’t fear death like you do now. You don’t even know what fossils are made of lololololololol. Classic, and creationist are the ones who to get educated? Right. Lololol Slavery and the Salem Witch Trails? Come on mark didn’t I warn you about those old refuted bible verse, you don’t understand the bible so quit trying to use it just makes you look more irrational. Btw I convinced you’re are the guy in the pic only an old fool would still believe wholeheartedly in evolution without checking all the evidence against it. How sad.
@ Ilike- WOW he couldn’t attack one point. great stuff.
http://www.essortment.com/hobbies/carbondatingac_s
LOLOLOLOLOL
Sorry - you are saying what exactly? Oh - that is right - the last 1500 years - they were not REAL christians LOLOLOL
Sorry your pathetic hate filled belief system has been proven false.
Oh well.......
Too stupid to understand science? Try religion. lol
Any time you have some "facts" feel free to drop them by.
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!
Interesting comments Mark.
Especially
"because once you believe you have the word of god in your head, you are immune to suggestions to the contrary, and your ability to make rational decisions is badly compromised."
You ARE talking about scientists who believe in global warming [even though there is no evidence for it in the last 10 years], Al Gore style are you not? Or was it Piltdown man you were referring to? Perhaps you were talking about human beings Mark.
Human beings whether they call themselves scientists or not, often cannot let their biases and brainwashed minds to conceive of anything but their own beliefs. Why is that? I guess it is because each human being has his or her own unique form of religion known as our biases.
If I went back in the history of science before we knew that the earth revolves around the sun or that there were harmful germs that you could not see which often cause disease and so on, we would know that science is so full of bias that it stumbles over it.
Of course once Piltdown man is found to be a mixture of bones of monkeys, pigs and humans, we conveniently forget what brought us to the conclusion that THIS was another stage in the development of man.
Not so long ago those godlike scientists said we were in danger of another ice age, or putting holes in the ozone layer and we would all die or that by the year 2000, the earth would be so crowded with people there would not be enough room for them.
And these are just the ones that come to mind without research.
Because we each have a set of beliefs, a "religion" so to speak, we are all biased and all take leave of our senses sometimes in love, war and science.
And then we have the covert "CIA" of the science world who will fire ANYONE who mentions "Intelligent Design" in comparing arguments which evolutionists cannot answer.
Ben STein in his move "Expelled" interviews some of these bigots who are "immune to reason." But they are the ones which stifle any reference to ID, or fire accomplished scientists from their jobs. You might call them "scientists who got "the word of god in their head" and won't listen to anything else.
So Mark, you are right. When Al Gore, or you or I, get "the word of god in our head" we ARE IMMUNE to reason. That is because we are human. We often won't even consider other possibilities but dismiss them without hearing the evidence. Imagine if our courts did that.
Please stop attributing the religious to the trashpile of humanity. Most of the great discoveries that were made that revolutionized science in the 1700's to 1800's, were discovered by "religious" people.
Flaming does not equal evidence. Never has never will.
Good luck.
Thank you for making my point cpedley. I have never really understood the "well look at how bad these guys are therefore it is OK that us religionists who speak for god are no better" argument.
But - if it makes you feel any less pathetic - you go with it. Sure - no climate change here LOLOLOL
lolol really mark there has been simple and very basic science and math questions you couldn't answer, that didn't mention God. Don't play the victim you believe in evolution because the truth is to much for you to comprehend.(accountability and judgment) You keep dipping your head in evolution kool-aid and let it wash away what’s left of your common sense. When you want answer the question that destroy your myth I’ll be back, until then keep telling yourself the lie there is no God. It never ceases to amuse me. Last Question What are the odds that mutations would stumble upon a Functional Combination of chemicals from the vast number of alternatives? Give up? Okay! The odds of forming just one sure protein by mutation is one in 10 to the 74 power! Meaning even IF the earth was 4.5billion years old Natural Selection and mutations still would have time to manifest everything we see today let alone fossils and you. That’s the beauty of math your pseudo science can’t the debunk the mass impossibility of everything we see occurring by natural means. I’m sure this won’t change your mind you’re a very devout fundamentalist of your faith just like every other religion, but you’re wrong mark.
thetruthhurst2009
What religion are you really? Have read some of your comments, pretty interesting. I'm an athiest and blame religion for a lot of the hate in the world. It makes us blind and weak. I don't believe in the Church or the human view of god. I believe that there might be something which we can't understand, but it's definitely NOT god. Why should there be a god? And if your a Christian and believe in the bible I hope you suffer in life. Eve was created of Adam and ate the apple of wisdom or whatever it was. Bullshit. Who could have known that. Religion is patheitc!!
"I'm an atheist and blame religion for a lot of the hate in the world."
You might want look up Pol Poi, Kip Kinkle The columbine shooters, Eugenics Lab, Stalin, Hitler(Roman Catholic turned evolutionary atheist) and all of modern day slavery if you really want to see what real hate is brought us by of the evolutionary religion or evolutionary thinking. Evolutionist and Muslims are one in the same. Except you call it science(but it’s the opposite). You don’t know everything not even close, until you do you can’t make such a statement.(There is no God!) I never claim to know everything I’m flawed like you. God doesn’t exist to you, yet. I have no religion per say I have a relationship with Jesus Christ and attend a bible thumbing church. Let me ask you a question. What is you’re wrong? My life has been spent reading and following a great book, being kind to my neighbors Loving people the best way I know how and spreading what I know to be the truth and refuting lies when I die and if I was wrong I’ll never know, and if I’m right I know I going to heaven. The peace I have is something you can’t grasp, yet. I hope you take this a wake up call. You’re breathing that means it’s not too late. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GhKtWzZ_4IQ May God guide you on your journey to truth.
I see you have taken to making statements that are outright lies now tth2009. which rather makes the hypocrisy of your user name and ridiculous belief system glaringly obvious.
Thank you for making my point. Your BS religion is done and your sky fairy does not exist. Too bad huh? lololololol
Evolution is a scientific theory based upon a collection of widely accepted facts. A few people involved in science may not agree with the facts, and that is there right. After all, a few scientists also believe the world is flat, a huge disk floating in space. Does that make them correct and their idea worthy of merit? It is up to the nay-sayers to come up with a better way of explaining the known facts and then producing an answer that makes better sense.
The idea of creationism is not new. these ideas have been proposed and rejected for more than 100 years now. To date, no creationist has produced evidence to back up their case.
Their entire body of evidence is merely conjecture, inventing or bending facts to fit their preconceived idea that God created everything and did so by not using the natural laws that God would have to have created, if God indeed created everything. Does this make sense to anyone else? It sure doesn't make any sense to me.
It actually reminds me of the old story, can God create a stone so heavy that God can't lift it? It's a non-question and a non-starter for a reasonable argument.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
P.S. Is it any wonder that we in the U.S. are falling so far behind in the world when we can't even agree on a subject so well documented as evolution?
"Evolution is a scientific theory based upon a collection of widely accepted facts. A few people involved in science may not agree with the facts, and that is there right."
Science is not performed by consensus. Your flat earth argument is specious because we can demonstrate that the earth is not flat by leaving it and observing it's shape. You cannot prove macro evolution, not can you demonstrate how it might have happened. Yes, micro evolution happens regularly and the results thereof can be observed. No argument there.
@ Chef Jeff - I know - it just makes Americans out to be look bad. Evolution didn't happen? lol
@ Nicomp - Seriously dude - where did you get all these "science degrees" you claim? lolololol
Really mark, just because you want to stay brainwashed, doesn't make the truth a lie. Check out my sources, from real, reputable scientist, answering your pastor Richard Dawkins ridiculous claim of “Climbing Mt. Improbable” I challenged to check the facts and show me the lies! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M4FvdOxIDfU
@ Chef Jeff- I see you’re a another fundamentalist list of the evolutionary church I have two challenges for you. Do what mark can’t answer all of the creationist criticisms(no ranting, no insulting, no drawing from an evolutionist imagination) There has at least 15 difference frauds associated with this myth of evolution name them then named your proof, Do you know the difference?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x-wGNZmwKXc
This is going to be fun! Good Luck.
@thetruthhurts2009: To me, the most serious fraud is the misinterpretation of experiments regarding the synthesis of self-replicating RNA in the laboratory. I don't blame the originating scientists, rather the media and the evolution apologists who twist the results into a story that fits their argument.
So true! And let not forget about Ida the latest mass deceptions of the evolutionary church. That huge media blitz for a lemur, and after it made I’m sure tons of money with a book an TV special and interviews it was soon and very quietly recalled by a panel of unbiased reputable scientist, and what real upset me was before Ida evolutionist steadfastly stated that there were thousands of transitional fossils if that were the truth why make such a huge deal over Ida. It craziness. Try not to get in a word shell game with these evolutionists that’s how they’ve kept this lie going for so long I have no problem with variations, genetic recombination, adaptations, transduction, mutations, transformation, vital enzyme exchange through plasmids, conjugation within a kind, these are all forms of micro- evolution(even though I hate using that word) it’s biblical and a proven fact, but when those Darwinist try to take leap of faith with “Give it enough time you turn anything to anything look at these bones” that where it stops being science and becomes a pseudoscientific religion. Why do they think bones can reproduce something other than their kind when animals today can’t. It’s pure absurdity.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5y7L3PQMi3A
LOLOLOLO
So - nicomp I now take it you got your "science degree" from Landover Baptist Ministry? LOLOLOLOLO
And your "evidence" for the sky fairy remains the same I suppose? Nothing. LOLOLOLO
thetruthhurts2009: the misapplication of Occam's Razor is also a fraud perpetrated by the evolutionary apologists.
A lot of Creationists believe that the 3rd Law of Thermodynamics prevents Evolution because it would be impossible for any group of smaller molecules to combine into a more complex system. In a lab setting, with no energy being provided, that would be correct.
However, the earth has a great source of energy in called the sun. with sunlight,heat, etc., evolution becomes more thanpossible: it becomes somewhat inevitable.
As for the comment about men and monekys, well, as I've said before elsewhere, monkeys are a lower form of primates. the great apes, which are genetically very close to us, and primates in general, is where we fall in the evolutionary scheme of things.
While it may be be distasteful for anyone to be told he or she is an ancestor of a great ape, that does not make it false. If you have better evidence, then let's see it. make you case based on facts, not on fancy.
You may wish that evolution is false, but again, that does not make it false.
When Creationists can finally come up with an idea that has credible evidence, and a lot of it, they may be able to put forth an idea with merit. Until then it's all wishful thinking.
Sorry, that's just the way it is.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
cpedley, one of the major differences between science and religion, at least when concerning cock-sure religionists, is that science will explore a new discovery and, if it is false, discard it. I mention this because you mentioned the so-called Piltdown Man. Yes, it was an excitement at the time, but it was quickly seen to be false. No evolutionary scientist now accepts that specimin as true. If they did, they would be laughed out of science because the evidense was so obviously false as to be laughable.
This is the same way evolutionary scientists feel about this recurring Creationist argument. The same old arguments, those already found to be as false as the Piltdown man, keep resurfacing and a whole new generation takes them as fact, when they are not.
You see, to an evolutionist, one does not need to believe in evolution. One knows, by the evidence, the proof, the gathered information that has been discovered, examined and verified, that it is simply a fact.
For a Creationist, however, one needs to suspend rational, logical thought, critical analysis, our entire method of learning, and accept solely upon belief that God created all living things in a one-day spurt of enthusiasm. Therefore, if you wish to believe in Creationism, that is your right, but to pass it off as credible science is ridiculous. It is not.
I have seen the so-called Creationist Museum and I had to force myself from laughing. It is very colorful, and filled with a lot of the same discreditied information that Creationists have used and abused over the past 100 years and more. I stood there as enthusiastic people said, "Oh! this really proves that Evolution is a Satanic forgery!"
Oh, really?
There was nothing there I hadn't seen before in some very old and misinformed literature I have from the 1920's. there is nothing new there that hasn't been presented time and again by Creationists over the past century. How many times does the "evidence" need to be found wanting before it is no longer even considered? Apparently, until the end of time.
If Creationists have anything new, publish it in scientific journals, get credence and stop passing off the same old tired Piltdown Man type of misinformation as proof. It is not, and it will never be proof, because it is incorrect. No amount of wishing it to be true will ever make it true.
You know, I could wish and pray for my cat to become a dog by Creationist logic, but I'm afraid my cat would still meow and be a cat.
If God exists, then God is responsible for all the laws of nature. Therefore, why would God create these laws only to break them at a whim? It sounds like the God you describe is a bit off center. He created everything and then just decided to do away with it. Sorry, that makes no sense.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
So what is this? Have people in the U.S. lost their minds? Are they REALLY still working this dead horse about creationist crap?
Man, are you all gonna be surprised when China takes you over! You already owe them a big chunk of change, and now you are handing them science as well! I pity your next two generations!
@ Chef Jeff-Ridulcule is not an argument is simply shows lack. Why is it when ever you evolutionist are asked to prove your side show one bit of evidence. You insult, ignore, deflect and deny. I was very specific in my questions and you still couldn't answer any of it. Why?
Johannes Kepler-Founder of Astronomy Young earth creationist
Robert Boyle- Founder of modern Chemistry
Sir Issac Newton-Young earth creationist
Louis Pasteur-Pioneer of Micro biology
Should we disregard
All major branches of Science were founded by Christians and most were Young Earth Creationist, but don't take my word for it. Do you own honest research and find the truth of Jesus Christ through the glory of his creation. God Bless!
"You see, to an evolutionist, one does not need to believe in evolution. One knows, by the evidence, the proof, the gathered information that has been discovered, examined and verified, that it is simply a fact."
I am so lost. If I am a veterinarian, do I have to believe in animals? ;)
Say it aint so, Ivan! LOL!
I was reading on the web about the argument by creationists that evolution has about as much chance of being true as a computer building itself. But the argument didn't quite ring true in that a computer analogy does not fit that of a living creature.
But one aspect to look at is the application of the Second Law of Thermodynamics and the addition of outside energy to a system. (http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html)
One argument evolutionists make is that molecules came together in a primordial "soup" and evolved the ability to act and react to their environment. We can reproduce this rudimentary observation in labs, with the application of outside energy sources, such as electricity.
We also see in plants that sunlight is needed in order for green plants to grow and maintain themselves. No energy in, no life exists.
All species need an energy-in source to maintain life. This in itself goes against the argument that the Second Law of Thermodynamics negates evolution, because no system or organism can survive without external energy input. Evenif God made us, he uses energy from the sun to maintain our lives. That fact is undisputable. No man lives by word alone, it seems.
But the early experiments, one of which I worked on in college, showed that random groupings of inorganic molecules can be converted to organic molecules, the building blocks of life, including amino acids, by the addition of external energy, in our case in the experiment, electrical charges. Since then the application of solar energy has produced a slower but equal result.
The Second Law would seem to indicate that, left to itself, any complex organism will decompose and reduce to a lower, eventually, the lowest energy state. If we lived in a world with no external energy source, that would happen to us as well. It happens when life is ended and we are dead. Our bodies decompose to simpler chemical forms.
But by the addition of external energy building blocks of life can be created, and by further additions of energy these building blocks can indeed combine and form more complex molecules, the basis of how life began according to a wide consensus and agreement of scientists in various fields exploring this theory.
To say that life would not be possible without a creator has effectively been shot down. Life can conceivably be created under lab conditions by human beings, and since the basis for creating life exists, how long will it be before someone creates a living micro-organism?
Maybe it has already been done.
@Chef Jeff Talkorgins lolololol , giving me an atheist site where more atheist dish out more atheist lies by other atheist. Are you serious? I guess I should label you Campbell’s lololol You’re in denial and it's funny. Grow up man. You still haven’t answered my questions. I doubt you ever will.
@truth “Campbell’s” lol funny
If you believe in evolution, without doing honest research for the other side , it's blind faith. Plain and simple. What I have noticed is Christians always seem to look at both sides, they usually come from liberal homes or schools and after they finished college or high evolution leaves them with so many unanswered questions and frankly doesn't make sense because there are too many holes, it's seems the only people who are die hard evolutionist are atheist so they can try(and fail) to evade God, and to Christians who believes in Darwin’s lie they should really look at what they are modifying, Why would any true Christian take man’s opinion over God’s word. Go back to Genesis. Okay, I hope someone is blessed by this message.
Keep up the good work gentlemen. Ignorance is everything. Remember - if it seems like it goes against the Word, it must be a lie.
You are assured a place at His right hand.
> If Creationists want to join the scientific discussion about evolution they can, but they have to play on the terms of scientific debate.
Yup, and that's the part they do not nor ever will get.
Why would you reject even the possibility that a God may exist based on what those who you consider fakers tell you?
You discovered a big thing: liars lie. But why automatically reject the existence of what they lie about just because they lie about it?
"One argument evolutionists make is that molecules came together in a primordial "soup" and evolved the ability to act and react to their environment. We can reproduce this rudimentary observation in labs, with the application of outside energy sources, such as electricity. "
No, you can't.
@ nicomp - you still didn't answer my question as tio where your "science degrees" came from so I am going with Sunday school.
A Pacal - Sorry you think I would base my decision on what other people think. LOLOLOL
I am quite capable of making an investigation and making a rational decision thanks. But now you come to mention it the fact that most people who claim to believe in a god are liars is a good argument against one.
I have not rejected the possibility that a god exists. I have absolutely rejected the idea that what you or any of these believers think is worth consideration.
Ah, sorry to poop in your soup, there nicomp, but we can, have and still can. the experiments are now decades old and have been shown time and again to take common molecules that were known to be existant at the time and combine them into organic molecules. these organic amino acids then acted with their environment. They did not become alive, but chemically they reacted in ways that created more complex molecules, which would be the precursor to life.
Sorry your sense of science is still in the 1930's on this one. I now quote from: http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SUA02/primordia
"The UCSD research team is led by Dr. Stanley Miller. Dr. Miller is well known for his 'primordial soup' experiment conducted in 1953. At that time he demonstrated that amino acids could be formed by passing an electric current through a flask of methane. This suggested that life could have arisen from materials and conditions present in early Earth history."
AND:
"In their recent experiment, the UCSD scientists heated a mixture of pantoyl lactone, beta- alanine and cysteamine at 40 degrees C (105 degrees F). All three chemicals are believed to have been present on the early Earth. Among the other chemicals formed was pantetheine. This suggests pantetheine could have been created at the margins of evaporating pools of water in prebiotic times."
We did Dr.Miller's experiment back when I was an organic chem student in the early 1970's. It is quite a common lab experiment for those who study the field.
Your appology is accepted.
Cheers, and enlightenment!
Chef Jeff
"Ah, sorry to poop in your soup, there nicomp, but we can, have and still can. the experiments are now decades old and have been shown time and again to take common molecules that were known to be existant at the time and combine them into organic molecules. these organic amino acids then acted with their environment. They did not become alive, but chemically they reacted in ways that created more complex molecules, which would be the precursor to life."
That's all well and good, but there's no such thing as a precursor to life. You can't be mostly alive. Ever seen 'The Princess Bride'?
I can put hydrogen and oxygen atoms together and create more complex molecules, called water. That doesn't prove anything. We all agree that some molecules combine to create more complex molecules. Those molecules do not become alive, nor do they represent a precursor to anything living. If I have a steering wheel, do I have a precursor to a car?
The experiments you reference took place in a laboratory, which does not replicate the conditions in the prehistoric Earth to which you subscribe. The molecules that you refer to would oxidize almost immediately.
Nor were any of the experiments in any way random; they were controlled environments configured by intelligent scientists. I'm sure we can all agree with that?
@ Chef Jeff aka Campbell’s- Do you even know what happened when evolutionist try to create life in a lab? The result was POISON! with the void of oxygen! Yep! Look it up please don't take my word do your homework. If we can create life shouldn’t the cryogenics labs be empty? They never have created life in the lab and IF they ever did it would simply prove it takes a Intelligence.
@ Bean Evolutionist plays the word shell game in order to keep people who believe in evolution in the religion and hope you never question it. Wipe that evolutionary sleep from your eyes and question your religion and it’s leaders.
@ Mark Speaking of answering question I’m STILL waiting for answers from you. You called me a liar. Prove it! What no atheist sites give you a good enough comeback or maybe gooogle let you down. lolololololol
it is pretty ironic that ken ham so closely resembles a monkey...
LOL - That was my thinking as well.
Well, not all organisms require an oxygen rich environment, there, truthhurts. There are plenty of organisms alive today which are very primitive and live on sulphur at the bottom of the oceans. They receive no sunlight, no oxygen and feed off volcanic flues which would instantly burn most higher organisms to death.
Early life emerging from whatever the Earth was like so long ago can only be demonstrated by precursors produced after evaluating the clues left behind from that time. This does not mean these precursors are mostly or even partly alive. It simply means the building blocks we recognize in all living things today can be formed under conditions that have been examined and refined over the past 70 years or so.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenesis
Obviously a hub comment is not a science course, and even if you think I haven't considered other options, you are wrong. When I took my science courses, which became my Master's Degree in Organic and Micro-Biology, plus the numerous courses I took overseas, where this foolish question of creationism does not stop serious scientific study, I learned that there are many ideas about how life began on Earth. Some I have reserved judgement on, others I have decided do not hold water. Creationism is one that fails in every aspect to put forth one solid idea to prove its value and validity. Sorry, that's just true.
Whether or not God started it all, as I said long ago in a comment, God would have used the many laws He created. To say God just had a whim to suspend creation and create life from dust still seems odd to me and many others, so instead of using tired old ideas to knock down the progress and growth of knowledge and learning, try using some factual evidence and either prove your point of view or just accept that you will forever be left behind by the rest of the world.
As for science, well, we'll just plod along snickering at the silly ideas put out there by people who understand very little about it yet seem to have strong opinions based upon untenable Biblical ideas.
As for those who find fault with people who know evolution is correct, i.e. the creationists, do not equate a science backed by independent and scrutinized research, which has been accepted based upon merits higher than people use to state the Bible is correct, as some form of religion. In a religion one believes something to be true. I know evolution is true, even as its many part unfold before our eyes.
I know you will never be convinced by anything I say, and vice versa. So have fun with your life and maybe we evolutionists can just agree to stay out of religion while you creationists stay out of science.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Maybe it's not. But then why the hell did you write this hub then?
Thou shalt burn in hell for thy wretched impiousness, heathen!!!
Did that at least sound authentic? LOL guess I have to work on it.
A lady on hubpages recently attempted to make a connection between reptilian brain matter and "Right-wing extremists." You and yours have been duped into believing that our "faith" is simply a crutch as if no one within Christianity has ever witnessed or partaken in something that science cannot disprove. Your quote: "What there is, is a growing number of conservative Christians and Muslims attempting to defend a faith which they perceive to be under threat"///ends up being an extremely overused and weak argument.
Do you have a rebuttle for those that came out of homes that couldn't have cared less about church and/or religion and are ultimately convinced that Jesus is the Christ the son of the living God? If you guys can come up with a better argument; something to the tune of, a dog has morphed into a cat or an ape into a human or a turtle into a bird then you'd be "cooking." But I know the Christ and he is as real as you and I sir.
, maybe when god made the earth and all the universes, maybe it was the same principal. I believe in evolution, but getting of the planet Earth for just one moment, something made the first flicker in space, a first pulse or vibration, what was that then? If you can answer that, Then I know you are talking sense. Go on then.....
@ Tackle this - I do not see that a religion and science are the same. But these people only understand "blind belief" so everyone else must therefore have a blind belief. They are just reinforcing my opinion that religion is a crock for sheeple.
@ Nell Rose - "maybe, maybe, but." Perhaps if you rephrased that question in English?
I mean - let's face it - you already have the answer - an extremely easy one at that "God did it" lolololol
Now define god and explain where the "rules" come from. LOLOLOLOL
Yeah sorry, the stupid comment box lost most of my comment! What i said was, maybe God scattered the seeds for humanity like we grow a garden. We don't want to see a garden just there, we like to watch it grow and evolve. Evolution is a fact, but it does'nt mean that we were'nt made by a higher being in the first place. You laugh at people who believe in a god, but you are just as strong in your belief that there is nothing there! My point is nobody knows. What you should say is, I don't believe in a god but maybe i'm wrong! Unless you can prove it....,I am stuck on the fence about what god is, or is it just science? so go on then what made the first vibration in space, Was it An inteligent being, or Just space hiccuping!
LOL
Why should I sit on the fence? all the time there are people prepared to tell me they are certain there is a god and they know what he wants?
Having said that - I am 100% certain that the christian god does not exist. Why? Three reasons:
1. His followers
2. Common sense
3. Evolution. If you understand evolution then that particular god CANNOT have been involved.
But any time you have some proof otherwise I am open to changing my tune. Of course- you must first prove that evolution is wrong. ;)
some 500 years ago or so learned men saw that flies and other vermin came from piles of rotting material. The obvious answer was that piles of rotting material spontaneously created vermin. Most people accepted that and said God was creating the vermin to pay us back for our sins. They defined sins as disobeying God, or as they saw it back then, the church, which was God's mouthpiece on Earth.
But a few curious types wondered if vermin was actually sponteneously created by filth. Although common wisdom that even we were created by filth, as the sperm and egg were known in those pre-microscope days, ("Man is born in filth" on learned cleric said), someone allowed his curiousity to overcome his fears of being condemned to Hell, as his priests were often wont to say whenever someone went against the grain.
So a curious man, a sort of scientist of his time, put a piece of meat under a glass bell jar and waited for the slimy creatures, flies and mice to appear. the meat appropriately rotted, but alas, so spontaneous creation of vermin occurred. he began to wonder, why was this so?
Using his brain, which even a Creationist has to admit is a God-given gift, and which I say is there for a purpose more than just accepting on faith alone facts we discover about ourselves and the world, he began to see that spontaneous creation was simply a myth created by the minds of men and women, accepted by all, including the church, that was false and needed to be exposed as such.
Naturally, there was much opposition. He was denounced from pulpits, scorned by former friends, but he was correct, and common wisdom, commom sense, was wrong. Today hardly anyone believes that vermin come from rotting stuff.
From this experiment it was then widely believed that life had to come from a creator. Of course the limits of the experiemtn would not allow for a creator to step in and make life. If a creator exists, or God as we say, then another mechanism had to exist for things to be created.
So far we have been concentrating on the begining of life in our curent disussions. Some say God created everything, others say there is no God. As one interested in science I can't create an experiment where God creates new life. I can only examine what exists, make determinations and evaluations based upon what I discover, and then make a hypthesis based upon the data I collect.
If what I hypothesize has merit, it will eventually be accepted. Darwin's observations were widely criticized at the time of his publication. He was not the only scientists working on evolutionary ideas, but he is the one we know best.
Did his work stand the test of time? So far, with many changes, as new discoveries were brought to light. Did he prove that God does not exist? that was not his purpose. Indeed, he even said in his writings that God was behind it all.
Whether or not God exists is not a question for science. Whether or not evolution is correct or not, is a question for science, and so far, anti-evolutionary ideas have failed to gain ground. If they can produce credible evidence in their favor, they may someday. Until then, no one can prove creationism in a scientific test.
"some 500 years ago or so learned men saw that flies and other vermin came from piles of rotting material. The obvious answer was that piles of rotting material spontaneously created vermin. Most people accepted that and said God was creating the vermin to pay us back for our sins. They defined sins as disobeying God, or as they saw it back then, the church, which was God's mouthpiece on Earth. "
Yet you insist that the vermin spontaneously generated as well, just over a much longer period.
Chef - nicomp is a well-known troll. He never makes any real statements other than to provoke a reaction. He is just here for the fight - that is what he does.
He is a christian.
Actually, yes, that is what I am saying. Sponteneous generation, through a process we have discovered and are discovering, was eventually proven true, just not in the way it was originally stated or defined. Life does not arise sponteneously from piles of garbage, but the amino acids and various other parts of primitive cells which still exist today can be manufactured in the laboratory. These protein components have been seen to form into longer protein chains that do indeed come from the combination of energy, an atmosphere of carbon-based molecules, and hot and cold temperatures, and of course, time.
Life many or may be an accident, or as some thing, it simply exists because the conditions were ripe for self-creation, or a creation. None of us were there, so the best we can to is examine the evidence, make our experiemtns and draw conclusions based upon our best intelligence.
As I said, there is no proving to a creationist that this is possible because for every bit of proof, every scrap of data, there is a "Yeah, but..." OK, fine. I believe that it is easier to make the case for evolution than it is for the Bible or any other holy book. What imperical evidence is there for anything in the Bible? What tests or experiments can we do to make a Biblical verse proved 100%?
Archeology has shown that some things that occurred in the Bible may have happened, but can these scientific examinations prove with a 100% certainty that this is not only what happened, but also this is how it happened?
Before you trash scientific discoveries look to your own source and answer me this: Why do you believe in a book that has no external proof of its veracity? There is nothing out there that makes the case for 100% accuracy of the Bible, yet you demand 100% accuracy in an area of science that is still examining the basic theory, still seeking evidence that will either make or break the Theory of Evolution. You see, unlike your beliefs, the Theory of Evolution is still evolving itself. It is still being tested, just as every other Theory is, and if it is found false, it will be discarded for a nbew and better idea. that hasn't happened yet and may never happen.
It seems you demand immediate, 100% perfection from science but overlook the imperfections of your own position and beliefs.
You believe that God exists, but in truth you can't really KNOW that God exists. If you have met God, face to face, then that's one thing, but to infer God from the Biblical chapters and verses is not proof, not fact, it is merely belief, and no amount of belief will ever pass for either truth or fact.
Winner: Creation!
"...but the amino acids and various other parts of primitive cells which still exist today can be manufactured in the laboratory."
How did histidine evolve?
"Archeology has shown that some things that occurred in the Bible may have happened, but can these scientific examinations prove with a 100% certainty that this is not only what happened, but also this is how it happened? "
Why don't you apply the same standards to biblical archaeology that you apply to the science of macro-evolution?
Hi, It's Nell again. Question. why are you picking on the christian God? surely if you don't believe in God then it has to cover all the Gods of all the religions. Step off the planet for one moment and forget mans brainwashing of their Gods. Do you honestly think that the cosmos was just a random explosion or something? Think about space. Everything is balanced, we have gravity and Atoms, maybe you should study Quantum Physics and then you would notice how strange those tiny things act, they seem to have a life of their own.maybe you should study the small things before looking at the big picture.p.s. I am enjoying the discussions and arguments tho' good hub. lol nell
Nell - Are you saying that you know what the christian god wants me to do? lolololol
And I should not pick on that one becaue it is so ridiculous?
lolol
Or - can I make my own decision that I had a different god speak in to my head?
That OK?lololololol
Nicomp, most creationists claim that because science is still discovering answers, that it must be wrong. Apart from that there are often incorrect applications made by creationists about why some aspects of evolution must be wrong, such as the famous how did the eye evolve and what about the Second law of Thermodynamics, and footprints in the mud, how a fossil bird twists it head, etc.
I do read a lot about science and I do read a lot about counter arguments. How did Histidine evolve? Look it up and tell me. Obviously there is an anti-evolution argument for that as well. Maybe God just decided to make it one day. Maybe it came to be by purely natural means in a world much different than we know today. You tell me.
There are many things we do not know, but we have a better chance of discovering real answers through studies than we do through blind obedience to the Bible.
Now, since histidine does exist, does the Bible tell how it came to be? God made it, right? Is that the end of the story and we need look no further?
It's that kind of argument I reject because simply saying God created everything does not make it so. Which God? Which Gods? Christian? Muslim? Jewish? Native American?
As I said, go and do your own studies, provide evidence that stands the scrutiny of science, and then make your claims. It's really as simple as that. If you wish to make & introduce a new scientific discovery, follow the rules of science, publish, keep publishing until your ideas are accepted. You won't gain an inch of ground reebutting me or Mark or anyone else. The Hub Pages are not a place to publish your scientific discoveries. Quite frankly, I don't even have any idea what your scientific discoveries are, since all you've done is tell us that we are wrong.
OK, I admit that it's possible that I may entirely wrong, that science got everything wrong about evolution. That's a possibility, although not really a probability. Maybe everything I have studied to date is comepletely wrong. But so far nothing any creationist has said or done has shown me that they have a better way of portraying how things came to be. Until they do, it's just conjecture and speculation based upon Biblical scriptures, which are not scientific in any sense of the word. If science is conjecture and speculation at least it has proof to back up the conjecture and speculation, it has evidence, form and substance, someting sadly lacking from the creationist idea of "creation science."
If there are indeed creation scientists in the field of biology or any other related science that have new discoveries to add to the our pool of knowledge, then tell them to publish! But the things put out there by creationists are the same old arguments that have been put forward and dismissed due to lack of evidence, proof and credibility for the past 150 years.
As for my applying these standards to macro-biology, why don't the creationists apply the same standards to their dismal body of work? So far they have only tried to make it true by force of will, not by force of discovery and evidence. It is up to creationists to overturn evolution, not just nitpick away at it. It is not up to biology to overturn an accepted theory based upon lack of evidence put forward by creationists. But so far creationists have attacked evolution based on very narrow arguments, while applying broad scope to their own flawed work.
If creationists REALLY have a better way, then bring it forward and back it up. But that's something they have consistently failed to do over the decades past. Is there any new evidence they can bring forward? If so, where is it? Why not start a new hub with it all listed for us to read, or write a series of hubs about it?
My observation to date is that there really is no new or compelling evidence for creationist arguments. Prove me wrong if you can.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Nell! Is this an admission that there may be more than one God!?!?!? LOL!!!
Most of the people who have responded in favor of creationism believe in Christianity as the one, true belief. I am a Christian, I just disagree with those that believe the Earth is 6,000 or so years old, for one, and/or those who believe that GOd just created all life in one, fell swoop on a whim that this Universe seemed awfully lonely without little creatures walking around.
Evolution, despite its many critics, remains solid and strongly the manner in which life came to be on this, and if there is life on other planets, those worlds.
Despite assurances to the contrary, as one commenter stated below, the chance of life elsewhere is quite large, unless one reverts to the idea that distant stars a but little pin holes in the fabric a few dozen miles above the Earth.
Nicomp, my good friend and arguing buddy here, obviously missed my subtle humour about sponteneous creation yesterday. I was attempting to show that science can't take itself too seriously because no mater how good an idea seems today, new discoveries will either change prevailing thought or modify long-standing ideas, usually for the better.
Thus when I was talking about the idea of spontaneous creation from a garbage heap, I was referring more or less to the idea that God created man from the dust of the Earth. I do believe from my studies of the Bible that is how we came about, according to scripture.
Others have said we are not descended from monkeys. Obviously not. To say so sjhows a distinct lack of understanding of evolutionary progress. We are related to the Great Apes and are primates ourselves, but we are not descended from meonkeys, a lower form of primate. We have our own evolutionary history aparts from present day gorillas, chimpansees and other higher order primates.
If that idea is repugnant to anyone, then understand that coming from dust is equally repugnant to me.
The current ideas being studied have to do with the rise of life over time from molecules formed at variuous stages of the Earth's history. Some were created and then coalesced into more complex molecules, a thing which those who claim the Second Law of Thermodynamics prohibits, evenb as they violate the primary rule of that law, that any system left to itself will tend to revert to a simpler form, which of course means that without energy in, the system's components will revert to simpler forms, and thus forget that energy was present in huge amounts on the early and present earth.
Gotta go to work now, more later!
@Chef Jeff: I'm saddened, but not surprised, that you continue to answer my questions with more questions. You seem to prefer a philosophical discussion of conceptual issues rather than addressing science. It's all good. This is a difficult forum in which to address specifics. See ya.
Well, nicomp, the whole issue of using Biblical scripture to define science is a philosophical discussion in my eyes. It would be like using science to prove or disprove God. Apples and volkwagens to me, at least.
I do like a good discussion and I am still perplexed why creationists do not use the scientific argument more strongly to get their point across. I saw in my local library a DVD of creatonists debunking of evolution, and it was quite well done, but again basically flawed in that is merely pointed out opinions as to why evolution was wrong. In order to get anything done in this area, the creationists need, and I mean really have to, find a better case and then back it up with more solid evidence. If it's out there, they will make headway. But merely speaking to the court of public opinion will not change science's view of evolution. really, the U.S. lags far behind the rest of the world in basic scientific knowledge. that in and of itself is very sad.
So again I say, publish or get scientists in favor of creationism to publish, serious papers aimed at the scientific community and start the campaign there. Although I doubt that evidence for creationism is really out there, I could be wrong. A solid case in favor of creationism, if it follows facts and does this through the scientific journals, has as good a chance as any idea to make headway against current consensus. Never forget that evolution had a hard uphillbattle for acceptance for many years, and is still being examined for flaws or needed upgrades.
Good luck and cheers!
Jeff T.
P.S., as for why I am not answering your questions with answers, well, you already have your mind made up on the information you already believe, and I am not out there to gain converts to evolution. It will stand or fall based on its own merits, no matter what I say. Thus far it is standing. If it one day falls, the so be it.
"P.S., as for why I am not answering your questions with answers, well, you already have your mind made up on the information you already believe, and I am not out there to gain converts to evolution. It will stand or fall based on its own merits, no matter what I say. Thus far it is standing. If it one day falls, the so be it."
I only see two purposes for these discussions: find common ground, defend your position, or learn something. That's just my left-brained opinion.
It's about time: "Winner, Creation!" Is that like the U.S. election of 2,000 - Supreme Court says, Winner Bush! Votes say, Loser Bush!
How do you figure creation wins just because you want it to? Rather dictatorial of you, isn't it? So far creation has been waging a losing battle in this arena. How do you figure, "Winner: Creation!"???????
Actually, nicomp, that's three reasons, but be that as it may. I really see no point in having to defend my position on evolution. It is up to creationists to defend their position and overturn evolution. Besides, is there any way you could ever be convinced that evolution is correct? The sign of a scientific mind is that one is willing to discard a prevailing idea if it is proven that a better idea replaces it. The sign of a convinced believer is that no matter the evidence against my position, it is all false and only my belierfs and ideas are correct. Where are you on this issue?
Just as my history lesson on how acceptance of sponteneous creation from piles of garbage was overturned by the observation that life did not come from rotting meat, but was later adapted to consider the possibility that life could have indeed come from a so-called primordial soup, science seeks to better define or replace any idea that it ponders. Science is not meant to be dogmatic, and at times creationists say it is because science refuses to accept the ideas of creationism.
My contention is that if creationists can come up with scientific evidence for their position, and that does not mean just saying, no to evolutionists, then science will do as it has always done - change prevailing thoughts.
Thus, the burden of proof right now is upon creationists, not evolutionists. Come up with a better way. If you lead, others will follow. But science does not answer questions by stating that because we don't know how something occurred that therefore it never happened. Instead science follows the path of, I don't know how this occurred, so let's find out.
Creationists seem to be following a path of, the Bible says this, so it must be true and all facts, evidence and observations need to be accepted upon the basis of how they fit Biblical scripture, otherwise they are false.
That is not science, it is dogma. Would you agree?
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Mark, in rereading your original hub, which kind of got lost in my back and forth with others, I would also add to the reasons why if I were God I would be embarassed about this creation: We are a mess as species! Why Mosquitoes? Why rattlesnakes? Why people? Maybe other animals would better worship God than we would! Maybe they wouldn't have rebelled in the Garden of Eden, which I am convinced, by the way, is NOT Cleveland! Take That Drew!
But most of all, why even bother? We live miserable little lives that in the end come to the same conclusion, and the best we can do is hope, and I emphasize HOPE, that somehow we measure up and get to Heaven where we sit around all day and play harps and sing songs. KUMBAYA, Baby!
OK, I'm being a bit snotty here, but many of us believe all of this has to mean something, but I ask, does it have to? Does life really have to mean something? Does a dog or fish wonder about WHY it is here and what it's purpose is? Why should we, then? Why are we more special than any other living animal or plant or whatever?
If God were generous and really loved us, he would have given us lobotomies right away so we wouldn't spend our lives in perpetual fear of never measuring up and facing eternity in a lake of fire.
As for me, I hope for total oblivion, with no after life. Either that or reincarnation, where at least I get a second, third, fourth, etc. chance to get things right!
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Yes - we did get a little side tracked. Which is what the religionists are best at - semantics. Attack the scientific theory in the hope that they will not have to deal with the genuine issue - that there COULD NOT have been a god involved in evolution.
This is why I did not make an argument in favor of evolution. Of course evolution happens - that is not in question - except by blind religionists who realize that there is no room for a god in the process.
I still would be interested to know how you manage to fit a god in. As far as I am concerned - we are animals. We make the most of our time here and the only thing that differentiates us from all the other animals is self awareness - which does not appear to be such a great thing lol
When I read the bible - I read an attempt to understand ourselves - not instructions from an invisible super being. If these guys actually understood and followed their book - we would not be having this conversation. Because no where in there is commandment no 11 - attack anything that goes against the dogma you have misinterpreted. LOL
Great article. I have very similiar beliefs on religion, and science. Check out my new hub on the role it has played in hampering the progress of mankind since the beginning of history.
Fundies will always be wrong & i can prove it, just take a look at this video;
Well, Mark, I can't really answer for the Christian part of me other than to say it is not the typical Christianity of Us vs Them. I guess I could just as easily call myself a Buddhist or anything else. It just so happens that Christianity is more common where I grew up, so I use that label.
I kind of like the whole gentle Jesus part of Christianity, someone who is a friend through thick and thin. I think I've met a lot of people in my life who live their Christianty without judging or condemning others for their beliefs.
I've met people who live exemplary lives, some of whom are Christian, others of whom are not, some of whom have no religious belief at all, but in the end I really do like the messages of love your neighbor as you love yourself, and all the positive messages, which somehow peep out past the "Thou shalt not..." and "lake of fire" messages.
I am a humanist who thinks that some of the Bible (and other holy books) at times get it right. They all may be nothing more than just some things written down by men, believing they were inspired by God, but I also look at the entire Universe and at times think it is the curtain, and behind it is something else, something we aspire to but can't quite put a finger on. Maybe that something actually made the Universe at the moment of the Big Bang. Maybe it just stood by and watched. Maybe it is just my need to believe something is behind the curtain. I really don't know, and I am not afraid to admit it.
The Universe is neither warm nor cold to us, it simply has no feelings about us at all. It is only through our eyes that it seems either friendly or malevolent, and that is more or less how I view the world we live in. It is our take on things that make life either worth living or worth escaping. I do believe that a lot of what passes for religion today is really just mental survival. We fear death, but I think what we fear most of all that life has no meaning, and therefore, we have no meaning.
I don't know if this makes any sense but that is the sum of where I am today. I could change tomorrow, because I remain open to all things being possible.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
No - that makes perfect sense and is pretty much the same way I feel (except for the cultural definition - god). The universe couldn't care about me one way or the other. I am no more or less important than a grain of sand on a beach. But I am a part of it nonetheless. I just do not feel the need to ascribe my self some importance like many of the religionists who seem unable to cope with the idea that they are not important.
Well, we could quibble about the name we use - God. I could say Joe and it would be pretty much the same thing. Is there a cosncious being out there? Is that being conscious of us? I don't know. I wonder, though, and I remain open to the possibility that all these religious ideas passed down through the ages may be half-forgotten times when Joe walked amongst us. Or they may just be the desire to believe that once Joe walked amongst us.
I have seen things that seem miraculous, and maybe they were. Maybe they were just coincidence. Again, I don't know, but I do wonder.
So now we have Joe the Plumber, Joe the Shouter and Joe the god.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
LOL - Well as long as you do not tell me that "Joe " has a set of rules for me - and you know what these rules are we will never come into conflict.
What a great topic. This topic is like the movie "Field of Dreams" if you build it they will come. Write a blog about creationism and evolution and it will fill with comments. My biggest problem with this debate is that people are always on ONE side or another. That is like saying these are the only two choices that explain our existence. What if there are other explanations? What if?
I understand both sides and agree with both sides to an extent. Personally for anyone to think that this universe came about all on it's own has been smoking a little bit too much of something. I mean think about it. Before everyone flies off the handle just think about what I am saying here.
In our solar system there is one sun and 8 official planets. Of course there are 130 or so satellites of the planets and other bodies floating around. But these planets and sun are all in perfect alignment and rotation of each other. The weather, seasons, and let's face it, everything that happens is and can be a direct result from this. If our axis gets a little off the entire planet can be at risk of survival.
To think that this all just happened by coincidence is absurd! There has to be a divine something or other out there. Many may argue about whether or not he/she/it can be referred to as god, Jehovah, Allah or whatever. The truth is that there is a rhyme and a reason for everything. I personally can't explain why things are the way that they are, but I do believe beyond a shadow of a doubt that there is a creator of some sort.
I don't attend a church of any particular denomination, or do I plan on it in the future. For me, I have a spiritual belief and don't buy into the different religions. They can't all be right, can they? I believe that everyone has a little bit of the correct answer.
I think everything was created and put into operation. I also believe that there is evolution occurring on this planet at the same time. You have to be ignorant to ignore that possibility as well. Let's face it, if we have sex with out siblings, it is likely the child will have "down syndrome." If a white man has sex with a black female, the child will likely be not quite black, and definitely not white. The more they continue to produce off spring and mix the race the results will continue to change.
Someone else mentioned "Dinosaurs" I think it was Mark. I believe in dinosaurs, after all, where did the bones come from if they didn't exist? Maybe the bible doesn't reference the existence of dinosaurs, I don't know because I didn't study it that much. Perhaps there is an explanation that makes sense about dinosaurs as well.
Here is my explanation. I think that if you were able to go to all 8 of the planets in our solar system and dig into their planet, you might find remains of creatures as well. Think about it. It is possible that the planets, including earth is like a renovated motel. During one cycle there are dinosaurs and they die out. The world goes into a rebuilding process and again one day is inhabited, but this time by the creatures and people that we see and live with today. Perhaps you can go to Mars and dig up some alien remains, or even see an alien in real life, don't know? But it's hard to believe that the planets are just there for no reason, at least to me it is.
I think there is a god, or a divine being. I don't see him/her as someone with a long flowing beard and white robe. I see this entity as a light energy or perfection and this energy is where everything comes from. We all have a soul or light energy, I think most people can buy into that. Do you evolutionists believe that a soul evolves? I don't at least not in make up. I believe that a soul evolves spiritually and every soul is here to provide a purpose and to gain knowledge. I believe that some souls are older than others and some are on higher plains.
The bottom line is this. Everything in existence, and if you think about it "existence" is a pretty big thing! Everything began somehow. Things happen or a reason and there is a cause and effect of everything we do, or don't do. That is in the divine plan. we will keep changing colors, getting taller, living longer, or shorter. Eventually it is likely that we (human race) will die away and there is another dominant form of life on this planet or another.
Just my thoughts, please don't crucify me
Jeff
Crucify you? Why would I need to do that ? You already did it yourself.
"To think that this all just happened by coincidence is absurd!"
LOLOLOLOLO
Therefore there MUST have been a CREATOR!
LOLOLOLOLO
Because anything else is absurd.......
Oddly enough - I have heard that one before........
Well, rvsource, some people automatically believe that anyone who does not think like them is wrong, and they have to speak out that way. As for me, I think I've been pretty open to both sides, even though I favor evolution over creationism. If, however, creationism came out with a logical, data-backed argument, I could be persuaded to believe their interpretation of facts.
The problem as I see it is that creationists so far have done little to prove their argument and have spent all their energy on just saying that evolution is impossible because (a) there is a creator, and (b) because the few bits of data they have chosen to contest have not yet been 100% proven by science.
For example, the histidine question that my friend asked in an earlier comment. Science is still studying the idea that this came from meteorites that fell to early Earth, or possibly that it was created in cold eras or regions. Histidine, as far as my research teaches me, is formed in cold, not in heat, as would have been most of the other molecules necessary for life.
But until science discovers the actual source, the question will remain open to attack, because of course, according to creationists, meteorites are just an absurd idea that science can't prove, even if histidine has been found in ancient meteorite samples.
But so far many of the proofs of evolution that have been proven have not been attacked. Instead, from some creationist groups, we lead to believe that dinosaurs and human beings walked together on Earth, even though the only proof of that are some indistinct, 18" long footprints in a mud shale in Texas, and unless our ancestors had feet like Bozo the Clown, that's hard to believe and does not qualify as credible evidence for that idea.
And of course there are those who say that Noah built an ark big enough for all the species of animals to dwell there, which would make the ark many miles long and wide, and also fails to answer the question that if the seas were desalinated by so much fresh water, why did the fish and other sea creatures survive? And where did the water come from and where did it go? there's just not that much water to go around.
Anyway, not every one is diametrically opposed to new ideas, we just need something more than hopeful speculation, backed up by no facts aor data, to show that creationism has any truth to it.
If one says just accept it, then I disagree.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Mark,
I wasn't really looking for a pissing match back and forth, but I'm game if you are.
As I told you, I believe in evolution to an extent, after all things, species do evolve. But please explain to me just exactly how the planets, solar system, sun, stars, black holes, galaxies and all that came about? Also explain what is beyond our solar system and where does it end, does it end? Is space infinite? How did space get there?
RV Source - I am not interested in a pissing match either. I am quite prepared to say "I don't know, but the big bang seems like a reasonable explanation" to that question. Although, the more I understand, the more I am inclined to think the universe is constantly expanding and contracting.
You have an answer though? LOL God did it. Piss easy answer. How about I say "The Easter Bunny did it to annoy the Tooth fairy?"
Sorry - I cannot accept your extremely easy answer. Probably because I do not NEED to have an answer. If I NEEDED to have one - maybe, but I do not.
And your "To think that this all just happened by coincidence is absurd!" really does not help your cause. I mean - how do you come to this conclusion?
And who said anything about "coincidence"?
There is an awful lot of choices between that and "a god did it".
Chef Jeff
I think you and I agree more than disagree.
As I said in my first comment, I agree with some of both sides. I do however strongly believe in a divine source. I can't offer proof of such an existence, however at the same time no one can prove to me just exactly how the planets, space, galaxies all came into existence to begin with. I think that is the result of a creator and evolution is a process that occurs everyday.
I don't think dinosaurs and man walked the earth at the same time either. I think dinosaurs were here long before modern man existed. I also as I said think there is and or was life on other planets. Possibly there are even other solar systems that inhabit life in some way or another.
But it would be very difficult for me to understand how everything got started in the first place, without a divine energy to create it.
Also where do you stand on the belief of a soul?
Mark
Did you even read the rest of my comments?
I agree with evolution as far as what is going on in the world. But something started the entire process.
I saw the rest of your comments yes. But "something" started it? How do you come to that conclusion? How do you then come to the conclusion that it is "divine," and - are you religious? If so - how do you then further come to the conclusion that it spoke to a prophet?
Of course evolution happens. There is no question of that. But - damn - that is a roundabout way to "create" something in it's own image.
So - evolution happens. Natural adaptation to changes in the environment. We agree.
Now where does a God come in - because this is a natural process that could well have resulted in something radically different to US.....
rvsource, as for a soul, I was told when I lived inSpain that a soul was the body, and that the spirit was what animated the soul. I grew up thinking a soul was a spirit, and more or less still believe that. Spirit may be electrical, it may be some essense of which we yet know nothing. We may have made it up.
I have heard "ghost" talking on the various sights on the Internet. Is it real? Is it proof of life after death? Personally I hope either for total and complete oblivion, nothing remains, if the lake of fire argument is real, or for reincarnation, if we get to work at making our spirits better.
I am not committed to any particular belief on souls right now, other than to say I acknowledge that such a thing may be possible. But I can neither prove nor disprove it.
We may indeed be in agreement on many things, and perhaps on the subject of this hub as well. I do not have to "believe" in evolution because we still see it happening. To me the question is rather like, do I believe in light? well, I see light, that is, what I am told light is, and i don't see when there is no light. I am just as certain that when I see evolution, I see it.
I can't see God, or spirits, or at least haven't yet. I may choose to believe in them, which means I accept they exist without having any proof to make that belief into a 100% sure thing.
I also understand when someone says they know God exists but can't prove it. What they really mean is, I have accepted that God exists, even though I can not prove it 100%. Where I have trouble is when people start telling me I have to believe what they do, which some religionists do, no matter their faith, creed or whatever. Since they can't tell me with 100% assurity, that is, proof their beliefs, no matter how fervently they may believe them, I have no obligation to accept their word as truth, or even their proof that they are correct and I am wrong.
And that, as I see it, is the failing of forced conversion, whether at the edge of a sword, or the end of a sentence. This is what "you" believe, but it is not what "I" am willing to accept.
I ave been told I am not a "real" Christian because I don't do "what other Christians do", whatever that means. Is there just one code of behavior or belief for one to be sure one is a Christian? Apparently not, although each writer who claims this is cock-sure they have the one, true answer, and everybody else is wrong. Fine, then so be it.
Anyway, thanks for the comment and reply and keep an open mind for all possibilities! Created, or not, the Universe is a fascinating place!
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Mark,
I think that some people just like to argue and others actually have a valid opinion. I believe that no matter what I say, you will find a way to argue about it and that is fine. I just have better things to do.
As far as something starting the process, that is factual. All you have to do is look around and everything is here so it obviously started somehow. Did god start it? Of course I don't know the answer to that, but I do know that SOMETHING/SOMEONE started it. We can call it god, I call it divine, call if what you like. I said earlier I don't see this entity as a man wearing a white robe and beard. I see it as a divine energy. You can disagree and I know you will, and I really don't care because it is my belief, not yours.
There is more to this than the physical, whether you believe this or not. It is more on a spiritual level and I believe souls are on different levels and some are more advanced and have learned more during their time on this earth. You might be a younger soul Mark, and not open to things that are beyond your grasp and that is OK. There is always another life for you to learn this.
Some things don't have to be proven to be true, some things are just known and that is that. We also later on might be able to prove what we can't see. For example no one can see DNA with the naked eye, or electrons, atoms and etc. But they are there. We have found ways to show their existence. Perhaps one day we will be able to show proof of a spirit or soul and a divine presence, one that will then believe.
In the meantime have a great day
lololol
And this is how it always goes. THIS IS A FACT - even though I have no PROOF - I am RIGHT LOLOLOL
SOME THINGS ARE JUST KNOWN LOLOLOL
I do know that SOMEONE started it.? LOLOLOLO
Seriously dude - Really really sorry your ridiculous beliefs have been proven wrong. TOO BAD THERE IS NOT A GOD AND YOU WILL DIE. LOLOLOLOL
Good job with the condescending "You might be a younger soul Mark, and not open to things that are beyond your grasp"
LOLOLOL
Nice one. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Is that enuff lols?
Chef Jeff
Thanks for your comments and I respect your point of view which by the way are very similar to mine.
Jeff
As far as Mark's comments, I can't communicate with someone that answers LOLOLOL, at least intelligently.
I guess I will migrate on to another way to spend my time
Take care
Really - what can I do with "You might be a younger soul Mark, and not open to things that are beyond your grasp" other than laugh at you?
You might be an ignorant fool, who cannot grasp the truth of what I say.
Nor can you see how condescending that is coming from an uneducated person such as you appear to be.
CIAO. I LOVE YOU LOLOLOLOLOL
Well, Mark what are you now? 21? 22? LOL But really, there is a belief by some that people can be old souls, new souls, or middling souls. Interesting in and of itself, the kind of talk I like on a a rainy night with the lights out and thunder rumbling in the distance. Puts you (well, me at least!) in that certain spooky mood.
Gets more intersting with cigars and single malt, I can tell you! But then, what doesn't? He-he!
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
Oh - I agree - although I prefer a good bourbon. It is the condescending "beyond your grasp" that I love though. Trust me - no one has ever said anything like that to my face.
If they want to delude themselves into believing whatever it is they have decided MUST be true - that is their business, but to suggest the only reason I do not believe it is because it is "beyond my grasp" well - what can you do but laugh at them?
Maybe the lack of understanding found in many of the people in the U.S. about evolution and the facts that back it up are due to their having slept through science class. Obviously they have some delusion that you can accept or deny facts based on belief, but in the real world, it doesn't work that way. Facts are facts, not subject to whim and fancy.
OK, all you bible-thumpers, close your eyes and walk out into a busy intersection, firm in the belief that God will make you safe from getting squashed!
I know, you can't tempt the lord thy god, but if you can't, then what good is it worshipping a god that ignores you when you need him the most? At least the ancient gods of the Greeks and others could be lured into backing one side or another in war or in politics with a few burnt offerings or human sacrifies.
But this Christian god! What can I say? Does he just sit there on his cosmic pillow, having created the mess we live in, and expect us to find our way walking with eyes closed across the busy intersections of life? Why does he ignore us and fails to at least show us something our little, imperfect minds can understand? Enough with symbols and symbolism, already! Just write what you want on the side of the Empire State Building and we'll gladly follow!
Come on, give us a clue! Either that or just tell us your whole purpose was a sham from that start! You're a jealous God? Well, I'm a sceptical being. Let's meet in the middle and see what this is all about!
OK, so people want to believe in God. Go ahead, and stop confusing your religious beliefs with science, already! I like science, and I accept as fact evolution occurred and still goes on. If you don't like that, tough! I don't like the fact that onions make me ill, but I accept it! Get a life and stop trying to change things you really don't understand!
I like your hub, Mr, Knowles!
Unabashed Liberal Jake from Chicago!
I have seen God
LOLOL
Great contribution. So you hallucinate. Sorry. Have you seen a doctor?
Hey, don't worry about facts! Just believe what you want and the facts can be made to fit! Want to believe that sea shells on Mt Everest really mean that Noah sailed around for a year in the Great Flood? Want not to believe that once that rock was under some primitive ocean? Belief will magically make those nasty old facts change to fit your ideas! Just add the God factor and all science will cower beneath your cogent arguments!
Want to believe that every living species could fit on a boat and be sailed around for a year, and that land plants would continue to survive although under dark, deep waters for a year, or that sea creatures would survive in a hugely desalinated ocean that covered the entire globe, and that the water sudden just appeared, created out of nothing, in sucvh quantities as to envelope the Earth? Don't want to face reality that there could not be enough food to feed these animals for a year? Want to believe that God pulled off some miracle and made food just magically appear every day? And that a handful of people could clean up all the poop and urine and all of this seven days a week and still get 8 hours of sleep? (Not to mention the daily schlepping up many hundreds of tons of water to slake the thirst of these poor captive beasts?)
Not to worry! Some TV preacher will prove it beyond all doubt by stating that God intervened and decided that after He had created all these laws of nature we live by, it was his duty to do a few miraculous things by breaking the very laws of creation He had set up!
Inother words - Don't confuse me with the facts, I've already made up my mind!
Well, then, ye doubters of science, keep your "made up mind" to yourself and stop trying to make up contrary "facts" to fit your ridiculous ideas! You sound like a bunch of school yard kids trying to come up with the best story!
"No, my house is more haunted because in the morning I leave my bed a mess, but after I get home the bed is made up! It has to be ghosts!"
Unabashed Liberal Jake from Chicago
.... hmm... I believe in Evolution but... I think I could write a good counter argument for this just for fun (even though I totally agree with you). I've been reading a very scientific book about how the Theory of Creation can be supported by the very thing that supports evolution: Science.
UL - there you go. :)
jojo - go for it dude. More money selling Dawkins book though. Them bible science books are all free. wonder why? :LOL:
LOL LOL ROFLMAO at Mark Knowles!!! You live by no rules. You don't want a set of rules to live by so you make sure you have no God, who in fact has rules for you to follow.
It all comes down to evolution, we have argued this before. If you think that both sexes male and female just happened to evolve to be able to reproduce - then go right ahead and keeping thinking that. And it just so happens that all animals, mammals, insects, reptiles and most fish need both sexes to reproduce and they all just happened to evolve that way. Most ignorant hub you have written.
So far no one on any of the hubs will answer my basic questions about how did Noah supposedly keep all these species alive for ayear on a boat? even today it would cost hundreds of billions of dollars to build a ship parge enough to hold every living creature, either in pairs of seven pairs at we are told Noah did in the Bible.
there are many other arguments against this fixation with the Ark, especially when one cionsiders that wood fit for building a ship was a very expensive and rare item where Noah was said to live. Even Kings with all their gold had very little of this kind of wood in their palaces, so where did Noah get the resources to built a huge boat that would have had to have been miles across just to hold, not only the animals, but also their food and water?
The technology for building such a boat, so many cubits by so many cubits, was not really a common thing in Noah's time, nor was it feasible even several millenia later. today we would be hard pressed to build a sea-worthy craft large enough to hold every living species.
And apart from this there is the nasty problem of how did plants survive at the bottom of this alleged ocean, and where did the water come from, and how did the sea animals survive desalination, and a whole host of problems no Biblical scholar has answered with any answer other than "God made it possible".
Well, may be God did, but then and again it is just as likely that this ancient tale is just a bit less grandious than the Bible would have us believe.
One other question I pondered last night was, why do we still have an atmosphere if water displaced so much of the atmospheric space above the land masses? I mean, a flood large enough to cover the tallest mountains would immediatly force most of the atmosphere out into space. Once out there it would be lost to the Earth for a very long time, if not forever. How did it get back down?
For those who wonder what I am asking, take a large glass container and fill it with water. The air in the container is lifted up and out as the water climbs. the same thing ould have happened here.
evolution or creation, what difference does it make in the world?
Whatever the reason for our existence, we have done nothing to improve the way that we interact with each other. While we improve technology, we still play by the same emotional rules that have existed since we started recording history.
We have not evolved since the beginning of recorded history and say that is 4 to 10 thousand years. Is that because we have evolved to the ultimate state of evolution or is it because evolution is not all that you portray it.
You seem to spit out your comments like venom, go for it.
Opinion duck - exactly. And what is holding us back? Religion. Time we evolved past it - maybe then we can become what we could be?
I believe there is a God, but I admit that I can't prove that He exists. For one, I don't even know Him, and I think I can't even know Him. That, I think, is the burden for many believers - having faith for something (or someone) that you cannot even know. Why I cannot know Him is the basic divine thing I perceive about Him - being over and above myself.
Mark, this is quite a provocative hub, but I would like to point out that in this hub, you have confused evolution as a fact from a theory. A theory is an explanation of the progressively harmonious "evidences" scientists are uncovering. Darwin was the one who first proposed the theory of natural selection as an explanation of why supposedly similar species are different from each other. He pointed that the difference was a change caused by the environment in which the species live in. Evolution, he concocted, is the process wherein species change in response to the demands of their environment. The point here is that the theory of evolution is merely an interpretation that organizes supposed evidence of marked change among species (just as Sigmund Freud theorized that consciousness has three structures - ego, superego and id). Evolution is not a fact. That is a layman understanding of the subject. It is only a possible explanation of an "observed" phenomenon. I quoted "observed" because no evidence has been made to literally show that change.
Mark Knowles: "The universe couldn't care about me one way or the other. I am no more or less important than a grain of sand on a beach. But I am a part of it nonetheless."
@ Mark Knowles: Correct me if I'm wrong, but I perceived from this comment that you equate the lack of importance the universe (whatever you think of this is) gives you to a lack of a "divine hand" that guides life. I tried to make sense out of this statement, but this is illogical: Someone out there don't give a damn about me, but that does not mean that he/she does not exist. I expected a more sensible comment, knowing the position you wrote on your hub.
Mark Knowles: "the only thing that differentiates us from all the other animals is self awareness"
@ Mark Knowles: Self-awareness still paints a blurry picture in the field of psychology. I remember reading an article claiming that animals actually do have some form of self-awareness. Plus, the term itself is not even consistent among psychologists themselves. More research is needed to even have a soft foundation on this subject. I have commented on this because you seemed really sure of your statement. There are a lot of things that actually differentiates us humans from the rest of the animal kingdom. Perhaps speech is one, but it is debatable. I know my dog understands some of the words I tell her. Anyway, your position about humans not being too far off from other animals can also be interpreted by religionists as a good topic to promote their belief in a God - his image is too profound to have touched all his creations. This is possible, but like I said, I don't know. That could be just one of the theories religionists could propose and believe as fact, no different from how you have confused evolution as fact and not just a theory.
rvsource: "To think that this all just happened by coincidence is absurd! There has to be a divine something or other out there. [...] But it would be very difficult for me to understand how everything got started in the first place, without a divine energy to create it."
@ rvsource: Yes, it's probably the most difficult to understand among believers. But just because you cannot understand it, or that because you cannot fit the statement in your schema, does not mean that it is false. You don't have to accept it, but you don't also have to reject it.
rvsource: "Some things don't have to be proven to be true, some things are just known and that is that."
@ rvsource: I agree with you that some things are just known, but that is not just that. I remember commenting in one of David Bowman's hubs that there are extra-logical ways of finding the truth. There are some things that cannot be proven, but we "know" that they exist. You only need to look at yourself and ask, "How can I prove that I exist?" Of course this is a very philosophical question, and a lot of philosophers have already debated on this topic (Think Rene Descartes' "I think therefore I am."), but the point here is, we can go on with our lives without that proof. We can go on assuming that we exist even if we don't know the proof. Just the same, anyone can go on believing in God without even having the proof of his existence; or scientists are continuously assuming that natural selection is at work despite it being only a theory. But that does not mean that we should not try. No, it is not that "some things don't have to be proven to be true," but some things can't just be proven to be true, and some things can be. And in order for us to know if anything can be proven or not, we should at least try. Now that's faith, faith in reason.
Chef Jeff: "The sign of a convinced believer is that no matter the evidence against my position, it is all false and only my belierfs and ideas are correct."
@ Chef Jeff: Believers believe in what they believe in for a reason. Beliefs can change. Reasons can get debunked. I hope you can be more optimistic.
Chef Jeff: "But until science discovers the actual source, the question will remain open to attack."
@ Chef Jeff: Like I implied earlier, science is just one of the ways we can find answers to our questions (Note the extra-logical ways of proving truths.). Even science itself is open to attack. Anyone is, anything is, even if something rests on a seemingly solid foundation. This is why evolution, no matter how correct the theory may be, remains a controversial and well-attacked issue. There are many factors for this, and one of my favorites is ignorance.
Chef Jeff: "I also understand when someone says they know God exists but can't prove it."
@ Chef Jeff: I can only surmise of someone who would say he/she knows that God exists without being able to prove it if he/she sees him (an extra-logical way), but that can't also be proven (or verified). This statement is not for me, but should it be, in relation to my position about this argument, I would say no, I do not know that He exists because I cannot prove it and I have not seen Him yet, but I do believe that a God exists.
Chef Jeff: "I ave been told I am not a "real" Christian because I don't do "what other Christians do", whatever that means."
@ Chef Jeff: From what I know, identifying one's self as a Christian means believing in Christ Jesus; it does not have anything to do with religious practices.
Unabashed Liberal: "Get a life and stop trying to change things you really don't understand!"
@ Unabashed Liberal: Get a life and stop thinking that you really do understand.
Sprinkler Man: "Most ignorant hub you have written."
No, this is not an ignorant hub. It could be a "most," but definitely not ignorant. There's a misconception about evolution being translated to a fact and not just a theory, but again, this hub is not ignorant. In fact, it is a very interesting hub - people are going out of their way thinking and making good comments. I guess it's time you start thinking too, and backing up your comment with a reason (or a couple of reasons) of why you think so.
@ Mark Knowles: Thank you for publishing this hub. It was worth reading and commenting on. I had a good time. :)
R.G. San ramon, sometimes people believe because they have no other choice. People believe in GOd for many reasons, but people also believe in other things out of desperation or for self-preservation. My statement is that believers usually have been convinced to believe what they believe and stick with it.
Thus comes the argument by creationists that evolution must be wrong, in spite of huge amounts of evidence and actual proof of it's being real, but this all means nothing because the believer's religious book can't be reconciled with data that would otherwise set the belief aside.
There is no real proof of Noah's flood, for example, and the very nature of such a fantastic event would have radically altered the Earth. Some people claim that since flood stories are common in other parts of the world, that is proof. It isn't. It may be evidence, but further study is needed to determine the nature of these flood stories.
Floods are common everywhere in the world and cataclismic floods, rare as they may be, can live on in the common folklore of a people simply because they are so rare and terrible. A story of a great flood does not prove that any particular flood is Noah's flood.
There are many other reason why the argument against evolution from a religious based point of view is not compatible with facts. One reason is that evolution does not attempt to tell how life began. It simply states that no matter how it began, life evolves, which it still does today, as we are witness to, sometimes thorugh natural selection, that is genetic diversity within a population, or by randomness of external causes. there is no one single cause for evolutionary steps to occur, they just do, and whether that is with a guiding hand or not, we see them, or we find evidence of them, all of which adds up to what you seem to dismiss as a theory.
As has been stated very well and much better by others, in science a theory is not just some guess at an answer. it is arrived at only by a long and difficult process whereby peers in science and elsewhere examine the data and either accept the theory or show how it is falsified by other data.
Creationists would have us throw out the scientific method because it does not agree with their Biblical interpretations. This is not science and will never be. If creationists wish to disprove evolution they must accpet that evolution is based upon the scientific method and disprove it under those rules.
Quoting the Bible does not nullify the findings of science in evolution anymore than it does in explaining electricity or how clouds form. You mention that you can't accept evolution as fact because it's just a theory. Please read up on how a theory is formed in science and perhaps you'll understand a bit more just how these things work.
I don't claim to be right that evolution is the only answer, only that I understand how evolution became a theory. I accpet evolution because to date no one has been able to falsify the data that underpins the theory. If someone does, and the data holds up to scrutiny, then evolution, like any other aspect of scientific theory, will go by the wayside. Until then, it is accepted as fact as well as we humans can understand the meaning of fact.
Cheers!
Chef Jeff
@ Chef Jeff: No need to tell me to "read up on how a theory is formed in science" when you yourself accept evolution as fact and not a theory. A theory is not a fact; it is an interpretation, a way of organizing and providing meaning from a set of data. Perhaps, you should follow your own advice; you do not seem to know the difference between the two.
Chef Jeff: "My statement is that believers usually have been convinced to believe what they believe and stick with it."
Of course. One cannot say that he/she believes in something if he/she does not stick with it. (What were you thinking?) Whether by reason or by any other means, people defend what they believe in. But that does not mean that a believer cannot become a non-believer. People change.
Chef Jeff: "I accpet evolution because to date no one has been able to falsify the data that underpins the theory."
Data cannot be falsified; they are recorded. On the other hand, theories CAN be falsified. And just because the theory of evolution has not yet been falsified (although it is continually being modified to suit current research), that does not mean that it is already true, hence the reason why it remains to be only a theory.
Regardless of the mechanisms, the underlying belief of evolution as Mark points out is rather unquestioned. Whether evolution occurs or not is not open to debate, the sticky parts in the middle are always up for a little playing around with.
Darwin himself struggled to even publish his work, knowing what it may present to churches in his time. But alas, the world is not flat.
There's plenty of room for mythology and scientific theory to co-exist, anyway.
I have not the time to try toconvience anyone about evolution and God.People will believe what they choose to believe. Consider me I believe in the impossible and the supernatural that Is why I believe that a miracle happened when Noah got all those animals in the ark. Just as how a miracle happened when jesus walked on the water and used 5 loves and two fish to feed 5 thousand people and had 10 basket left over. Can evolution dispute that and explain how that happen. Can it say it did not happen and explain why it did not happen and prove it. I believe in miracles.
@ Juliet - good for you. Why on earth do you think I care that you choose to believe impossible miracles? Does that make evolution wrong? No - of course not. I don't really care how irrational your beliefs are - I would prefer it if you kept them away from me though. ;)
Brand new to Hubpages. Your blog caught my eye. For those who are really looking for arguements for the creationist side you might want to look into books or videos by Lee Strobel, a former athiest who now believes in creation and has some really good information to support his views. As a PK "Preachers kid", I have been torn about why we are here for many years and still have many questions, but I just can't buy the theory that it's all by chance.
The debate over creationism vs. evolution is yet another example of the paradox that is created when science and religion butt heads. One is based on empirical data and the other on faith- how could they ever come to terms. It is like trying to use peas to prove carrots are orange.
Evolution became the religion for academics.
There are still a lot of "believes" in - and almost everybody sees the whole evolution as dogma - and not as it is: a theory!
Even here in the article, evolution substitutes creation AS DOGMA.
Lets face it: both are theories and both are incredible unbelievable! [in Evolution: the human developed from some amino acids swimming around, over micro organisms; over simple animals, over monkeys to the homo sapiens sapiens... everything by accident! or Creation: an undisclosed uber-power named God created man from dirt... anyway sounds very similar...]
Dominic - that is utter garbage. Sorry.
I know that you cannot see the difference between something that has millions of facts to demonstrate that it happens and a religious piece of fiction.
Guess that makes you a believer huh? LOLOLOLOLOLOL
Have you ever had ANY supernatural experience?
You may attack Christ, you may attack God, but would you attack the Holy Spirit?
Just asking...
MK,
Have you ever had ANY supernatural experience?
You may attack Christ, you may attack God, but would you attack the Holy Spirit?
Just asking a couple of questions...
aquasilver - first of all - what difference does it make to you what I do not believe in?
Second of all - yes I have had supernatural experiences.
There is no god or jesus to beleeeb in. You made them up to scare little children.
Fuck your holy spirit.
Happy now? That you think I am damned for all eternity? LOLOLOL
You actually think you are speaking for a GOD?
You think me saying I do not believe in your god is "attacking christ and god"? LOLOL You really are one dumb fuck aren't you?
Hey Mark, just what to share a picture with you http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/1892/creationism. ;)
I found it on this blog: lolgod.blogspot.com and I´m sure you´ll love it :)
Great hub, btw.
Take care,
Ricardo
Absolutely unbelievable - Aguasilver: You pulled a stunt like this by starting that particularly nasty forum thread, but soon disappeared when even other Christians took offence.
Yet here you are, pulling the same stunt when you think that nobody is looking, showing a new level of sneakiness and duplicity.
Not the best example of Christian behaviour I have seen.
LOL
funride - I love it - I will add that to my collection.
Sufi - this guy gives me flash backs to when I was an 8 year old. And his threats work on 8-year-olds :(
Still - as I have told him - he can thank his lucky stars he was not one of the ones filling my head with this shit when I was 8. ;(
Hi Mark,
Well ignoring your normal abuse (you know you really do sound a lot live Evoguy or whatever he calls himself) you yourself said: "I am a big fan of asking questions about anything" - so humour me if you will when I ask these things.
Of course I'm saddened when you deliberately malign the Holy Spirit, but that is your concern and for the record it does allow other believers to see where you are at eternally.
Of course as you believe that you came from nothing by accident and are going nowhere fast when you die, I guess being abusive and crass in this life must give you some small pleasure to reflect on when you think of your future.
When you had your supernatural experience, did it not cause you to wonder where the 'super' came from.... maybe I framed my question wrong (I am a big fan of asking questions about anything)...
Have you EVER had a SPIRITUAL encounter?
Hi Sufi...
I shut off when I saw how it was going, never wanted to have people damning themselves, still don't, not pulling any stunts, shucks I put the whole aspect up on a hub on my pages, I just took it to where discussions could be conducted without the normal hijacking by the local atheist cabal ganging up.
I'm asking MK because he has put himself up as the accuser of the brethren, so why not ask a few questions and find out what he really believes in.
MK as for your NOT VEILED threats, there's no way I would have been telling you these things when I was 8 years old, I didn't come to faith until I was 41, and I don't set to scare anyone, as a matter of fact I lean towards universalism as a good theory, whereupon nobody gets to hell because it does not exist... the lake of fire is a refining process.... it's an interesting theory, but not one you would mention in a church! - and not one popular with you, becuase you get to spend eternity with a God you refuse to admit exists! LOLOLO (to quote you or Evo, or both of you)
You keep a civil tongue in your head and stop your abuse and I'll stop questioning you!
lolol
I am sure jesus would be proud of you for encouraging me to do that. LOLOL - Go fetch a few believers here to see for themselves where I am eternally. LOLOLOLOLOL
Not interested in answering any personal questions - I have met people like you before and you are not asking for anything that would be good for me. ;)
Bye bye Daddy. Just remember - the 8 years old you have used this on will come visit you one day when they find the truth. ;)
There are and never have been any eight year olds that I have 'used this on' - With my own son, I explained about God, and I told him that some people believed that Hell was real, but for me the jury was still out, because the whole concept is hanging on the translstion of one word, and apart from the fact that it is written that it would have been better for Judas to never have been born, there is little evidence to support Hell as anything than a fear aspect added by the RCC about 3-400 years after Christ lived. I am no supporter of Churchianity, but equally I detest people who are abusive and express such hatred as you and EVo seem to spew out.
If you guys are so very sure of your stand (that God does not exist) why do you spend so much time trying to preach to the converted?
I will answer that one.
Because it makes people behave the way you are behaving. The constant conflicts are nothing less than a blight on humanity.
I think you have made a fair representation of yourself here and on the forum you started the other day daring atheists to deny the Holy Spirit:
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/25714
"Why are they afraid to speak against the Holy Spirit?"
Not exactly a loving approach and I do believe you stopped after you were reprimanded by another believer.
Yet here you are pushing me to do the same thing.
See- this is not what I consider to be love and I must say - it is scum like you who persuaded me that the christian religion was a crock of shit in the first place.
Sorry you are too dumb to understand. But keep up the good work LOLOLOLO
"Why are they afraid to speak against the Holy Spirit?"
If you are any sort of representative of it - Fuck the Holy Spirit.
"Yet here you are pushing me to do the same thing."
No true Mark, I asked you not WILL you, but WOULD you, and that's a question, not an incitement, no pushing , not now, not then.
LOLOLOLOL Semantics - excellent.
Sure Daddy. You are forgetting that everything you wrote is there for anyone to read. Both here and the forum.
Not you know I am not scared of your threat/question - what are you going to do?
Sorry Mark, had to pop out to do dome shopping!
What will I do...
Just carry on as normal, Mark, just as normal.... write a few more hubs, answer a few more comments and generally let time and God decide what's right and what's wrong.
I don't care whether you are frightened or not, it's inconsequential to me.
I do suspect that Evo is your 'mask', where you can rant at will without sullying your MK 'image' of the modern man in control, and I am curious to know what abuse happened to you when you were 8 years old, I'd guess that if we knew that we could understand your animosity towards God more readily.
I suspect it involved priests and choirboys.
Whatever happened to you, it turned you into a bully, just like many other boys who felt inadequate and downtrodden by whatever hurt them, and decided to take it out on those who they perceived as weaker, different or a threat.
Whatever, you are not my problem and I wish you well, your non Antichrist articles are good to read, which makes your venom more apparent and less acceptable.
LOL aquasilver - is that your real name by the way?
Thank you for once again reminding me why I do not follow the christian religion. I appreciate the reminder.
Guess you really are too dumb to understand. Oh well.
You must be very proud of yourself. Be sure and get a few more believers to stop by and see me "deny the holy spirit" lololol
Thanks Daddy. Was it good for you? LOLOLOLOL
MK "God apparently took 4.5 billion years to create Adam. Not sure what his problem was - If I was all powerful, I could have done it in a day."
He did. It's you guys who thought it took an all powerful God 4.5 billion tears for a man to 'evolve', who believe that this glorious creation can have happened by total accident, and that your sole purpose of living is to be as obnoxious as possible to Gods people.
Sad.
Now I promise to let you have the last word after this, so don't throw your rattle out of the pram Evo.
Daddy... what is this fixation with Daddy that you keep manifesting? - was he your abuser?
Take note: Jesus trashed the moneylenders in the Temple, He also tore into the Pharisees, don't confuse 'meek' with docile.
When we see evil, we are entitled to expose it.
John
Hey, I'm John, you're Mark, all we need is Matthew and Luke and we are set to take the good news to the ends of the earth....
LOL
Your ridiculous beliefs are of no real interest to me. Your demeanor and behavior tells me all I need to know of how valuable they are. Thanks once again for reminding me why I despise religionists. LOL
You really are not so bright are you? You do not see how the bile you spread is enough to make people ill.
And you think I am evil? LOL
And you are entitled expose it? LOL
Just like jesus did? lol
That is funny. Thanks once again. Sorry your beliefs have been proven to be garbage. Oh well.....
LOLOLOLOL
Environment is responsible for evolution.
Micro evolution is no longer a theory. "It" has been empirically proved. Mutations at the virus and bacterial levels happens very quickly.
Macro evolution is still a theory because in more complicated life forms, mutations/changes happen slowly, sometimes taking many millenia. "It" will also become fact given time.
We are animals. Pls explain to me why "believers" in mythical gods, consider that "we" animals are deserving of immortality.
There is not enuf fresh water on earth to cause a flood of all the land masses on this planet. If there were, all water would have become "brackish" mixing with salt water.
If all land masses were flattened, and flooded with all the existing fresh water on earth, the estimated depth would be about 2 inches.
In 1611 King James and his selected ecclesiastics re-interpeted and re-wrote the "bible" (just one of too many to consider in this response). The new version so infuriated both catholics and protestants that they were planning to assasinate him!
By the way, can any monotheist, factually" define this god thing? There is no definition that factually defines this "god" in any monotheistic scripture. "It" is mentioned and opinion is offered as to what "it" is and "it's" powers are described...and that's all.
Monotheists believe that this "god" thing said: "Let us create man in our image." If they'd study the "bible," they'd have to agree that this biblical god thing flies into maniacal rages and ends up murdering tens of thousands of his "creations:" men, women, children, the unborn, their pets and flocks. Maybe thats why man is the earth's prime predator and killing is just a characteristic of his creator?...
Monotheists base their belief in "it" on "hope" alone. Religious "faith" is based 100% on hope...nothing more.
Unfortunately, the majority of earths population of humanity is still fearful, ignorant, superstitous and easily led i.e the 1000 yrs of the "Dark Ages" and the stadiums filled with followers of the weeping and forgiven TV evangelist Jimmy Swaggert.
I could go on for pages, but why? All I say will not influence the "blind" monotheistic sycophant.
Qwark
Ya'll:
The truth lies in fact.
Even in the micro "quantum" world there is more space than mass.
Our universe could exist in a used piece of chewing gum stuck on the bedpost of an entity in one of the many dimensions of the (TOE)"Theory-of-Everything."
Who can, logically, argue that possibilty?
Qwark :-)
I really hope that a movement can start where atheists stop using the term "god" and simply put an "a" in front of "god" and no capitalization of "god" either. When referring to God
rvsource: "But it would be very difficult for me to understand how everything got started in the first place, without a divine energy to create it."
This is because you are arriving at the question with a preconceived answer: a god is *necessary* to explain anything you cannot immediately explain yourself.
"There is no creation vs evolution debate"
The last refuge of someone who cannot support their argument.
Nicomp - Not really."It says so in the bible therefore it is true," is not really debating. LOLOLOLOL
I agree with every word. Check out my hub "finite" a short journey to my atheism life, which is nothing more than a happy realization of hpw limited my time is here. Comments encouraged
Mark, I agree with the main points in the hub but not necessarily the tone. First of all, it's true there's no debate about evolution, at the highest levels at least. I think we can all agree that you won't get into the top University's PhD programs by quoting the Bible. For those interested, Dawkins aside, probably, the best book I've read on evolution is 'Darwin's Dangerous Idea' by Dan Dennett, which I recommend for anyone, religious or otherwise, wanting to understand its major tenets. I don't see the point though in evolutionists and religionists banging heads. Never the twain will meet and life's too short surely...
Not so sure. There are people who keep their children out of the public school system and teach them that evolution is a lie.
This is child abuse as fas as I am concerned. And needs dealing with.
I understand what you mean and I did say I didn't see the point in banging heads; I've got nothing against reasoned argument. My only point is if you want to bring the opposition closer to your point of view, it can be helpful to put yourself in their shoes. Let me ask you honestly, did you ever convince any religious person of anything in any of the debates you've had here? Did any of them ever say to you, "Oh hang on Mark, you're right, I'm a complete idiot, sorry about that; any chance you could lend me that Dawkin's book?" You know what I mean right? Having said that, I understand how you feel. I just think that the effectiveness of the approach should be the first consideration in any attempt to win an argument. It's easy to win over your own side but to bring someone over from the other side is a different story. That's my take on it at least.
Good grief no!
I am not talking to them. I am talking to the undecided and the ones being fed the line. I Have convinced a few - but - on the whole - no - If you are determined that God created us and evolution is the devils's work - I do not expect to change your mind.
But - I will ridicule you - in the hope that an outsider looking in sees the reason,
Changing memes is a generation-long process.
Interesting hub. I agree with almost none of it, but it is fascinating to see how a science-worshiper is no different, really, than a religious person. Being convinced in your own mind that you are right is not an argument, and that is all that is your whole argument here.
They believe in a supreme being that knows everything, you believe in a discipline (science) that knows everything. It kind of works out to the same in the end.
Um - not really Tim. Science is fact based - and you can actually measure stuff. You know - like the scientifically proven boiling point of water.
But - please go ahead and quote me saying science knows everything. LOL
Your first sentence is correct to that extent - observational science is measurable, predictable, observable, and repeatable. Historical science, however, is not.
Science can discover infinite knowledge about the physical world, but unless we develop a method of time travel, it cannot speak ex cathedra so to speak for the distant past. We can't repeat it or falsify it. We can give it our best guess from the available data, but a guess is still all that it can be.
I think "guess" is rather too loose a term, because it implies complete supposition. Many scientific fields have come to conclusions that broadly coincide with other, impartial un-related fields. Geologist for example have come to similar conclusions as to the age of the earth as other fields have done.
To ignore scientific theories in favor of a god book is nonsensical.
Sure - as we learn more,. we adapt what we consider to be the best explanation we have at that time. That is why science is always moving.
One thing is pretty certain - there is more than enough evidence to show that we and everything else on the planet evolved. As to exactly how that happens - we are still learning.
I just do not see the sense in discarding the one and only way we have of learning about ourselves and our past in favor of "God did it". :(
We would be back in the dark ages.
It must be a coincidence, we wrote about the same topic, but your material is completely different.
Yeah - how about that. What a shocking coincidence.
I wrote this over a year ago - you just wrote yours 10 days ago and used exactly the same layout, title and photos. Amazing. LOLOLOL
Fuckin religionists. LOL
Ok, a well written hub, but one which is aimed at Christians particularly. Therefore, I am going to respond on behalf of all of Creationists and Christians who reject Evolution, simply because it is a lie.
For one, can Evolution give an account for the first atom? NO! it can't. Define homogeneous: "A thing, or something of the same nature or kind, i.e, the universe, the earth." Can Evolution give an account how the homogeneous nature of a non-living substance changed to living one? NO! it can't. Therefore, there had to be a Divine Creator who gave life to non-living creatures, or bodies. This would explain the living organs in plants and trees and animals, including mankind. The Creationists' theory is more persuasive, life can only come from another living substance, or being. Simply put, life comes from life. Before, there was no life. Therefore, there was a Divine designer of the universe, and the earth who also gave life to all living creatures.
Two, this would also point out the false "Big Bang" theory. Can Atheists and Atheist Scientists explain why the present universe is a cosmos, and not a chaos?
No! it can't. In other words, why all of a sudden did the universe after its so-called, "Big Bang" self creation, did it adopt immutable natural laws and organizing principles?
Three, can Evolution give an account for animal consciousness and sensation? No! it can't.
I won't even ask you "anti-creationists" how the stars were formed. But, to put it all in a nutshell, Evolution at best, is a false system of belief based on Science Fiction and hypothesis. This is the explanation of homosexuality being accepted as a valuable contribution to human life. Wake up people, today's scientists are no smarter than 5th graders. Their only agenda is to debunk any belief pertaining to the truth, including God, Jesus, and the bible. They are not trying to establish themselves in truth, but are only trying to indoctrinate, and promote an Atheists society.
Nice hub by the way, well written.
Thanks. Nice to know you speak for all Creationists and Christians who reject scientific knowledge. Yay!
There are unanswered questions that have nothing to do with the proven fact that evolution happens - which we have proof for - and attempt to explain with the theory of evolution - therefore a invisible super being dunnit - stunning argument - thanks for the comment.
I am shocked you are prepared to use a computer. Dear me.
Mark Knowles, I am even more shocked that you even use hubpages, as if you have any sense of what you're writing about. And not to mention that you Evolutionists can only come up with theories with no explanation, and all you people do is stir up questions. When somebody comes along with more questions that challenge your credibility, all you do is resort to foolishness and lame statements, and your arguments hold no weight. The best you can do is post idiotic responses to people like me who aren't afraid to tell you that you're ignorant, and your theories are fiction. Seriously, from reading all of your comments, responses, and etc, shows that you are very ignorant and foolish. You need to get a life. Get some education in morals, then find yourelf a minister of the gospel of Christ, because you need prayer, a new birth, and a change of life. The truth is, all of you Atheists are simply fools with no sound knowledge, I would call you an educated fool, but that would be a compliment to you. Get a different pic, yours look stupid, which is the true match to your character.
Ah - personal attacks - you must be a Christian.
Disgusting religion really - no wonder you have caused so many wars. :(
Gawd you are ignorant. And so very brave from behind your Internet persona - LOLOL
I may have a simplistic look at religion I've been given 1 view for many many years. My point of view is from a person wrestling with religious manipulations in my life and this still continues today...and I'm 32 years old. Constant religious battering is tiresome! I am so glad that there is hub like this out there, thanks Mark. To the Christians; I'm very tired of your opinions I'm tired of your scriptures and verses ( just because it's written in a book doesn't mean we should be regulary beaten with it.) You can pray as much as you like, but it doesn't change the fact that our opinions are EVOLVING, we are evolving past the need to be controlled by fear and ancient scriptures. Again, this is an excellent hub.
Thanks - I seem to have generated an awful lot of attacks. Makes a nice change. :)
How's come the Gospel Of Christ Chruch and most other churches use the teachings of Paul whom by the way is an infiltrator and murderer over the writing of Jesus? How's come Jesus only has four books to his life and Paul has more than that? How's come so called Chritians whomare supposed to Love One Another exhibit the opposite and the call the kettle black? How's come to get their useless point across resort to name calling? Aren't all those characteristic of their Satan? Whre is the unconditional love and compassion for others. It certainly isn't in those who say they follow Jesus Christ--not one single minute drop.
Thanks - I seem to have generated an awful lot of attacks. Makes a nice change. :)
People attack what they fear will change their way of thinking. I like the way some christians will come off all smug about it until you push a bit harder and the fear and nastiness comes out.
Well - I can see why they are so defensive. They had a free pass for so long - and now people are beginning to question their ridiculous beliefs - and they cannot kill you for that now.
It must be very frustrating for them. LOL
UncivilServant, you are correct in that assumption. I really didn't think of it that way only that I get attaked alot too--so much so as to one small group of people on here have decided to ban me from commenting on their hubs--even as much as some who don't even know me or read any of my hubs. Mark keeps getting banned from forums. Oh Well. We should keep pushing Mark...Hahahaha!!
UncicilServant you just gained a new follower.
Hi Mark - enjoyed the article. I am a huge fan of Richard Dawkins, but I think he's too nice !! When confronting rabid religionists (of any persuasion) he backs away from confrontation despite quite obviously recognising them as dribbling imbeciles.
The actual point I wanted to make was a plea to stop calling it "The Theory of Evolution". When Darwin wrote it 150 years ago (well, published it), it was a theory. After 150 years of scientific evidence I think the "theory" bit should be dropped for ever. Incidentally, anyone (sane) who doubts evolution should go out for a walk. Look at the animals in the field such as sheep and cattle, and see how man has changed them for our own purposes. Look at a chihuahua and a great dane, and see what man's selective breeding has done to a wolf. I think I'll call it "un-natural selection" !!!!
LOL - There you go. :)
I find it quite amusing that you say Christians attack evolution so hard because they are scared of it ruining or diminishing what they believe. Using the same logic, one could say YOU are attacking God so hard because you are afraid of Him ruining what you believe...
Yes - you could.
IF - you were a delusional war monger and incapable of seeing that I have never attacked your imaginary friend - just the fan club.
LOL Logic - look it up.
There you go again, always on the attack. Lol, very civil. I was just pointing out that you are using the same aggression against "the fan club" that you hate to be used against yourself. I guess that might be the aim, but I'll take a lesson from you and ask, "When did it become the norm for evolutionary fanatics to attack people of faith?"
Logic, hmmmm I have never heard of that before, I guess I'll have to look it up :)
When did it become the norm? As soon as you were stopped from burning people at the stake for disagreeing with you. It has been growing ever since. Evolutionary fanatics huh LOLOL
I don't need an understanding of science to know that your beliefs are utter garbage and will always - ALWAYS - cause a fight. Just like they are now. Try reading a few history books.
I understand you are upset that science has proven your religion to be nonsense - deal with it.
Try behaving in a way that garners respect and you might get some. Worth a try you think?
Mark Knowles 1:1 - "Try behaving in a way that garners respect and you might get some."
Point taken. I guess I'll act like you now and tell people they are uneducated (try reading a few history books), and what the believe is garbage...oh wait utter garbage. Yeah, maybe that will get me far in life.
LOL
Guess you haven't read the bible then? That is the trouble with people like you - what does the bible say about people who don't believe the utter garbage in it?
Guess you never read any history books either ? Try reading a few - see if your ridiculous religion has caused any conflicts.
Just like it is doing now.
You are obviously uneducated. And your beliefs are utter garbage. Why is me telling the truth such a problem for you?
I acknowledge the crusades that have taken place under the title of "Christianity" in the past, but those were mistakes, devastating ones at that. The New Testament speaks nothing of murdering because of the cause for Christ. Christ died for the world (of course you don't believe that, I am speaking as a Christian), and many of his disciples were persecuted because of what they believed (all but John).
So, if you follow the pattern of the early church, which is what Christians should aim to do. Then, followers of Christ would NEVER try to kill for their cause, in fact they should look to give their own lives up for Christ. You are mistaken, when you look at what Christians have done in the past and apply it to Christian theology.
I am well studied in biblical theology, but at the beginning of my posts I chose not to use the Bible in our discussion because clearly you care nothing for it. My aim was to show how the things you were saying (i.e. behave respectfully and maybe I'll earn yours) was contrary to how you were behaving (i.e. calling me uneducated and telling me my beliefs are garbage).
Professing themselfs to be wise they became fools. If you beleive you came from a rock your a fool!
Dear me,
The pattern of the early church was exactly the same as the current version. Go around telling everybody that god told you what they should be doing and generate a lot of ill will and arguments. For a while there you got fed to the lions for causing that much trouble, (being persecuted) then you came to power and started murdering every one who did not join, now you are losing what power you had and making more trouble attacking scientific advancements, while the Muslims are starting exactly the same circle of their own. Nonsensical belief systems will always - ALWAYS cause a fight.
It is not "persecution" if you push some one into attacking you. Reminds me of the "death by cop" version of suicide.
Have you actually read your bible? The very fact that you are here arguing with me proves one of my points that Christians are hypocrites.
What does your bible tell you to do when faced with an argumentative non believer?
I have studied the bible at great length. It is contradictory, inconsistent, teaches people to actually remove themselves from what could be considered god instead of growing towards it - and none of you follow it in any case.
Why should I respect a man who claims to be a Christian who does not follow the instructions?
So, I conclude that your beliefs are garbage based on the fact that you do not follow the teachings you claim to be a follower of. Or - you are uneducated about them. Or both.
Are you turning the other cheek here? Or are you quarreling with me?
Seriously - never really understood the nonsensical argument that "real" christians would never fight - when here you are fighting. Albeit non-physical.
Like I said - behave in such a way as to demonstrate that you do follow it, do not fight about it - and maybe you will get some respect .
I am not the one claiming to follow christ. You are. And all your brethren over the last 2000 years - how are you any different?
This is a debate, is it not? The very reason you wrote this article was to start a discussion. I have had many discussions with atheists and they have been more than civil towards me and I have always treated them the same. The reason we have these debates, or at least the reason I do, is to learn from your opposition. I have always been taught the best way to defend your side of the argument is to learn as much about the other side as possible.
During this discussion, I have never attacked your intelligence, I even acknowledged Christians have made mistakes in the past (and present) but from my study of the Bible, Christians should behave in peace and love towards everyone. I don't think I am going too far to say that you have a bias when approaching the study of the Bible, just like I have a bias when approaching evolution. For this reason, we debate with each other so we can better understand beliefs, to break away biases.
I apologize if I was disrespectful toward you in any way, but this has been a great learning experience for me and I hope you have gotten something out of it.
This was clearly aimed at ignorant religionists who attack scientific facts because of their religious beliefs.
I am assuming you are an ignorant religionist by the very fact that you are fighting with me. Your use of semantic arguments to defend that notwithstanding - it seems you have a comprehension problem.
I never said anything about behaving respectfully. In any case - calling me an evolutionary fanatic" and suggesting I am arguing against your ridiculous religion because I am afraid of a non existent GOD ruining what I believe is not being respectful in any way.
What I said is that you should behave in such a way as to garner respect. Guess what? I have no respect for those who reject science in favor of "god dunnit". And are too hypocritical and narrow minded to see why this will always ALWAYS cause fights.
I have not gotten anything out of it actually. I am actually saddened that such as yourself exist and propagate the myth. And twisting everything I say to suit yourself is actually lying.
I have never once in my life attacked "god" - that entity does not exist. How can I attack something that does not exist?
I challenge its fan club daily - people like you who will fight and argue and then deny it because the book they claim to follow gives clear instructions not to do so.
Hypocritical. I feel comfortable using that to describe you as it is a biblical term. Please don't take it as an insult. ;)
Evolution - happened and is happening now. Deal with it.
In your belief of evolution how did it start? What do you believe was the beginning of it all? I am interested, honestly.
I don't know what was the beginning of it all. There are lots of ideas, but nothing certain. What does that have to do with the evidence we have that species evolve, adapt, and become other species? I am confused.
And do you mean on this pissy little macroscopic dot of existence that we call earth - or the whole thing?
On earth. In my way of thinking, every creature has to come from a previous one, even in evolution. So, I have always been interested to what evolutionists say was the start of all this. I am interested in what you believe about it.
Evolutionists? What is that? Evolutionist as you so ignorantly call them do not have an answer to that. I already told you. You seem to have the same comprehension problem. Way to avoid the Kwestions I asked you.
Would that be considered actually insulting or just deliberately obtuse?
On earth? I don't know.
Now answer my question. Why are you satisfied with the meaningless, clearly wrong answer you seem to be satisfied with?
And are prepared to ignore the teachings you claim to follow in order to defend it?
There is no denying life evolves - so what is your point exactly?
I've spent 32 years under a cloud of religious manipulation. I am ONLY now reading up on evolution and my opinion is that religion completely disregards the beauty of evolution. For those who insinuate that we wouldn't be good unless we have God - this is another well contrived story developed by bully boys trying to win a pointless argument. Religion has completely destroyed our trust & respect of mankind and the world we inhabit. You can quote bible stories all you like; it means nothing, you might as well quote lines out of Alice in Wonderland. I apologise for MY attitude I've had this thrust in my face for too many years. Evolution exists....get over it
Thanks - yes - I agree - evolution is fascinating and beautiful to watch. And unlike the fairy tail - is observable.
You state that there was no divine guiding process in evolution, but even that does not rule out the possible existence of God. Reading Genesis literally DOES contradict science, but then no serious, sensible scholar would ever suggest that it SHOULD be read literally.
Ken Scam's "museum" is a travesty that needs levelling to the ground. There is no a shred of evidence for young-earth creationism or a young earth - all the evidence points to the contrary. However, there are many many people who accept the sciences but still believe in God.
It does rule out the possible existence of the god of the bible that uses direct intervention in order to cause an outcome. A vague "started it and left it to get on with it" non personal god? Sure - but - we don't need that one in any case.
There are no serious, sensible bible scholars - but yes - I agree it should not be read literally. Ken Ham should be arrested.
Yes - most people believe in the "god of the gaps" god - those gaps are slowly but surely shrinking. And there is much money to be made from this subject. LOL
I could only read half of your comments. Will finish them later.
Good discussion.
But i don't know why you always have to bring a "lol" into your comments. You seem to mock the people who do not believe what you believe.
Also you seem to believe that if there was a God, everything should be perfect.
Wow and this keeps on going and going and going---Energizer bunny look no furthere for that energy!! LOL
I just dropped by to see how youa re doing Mark! As you know I don't go into the forums to be ripped apart but I have written a hub on that one christian that deletes just about everything that I have said to him and that he is the main hubber who tells others that I am evil and Satan and all the rhetoric. Ha! I got the last few comments and sent them to my e-mail and made a hub about it BEFORE he deleted them. Egg on his face. Religion is just a tool to use to get oneself on a higher pedestal and above others and to aspire themselves to thier Grand Illusions. Too bad It's just Ego Trippin Jezebels Spirit and Your Petticoat Is Showing
Under your first picture you said: "God apparently took 4.5 billion years to create Adam. Not sure what his problem was - If I was all powerful, I could have done it in a day". Key word here is apparently.. when you truly find the answer you are looking for, let the world know with the same veracity that you have now and by the way, God spoke the universe into being.. that only takes a day lol.
I have an excellent url for reasons for a young earth.. http://www.6000years.org/frame.php?page=young_eart
I thought your hub was really just a bunch of hooey. Like most of your stuff you are too biased to accept any facts but the ones you want too. Write a hub about the url i gave ya then if you are so correct. Or try this handy pdf download url.
http://www.6000years.org/downloads/EvolutionCrunch
Evolution so sucks.
Yes - apparently is the key word. The universe is apparently 4.5 billion years old. Not really interested in lies to support your ridiculous beliefs thanks.
LOL - FACTS? LOLOL I thought lying was a sin? No?
Gawd u people are ignorant. Sad really. :(
I can't believe I read this whole thread...feels like my eyes are gonna bleed.
To begin with, I do not believe in either creationism or evolution per se. Creationism seems to have more moral implications, while evolution represents a fascinating interpretation of archaeology and natural processes.
That being said, most of this discussion is not really discussion at all, just meaningless assertions of the truthiness of either side of the argument and name-calling. Looks like Mark Knowles started this just to piss some people off. Childish, really. Also: what adult male types LOL in almost every post? And you included "gawd" and a colon-parentheses sadface in your last entry.
Doesn't read like the words of a well-educated person at all, I'm afraid.
If you want anyone to take you seriously, maybe you should work on that.
I'm also aiming this at the religious folk out there--quoting the Bible and saying things like "Jesus loves you" convinces no one.
And yes, I realize that it is actually paleontology, not archaeology, so you can forget about trying to pick apart my entire viewpoint based on one poor word choice, as many of you are wont to do.
Well Dave - Thanks for the input. What is an appropriate response to people who believe the earth is only 6,000 years old and evolution never happened/happens and are prepared to keep their children away from the public education system in order to teach them creationism?
LOL works for me.
Well, actually, not all the people you responded to in such a empty and flippant manner indicated that they were hardcore creationists who took the Bible literally and would therefore ban their children from considering evolution as a valid idea. I don't have time to search back through the entire mess to find a specific example, but there were a few who only questioned that such a process could generate independently of a guiding force. Instead of simply stating that they were entitled to their opinion but you don't agree, you threw internet chatspeak at them and said basically that atheism was an "obvious" conclusion and that only a mindless fool who believes in a spaghetti monster (my phraseology) could possibly doubt it.
You didn't really set examples to ground your reasoning, just indicated that you and all other smart people were right and anyone who disagreed was wrong. That kind of argument smacks of the same smug arrogance and hostility you pointed out in the evangelical types.
And that is exactly what I said I was going to do in my opening statement. And I quote:
"I am not going to put forward an argument in favor of evolution here. Of course I believe evolution happens, because it does. The measurable data and evidence is all around us. No – what I am going to do is a “taste of their own medicine,” and this will be a purely emotional, completely un-factual attack on those who choose to attack a valid scientific theory for religious reasons. Precisely the same as their attacks on evolution. :) I am not even going to bother explaining evolution to those ignorant of the process. I tried that once and the ensuing discussion is here
http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/7572 "
The fact that you are too lazy to have actually read what I wrote - or followed the link to a rather long forum thread in which I did put forward an argument for and proof of evolution occurring earns you your very own LOL.
LOL
Lighten up Dude.
Well, ya got me there: no, I didn't read the entire intro. Usually the title of a thread (in this case, "Creation vs. Evolution Debate") is indicative of its purpose. Not so here, I see.
Still, I find it puzzling as to why you would bother starting this. If religious creationists are so silly and unfounded in their attacks, why even acknowledge them? So you can spend untold hours on an immature back-and-forth, hiding behind your keyboard, saying, "Nyah-nyah! Your beliefs are stupid!" Why would their baseless arguments even require an attack, unless evolution was more than simple facts to you, but something close to you personally that you can't stand having ridiculed by superstitious whackjobs?
And you may understand if I find being LOL'ed at by a professional blogger somewhat underwhelming.
LOLOLOL There ya go "Dave" - now you earned a LOLOLOL for your inane, senseless comments. Still - at least you admitted you did not bother reading my article before commenting, so you have no idea what it says and therefore your comments are as worthless as the LOLOLOL you just earned for yourself. WHich is the same as the religionists who commented did. I doubt a single one of them actually read what I wrote. Just came for the fight. Oh well.
Let me know what you do for a living so I can decide whether or not your opinion should upset me. Dear me.......
Edit - "Dave" - why don't you read what I wrote before making any more comments?
And then - while you are at it - you can tell me why you came to this page in the first place. I assume to express an opinion on this nonsensical debate. LOLOLO
I looked up Creation vs. Evolution to understand what arguments there are on either side. Unfortunately, this thread popped up and I read it. No sensible points there.
I said I did not read the *entire* intro to the thread, and I explained why. Maybe you should read what I write before attempting to respond. At any rate, I was not commenting on your introduction, but on your interactions with other people. You seem to have zero social skills. Perhaps that is why you communicate on the 'net?
Typing LOLOLOL only demonstrates your stunning lack of maturity and thought.
By the way: how does "Laugh Out Loud Out Loud Out Loud" make any sense?
Dear me - this is not a "thread" - these are comments on an opinion article I wrote that you did not bother to read. And many of these commenters are people I interact with regularly.
I take it you still have not done so either. Just here for the fight as well huh?
Excellent - most people who think there is an argument for creationism tend to be here for that.
Because you have unfortunate missed the quite sensible point I was making that there are no arguments for creationism.
It doesn't make any sense at all - any more than your inane comments. You are awfully brave though "Dave." LOLOLOLO
You forgot to tell me what you do for a living so as I know whether or not to hold your opinion in any regard.
When you come back and tell me - perhaps you could make a pertinent comment as well instead of merely attacking my social skills. If you can bring yourself to read it that is. I know it is quite long and has some hard words in it. LOL
Evolution is beautiful. god is an excuse for man's superiority complex and pure ego. Love and hate, good and evil, and every emotion between your ears are constructs of an imperfect human mind.
Humans are so insecure in the life they have, the pain they experience, they will create a "loving god and heaven" to "save" them from this pain.
Sheep.
I don't understand the depths of space as having no end.
I don't understand the big bang theory and the assumption that somehow that caused every thing to become present for life evolve.
I don't understand if there was once nothing how can there now be something! So if scientists can produce life as we know it from a sterile vaccum, then I will re-visit my thoughts!
i'll respond to the last 2 comments:
s8n 2 days ago
Evolution is beautiful. god is an excuse for man's superiority complex and pure ego. Love and hate, good and evil, and every emotion between your ears are constructs of an imperfect human mind.
Humans are so insecure in the life they have, the pain they experience, they will create a "loving god and heaven" to "save" them from this pain.
Sheep.
Bob Francis 13 hours ago
I don't understand the depths of space as having no end.
I don't understand the big bang theory and the assumption that somehow that caused every thing to become present for life evolve.
I don't understand if there was once nothing how can there now be something! So if scientists can produce life as we know it from a sterile vaccum, then I will re-visit my thoughts!
--------------------------------------
s8n, Evolution is beautiful. Man, as a whole, is not. What most fail to accept is that put under the correct circumstances, any given man is capable of any given circumstance. You deny it, but put under the correct duress, you would kill you brother/mother. A relationship with God, one who acts as both a counselor and a Father, helps hinder our meek natures which has the inevidable tendacy to move towards a selfish nature of personal consumption.
Bob, and many other Christians, must embrace that evolution and God are not mutually exclusive, but very romatically intertwined. How could God be so singular when the Bible itself is a story of the evolving man? Any spiritual person who denies the possibility of evolution too close minded, and I wouldn't given them the privaledge of my objective mind.
Thanks for the commenst everyone. :)
@Jbauk - thanks for that comment. I had really forgotten that the bible IS about an evolving man - and yes - irony.
Yes, I can't read, yet you seemed to have missed the part in my first post where I clearly stated I did not necessarily agree with either creationism or evolution. I don't know how to phrase that in simpler terms, sorry.
I also criticized the bible-thumpers for their lack of critical thinking. The only reason I focused on your side of the "discussion" was that you try to give the impression of an educated, reasonable man, yet your responses frequently include the terminology of a vapid fourteen-year-old girl.
And yes, I realize that your article was aimed at starting shit with fundamentalists over the internet. You do not need to keep claiming I have no idea what this is about. To do so would only emphasize your own ignorance, "Mark."
But Dave - I asked you to offer some criticism or response to my article and tell me what you do for a living so I know how well to grade your opinion of me. You jumped into the discussion without reading my article and appear not to have done so now.
I made a reasonable, witty and funny case for the "fact" that there is no argument for creationism.
Yet you responded to me taking the piss out of people who call me an agent of Satan for holding making that argument.
I don't care that you do not believe in evolution and no one really believe sin creationism because it is actually nonsense requiring a strong dose of "suspending disbelief,"
You came looking for a discussion about the laughable debayte between "evolutionists" and "creationists" and you got one. This is how they go.
1. Scientist poroposes a theory to explain an observable phenomena
2. Religionist does npt agree with this fact driven explanation because his religious book sez something else
3. Scientist tries to explain
4. Religionist doggedly repeats his own claims
5. A fight ensues.
This is how it always goes, but - fortunately for us - religion no longer has any power and is forced to use underhanded political methods and propaganda.
Now - if you want to have some input on this "discussion" or my clearly expressed and valid opinion - be my guest. I would welcome it instead of this stupid bickering argument you first attacked me as provoking by having an opinion which you are too lazy ti read.
But as you think I started this just to piss people off rather than express a valid opinion I have to wonder why you are here. You don't believe in evolution? LOL Do you "believe" in dinosaurs and fossils?
Why yes, I believe in fossils. They have been found. There are numerous examples to be found in museums.
I think what you are really trying to ask me here is, do I believe every conclusion the experts have come up with regarding the nature of those fossils, the behaviors of the animals which became the fossils, etc.
The answer is no.
While these ideas arguably are the best interpretations we have so far, I don't automatically accept them at face value. Even experts are prone to mistakes. And really, what difference does it ultimately make anyway? No one will ever know for sure about events and creatures that existed long before any human being, unless of course you believe in time travel.
I found this "discussion" because as an outside observer, I was interested in just what positions each side of the debate held. I was curious. Sue me.
What I found was a lot of brain dead antagonism and name-calling. I commented on it.
And by the way, I finally did read your entire introduction to this page. It changes nothing.
You still present yourself as an ass in almost every post.
If you are not an ass, then I wholeheartedly apologize.
So - still did not bother to read my article then? Not actually interested in what positions each side of the non-existent debate there are?
Thanks for adding to the brain dead antagonism and name calling that is inevitable result of this stupid "debate." LOL
for one who is born death is certain. -Bhagavad-gita
Time will tell ! The moment we die we will know whether there is a GOD/Creator or not. If 'NOT' - NO HARM DONE. if 'YES' - it will be too late to turn the clock back.
Really Mike? You think god could be such a small minded cunt?
With a mouth like yoursI don't know why I'm bothering to get involved, or even read your comments. Bye.
Aww - Me neither. "YES - too late to turn the clock back." Still what a cunt huh? LOLO Oh - you mean saying a word like "cunt" is worse than burning someone for all eternity OK - LOL
Sure. Saying a word? LOLOLOLOLOL
Mark, I am a Christian and I read this article or hub and had a few thoughts. I beleive you play vocabulary war and try to prove that Chrisitans are stupid? Did you know the fathers of modern sceince were Christians and how their laws actually support creation. I did enjoy reading this so i could have a different perspective but you should read the second law of thermodynamics, it will change your thoughts....
Really Andrew - is that so? Why is that exactly? Are you saying is IS possible to break it - it just takes an Invisible Super Being to do it?
Or are you saying the earth is a closed system and does not get energy in the form of sunlight?
Dear me. Just because you do not understand physical laws - this does not mean your majick did it. Come back when you understand thermodynamics - it will change your thoughts. Who am I kidding - you will still have faith.
I am glad you enjoyed what I wrote.
Actually I did finally read your article, and said so in my last comment. Try reading first, then understanding, then commenting. I know it's unfair for me to ask of you such an exhausting task, but remember what the little engine said: "I think I can, I think I can!" Don't give up, buddy.
Let me guess your response: "Dear me! LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL!"
No Dave - what you said was this:
"And by the way, I finally did read your entire introduction to this page."
So - yes "Dear me LOL" is probably an appropriate response. You have not once responded to what I said in my article - and have still not bothered to read it, it seems.
Such a hot topic Mark. I made it through the article, but not through all of the comments. Don't you love it when what appears to be a perfectly intelligent person says "God once said...". How could anyone know for a fact what god let along Jesus said 2000 years ago? I have no problem with someone having faith (sometimes people and children need to think they are being watched. BUT don't tell me what god said 2000 years ago, I don't know what my wife told me to do yesterday...
Good point and certainly one I take issue with. I mean - there is no contemporary evidence this Jesus person even existed. Yet they can say with authority what he said?
If a man does not know what he will die for then he truly knows nothing. Of all Men Jesus Christ is the one you choose to be the most threat to your carnal knowledge?
If there is evidence on people that don't exist I'm sure Christ top's the charts. The truth is that as history has shown things that don't exist simply go away. not get stronger. Now how many thousands of years was it?
Rad Man seems to get lost quickly when he says "BUT don't tell me what god said 2000 years ago, I don't know what my wife told me to do yesterday..." well that is a profound thought to chew on i look forward to continue chewing on this.
*
soulspeech2012 in the debate of the soul of mankind. To...
@soulspeech - I certainly wouldn't debate that the Jesus written about in the bible wasn't a hero. I would contest to those writings being legitimate. The world was a different place back then. Imagine your engaged daughter or sister coming home and saying she is pregnant but still a virgin. Most people would question her today, but we are supposed to believe that happened more than 2000 years ago. Does anyone in their right mind believe these televangelists actually heal people? They only need a few gullible people. If all four gospels were identical and written at the exact same in different parts of the world I'd pay attention. They are not identical and are quite different so how truthful can any of them be?
A huge problem with the world is that they are putting all their eggs in the basket of theory. Problem with theories is that they are full of holes. Which is why theories are always "evolving". As soon as a hole appears the theorists start theorising to repair their theory. But the truth of the Bible does not change. Have you ever seen a Bible that has been revised. I don't think so. How many revisions have been done on books that teach any kind of theory. Countless!
Dear me - the bible has been revised more times than I have had hot dinners. You Christians really are ignorant of both your religion and the difference between scientific theories and irrational beliefs.
The only constant in your war mongering religion is it still causes fights 2,000 years later. You have no moral compass - that is your problem. I am not going to waste my time giving chapter and verse - but you need to do some research.
A huge problem with the world is the amount of lazy people such as yourself not prepared to do any work and take what the preecher man sed the bible sed the government translator sed King James sed god sed as gospel.
They are also too lazy and ignorant to understand science.
Get some education before lecturing me on anything.
I believe in the big bang. It all happened just like it said in Genesis,"..and God said "Light be!" and light was. True science and the Bible agree. You contradict yourself though: 1st you talk about evolutionary theory and then evolutionary proven fact. It has never been observed and documented in nature of one species "evolving" into another. It is all assumptions based on the winds blowing through the minds of people who need to be heard. Adaptation is not evolution. Besides nature's way is to devolve not evolve. Things don't get better they get worse.
Religion has started wars, not Christians who know God for what and Who he is. There is a difference.
Assumptions?
Still - I am glad you believe in evolution and yes - there are proven facts that show evolution happening. Sorry you are ignorant of that. Oh well - wot sez tha babble bout it? LOLOLO
Not sure what "better" or "worse" has to do with anything. Just judgmental religious garbage I suppose. Christians have been starting wars since day one. Disgusting belief system - as you are aptly demonstrating right now - thank you.
Mark not bad... Keep up the good work!
Andrew Matson, someone who believes in the supernatural simply fail to grasp the facts, easy as that mate. You are delusional
What does that mean?
A delusion is a fixed belief that is either false, fanciful, or derived from deception. In psychiatry, it is defined to be a belief that is pathological (the result of an illness or illness process) and is held despite evidence to the contrary. As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, dogma, stupidity, apperception, illusion, or other effects of perception.
Delusions typically occur in the context of neurological or mental illness, although they are not tied to any particular disease and have been found to occur in the context of many pathological states (both physical and mental).
Robert Pirsig's statement in Lila that "when one person suffers from a delusion it is called insanity. When many people suffer from a delusion it is called religion."
I am not a prophet I cannot see the future I can promise you now there is no God, no Messiah, we are just the first animal species on this planet to take stock of our own existence. We peer into our own DNA, and you want to tell me that some guy who died 2000 years ago and his dad is what the universe is all about. Have you tried to wrap you head aroud the odds of that being true? Look at the bigger picture...
Religion fills a "much needed gap", giving consolation and inspiration to people who need it. But According to Dawkins, these needs are much better filled by non-religious means such as philosophy and science. He suggests that an atheistic worldview is life-affirming in a way that religion, with its unsatisfying "answers" to life's mysteries, could never be...
Seek and you shall find...
This is a fascinating subject :)
By the way, Mark, I have quoted you here:
http://hubpages.com/hub/Darwin-and-Evolution
I hope that this is ok. :)
Hi Trish - that is perfectly fine. :)
If there is a God, he will be the judge of us individually. If there isn't a God, there isn't. Leave each to the dictates of his own conscience.
Pensamiento - wot ?
If there is a God, each of us will be individually accountable to him for what we believe. If there isn't nothing will happen. Leave each person to believe as he chooses.
surely you mean "If there is a god, from all the infinite possible gods it happens to be a god that judges you based on what you believe you will be held accountable for using your brain" LOL
wait...i didnt read all these. there are to many. I was just wondering if the big bang exists?
The most important and interesting development that has come from the modern evolution movement is this:
As we evolve we learn to think in abstract forms...the highest development of abstract thought that will ever exist.... is to believe in God.
So abstract it cannot exist or even be defined. I agree with you though.
We are going through the next stage of that evolution at the moment.
We have now evolved the ability to differentiate between abstract concepts and reality.
Eventually the entire species with have this ability - at the moment we are the minority - but I see it catching on.
I thought this was a discussion, not a place to tear into the other side! Where are the facts presented? Also, at the time of this writing, BOTH EVOLUTION AND CREATION ARE PURELY BASED ON FAITH. It takes as muck faith to swallow a fact that says we came from mineral and nutrient rich muck as a fact that states we were crafted from clay and had God breath life into us. I don't understand the point of arguing. Why don't we all just sit back, be quiet, and see what science comes up with?
s - Science has already come up with something. The fact that you are incapable of understanding that evolution and the beginning of life are not the same thing is neither here nor there. We evolved - we have facts. Deal with it.
Wow,MK, you speak like a man who has all the answers. All the things that science has come up with are flawed. The Big Bang, where did it originate? Nothing is nothing, can only be nothing, and can produce nothing. Besides, I think we can all agree, The original dense cloud of gases that caused the Big Bang WAS FINITE. How could it produce an infinite thing?
Well, all i got to say, I will be praying for all of you! Jesus can change anyone once He opens your eyes, for you are blinded by the lies of the devil!If anything, sciene attacks religion!, Chritianity is the only Truth, the only sanity in the world, it's the only thing that makes sense! Go ahead and research all science and other religions and you'll see.EVOLUTION is a THEORY! meaning it hasn't been PROVEN true so how could u be 100% sure, wouldn't u want to be sure knowing it means life or death?For instance, what about how complex the cell is?evolution doesn't explain that!it wasn't just a random act, its complex!Look up definitions for truth, sciece etc.w/o order there is no science!If you believe in order how do u not believe in a Lawgiver?Even Darwin said"if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could possibly have been formed by numerous,successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down."So what about the bacterial flagellumthe design of the human eye, or how everyone has a different finger print???How does science explain that?and there will always be limits to science no matter how far in technology you get!Science cant aeplain WHY we are here or WHY we were made, atheists believe we have no purpose, no meaning in life!hm what a great way to live!BULL!Even atheists ask well why does a God let all these ppl die etc.,so that person has a sense of right and wrong, where do u think that person got that from?hm and also there are very intelligent scientists who believe in God, Rob Steine,John Polkinghorne,Francis Collins, Stephen C. Meyer!SO scientists have backed up the creation theory cuz it makes sense, it is the truth.There are lies in the school books that have been proven wrong and still taught!Propaganda and lies lies lies, u wanna attack religion?Well evolution is one of them, and since its just a theory by the way, others should be taught as well, ones that don't have proven lies in it. May Jesus have mercy on you and open your eyes to His truth and love.
If we are living on earth which has to have been created then it has to have been created by a creator. anything that man has ever made has been created by man and therefore exists because man has made it. Since the earth is real do you think that it/we just happened by mere chance. I think not, anyone who has a sane mind should be able to understand there is a God and He has created eveything.
By the way, when I say "science" I mean evolutionary science.
Also, I will have to rewrite the meaning of this sentance.
"what science comes up with"
When I say it, I mean "what science can prove".
Ciarra, you probably are a devout person, but, I put this lightly, that was exactly what I was talking about in my first post. Everybody here has been saying, "this is my philosophy, it is correct, shut up and believe it!" I may believe in special creation, but I will not try to force my beliefs on anybody else. I will post what I believe, and whoever will believe it is welcome to do so.
"A soft answer turns away wrath, but harsh words stirreth up anger" Proverbs 15:1
s - If only all Christians kept their beliefs toi themselves the way you do LOL
Sorry you do not understand science. It must be very frustrating for you all with these scientists going around saying they know things. LOL
What a wonderful world it would be if everyone kept their beliefs to themselves
How come you think christians should keep what they believe to themselves when scientists dont keep thier beliefs to themselves. We as christians know and believe in truth. So if we know the truth and the bible tells us to tell the rest of the world about what we know is true. then why should we keep it to ourselves especially when it has to do with your eternal salvation?
please do not mistake my last posts as a message that says we as Christians should be deaf and dumb about the problems of this world! many people will never accept the truth, no matter of any evidence to support it! This is a debate about conflicting scientific theories, not conflicting theologies. Has anyone wondered why creationists are always called "cocksure"? We always say,"It is true because the Bible says so." That may be true, but when many people ask," Is God real?" they want facts! That is probably why so many people are evolutionists. When they ask, they get presented with fact after fact after fact. These facts may be untrue or outdated, but in the eyes of the person asking, they are facts nonetheless. Facts are easier for the inquiring mind to swallow than pure belief. We must give evidence to the existence of God. Nearly all the evidence for God is in his creation, but while that creation is paraded around as "chance", then there is very little evidence for God. I will defend creation and God, but I will always be the defender in such an argument.
s - "Facts are easier for the inquiring mind to swallow than pure belief." I agree with you. I will believe in facts over irrational belief any day. This is why your religion causes so many wars. You believe nonsense instead of actually inquiring.
Nicko - I do not need saving - nor will I live for ever. How odd that you use a scientific invention to spread the hatred and fear. :(
I am new to Hubs. This is the first article I've read and will read more of these. Very engaging.
Only one comment specific to the content here.
No one 'knows' anything. We all 'believe' something. There is an awful lot of 'fact' spoken here.
'Faith', 'belief' are emotional constructs. We have faith because we feel comfortable with the notion. We believe because the part of us (brain, feelings) is most comfortable with a given proposition.
Some people believe what feels right.
Others believe what they can prove.
None of us (not a single one of us) can possibly have enough information to know the answer to the 'meaning of life' questions posed here.
The debate is everything. It is how we test ideas and discover how we feel about them.
Thanks, Mr Knowles, for contributing to the debate. I don't agree with everything you've said. (what a colourless conversation we would have if I did!). Hopefully, I'll get the opportunity to engage with you further.
And everyone else who posted too. I feel my spirit expanding already.
Hi Anton - sure - your religious beliefs are just as valid as something we have millions of pieces of factual evidence for. LOL
The Flying Spaghetti Monster is as valid as your Invisible Super Being which is a belief - the same as believing in gravity.
This is why your religion causes so many wars Anton - you are fighting for something that does not exist. Yo0u are defending it right now - and attacking me for "believing" in something we have p[roof for. Why is that?
Thank the FSM you can no longer murder me for not believing.
Anton - why only apply this thinking in this one single area?
When you leave your apartment - I bet you use the front door instead of a third floor window. Why is that? Gravity is "only a theory" and not proven. LOL
You know what this makes you?
Mark,
Actually, I don't have a religion. Pretty sure I'm not a fan of violence as a political tool either. Also a fairly solid fan of the scientific method.
However, please tell me your response to: "You know what this makes you?" Based on your conclusive, objective and scientific study of a couple of paragraphs that I have written. It appears you have decided that I am religious, that I am an advocate of a system that would deny you your right to an opinion and would violently oppose that right if only I could, and that some of my beliefs may render me incapable of effectively deciding the most appropriate way of exiting a building.
What I am stating is everything I have ever read is what someone has told me. Relatively little is something I have experienced. (Yep, I have observed gravity in action and I count on its existence.)
The phrase "studies have shown" by itself carries the same weight as "the bible says" in the mouths of most people, simply because very few have actually read the actual study or the bible they are quoting.
And who says I apply this thinking only in one area?
You've made a few leaps of faith here in just our exchange alone.
Studies have shown? I never said that. Glad you are not religious - sorry - I assumed you were based on "No one 'knows' anything. "
Glad you no longer place the Invisible Super Being in teh same category as evolution. Good for you. ;)
People that do not believe in evolution because they fear it an insult to have come from a primate are hilarious. You can't fix stupid no matter how hard you try. The only thing more powerful than a black hole is the intellectual void of a creationist.
To say the truth most of you i assume have the same intellectual void. Many steps in science has come from devote Christians (Issac Newton, Leonardo da Vinci, and Galileo) ,yet you are blind. Increasing scientific evidence has been put forth to prove a young universe.
well here is a question for evolutionests if the dinosaurs were extinct before man came along the why do a lot of ruins have dinosaurs symbols on them?
That was a very well thought out article that expounded a lot of truth in a very concise manner. Are you a published author or is this the only place to read your articles? Only asking as I would be interrested in reading more.
let me tell you something strait. Evolution is not always right really, its never right. You guys got it mixed up, people who beileve in evolution are just to scared or stubborn to admit that they (and we) were created. That there is a higher power a creator that is the maker of evrything. If you beleive in evolution ask yourself if humans evolved by comman ansetry from apes or whatever then were did the apes come from, and once you get the answer if its anything that is on or of earth or what you learned in science then keep going ask yourself were that came from. Eventually your overall answer is God who was there in the begining and created everything. the god that wwas and is and is yet to come who has no creator. If you don'tcome up with that answer GET A BIBLE. And yes I'm a christian and I do have logical reasoning. The founder fathers of the country on which you stand were christians the ones who gave you the right to say this stuff do you think they have no logical reasoning. If you head is still into evolution after thinking deeply about this than I can't help you and were you and up after this life is were you and up.
sorry about the spelling mistakes
Hey cheek this out
Genesis 1
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Aaron - LOL Not a logical thought in there - sorry. In fact - you come across as an atheist trying to show how ignorant and uneducated some religious zealots are by pretending to be one. But - thanks for the input.
BIT OF A PROBLEM HERE IN THAT RICHARD DAWKINS USES "NATURAL SELECTION" A GREAT DEAL REGARDING THE FACTS. EXAMPLE, THE CONCLUSION THAT EVOLUTION (FROM DARWIN) IS TRUE, THEREFORE GOD CANNOT EXIST. DARWIN STATED "IT SEEMS TO ME ABSURD TO DOUBT THAT A MAN MAY BE AN ARDENT THEIST & AN EVOLUTIONIST" ! PEOPLE GET LED BLINDLY MOST IN THE ATHEIST CAMP, AND STATE IT RELATES TO THE THIESTS. THIS I ALWAYS FIND HIGHLY AMUSING !
AND YES, I JUST SPELT "THEISTS" WRONG I KNOW !
LOLO INNIT YAY!!
SO MANY COMPLETE PLEBS ON HERE WHO THINK THEY ARE CLEVER, LOL.
"I WANT TO KNOW HOW GOD CREATED THIS WORLD. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN THIS OR THAT PHENOMENA, IN THE SPECTRUM OF THIS OR THAT ELEMENT. I WANT TO KNOW HIS THOUGHTS. THE REST ARE DETAILS." - ALBERT EINSTEIN
So true, my thoughts exactly. Kind of an overload, and it spurred a discussion between me and my two friends. My friend, I thank you for this wonderful piece of writing.
Very insightful, you manage to bring the thoughts in the back of my mind to light. Religion ha always been a topic of debate in my life and it's good to see someone writing about it.
Having come from an agnostic background, I started studying the evolutionary model (not truly a theory by definition) to disprove the Bible...but, as I looked at all the evidence, not just that from the agenda driven side of science (yes, it exists on BOTH sides) I found some interesting things at the "raw" data side...If we start with a "looking for truth" no matter what that means to my current belief system, we'll find it...
What are your thoughts on Spontaneous Generation, which would need to occur for life to start?
What of the fact that genetic mutations are a loss of information and never the addition of valuable information?
What of the recent studies, published at the NIH among others, that show that we all share a common ancestry within the a few thousand years? By non-Creationist scientist...
There are hundreds of such facts...thoudands...
I ended at Genesis, I did not start there...
Just some thoughts to ponder...I've been on both sides of the debate...
Spontaneous generation - yes - life would need to start somewhere and it is reasonable to assume that earth is not the only place in the universe where life - as we understand the term - came to be. I don't have an answer as to how that came to be - But I reject an Invisible Super Being, because such a thing is logically impossible.
Genetic mutations are nothing of the sort - you have been listening to a biblical scientist lying for Jesus.
What study is this? Please add a link because the latest on their website says no such thing. If you can understand the difference between genealogical and genetic ancestry - this might help you understand it.
Nah - you started at Genesis - you just had some doubts and found enough liars for Jesus to get you back on track.
Well, I think universe and matter and time and space and the laws of nature had to have a start somewhere and somehow. " oh no, there is no beginning" or " oh no, the universe and matter and time and space and the laws of nature were created from some explosion that basically came out of nowhere it self". both sound pretty far fetched. I just try to imagine it myself, I think its literally impossible to back in time endlessly. i think its improable that the universe and its resulting design and perfection would have resulted from some random explosion out of basically nothing. I think its as improbable as anyone could ever say a god could be.
Also, whether god exists or not, there is no reason to beleive that he would have felt the need to leave evidence. So, although it sounds like a cop-out its true; it doesnt make to sense to laugh at god-believers because theres no evidence, because truth is whether they are right or wrong, either way there will probably be no evidence. I believe in God and its a personal thing.
My family suffered for generations,no hope, no way out of exterme poverty, NOTHING. Barely food to keep us alive. all we had was belief in a god. Then all of a sudden miracles started to happen, crazy events that changed our lives around. So, nobody can convince me god doesnt exist, I have seen his work in my life. I think that the first step is to believe, and with faith god reveals himself to you. Thats all. people say " oh i pray but nothing happens", thats not faith at all. faith is believing in something you cant see as much as you believe something like your own right hand. if you insist on him proving himself first, probably wont happen. and since this is how it works, i understand why many refuse believe. but im telling you its a backwards system. as martin luther king jr said " you dont have to see the whole staircase, just take that first step".
Mark, for the atheist to say God doesn't exist because no one can prove it is liken unto standing in an orderly fruit orchard and saying prove that there is a planter. The burden of proof is on the atheist because they are standing in the universe which is very orderly.
jayohthatman - you said - "I think universe and matter and time and space and the laws of nature had to have a start somewhere and somehow. "
Why? You do not back this up with any sort of argument. Matter and space have always been here. Please prove otherwise. I am glad majik made your life better.
wilmiers77 - I said no such thing. You god is logically impossible - you are the one claiming it is possible by majik. I don't believe in majik. You do. You hold the burden of proof. Go!
Mark, my man, you are still standing in the orderly and well manicured fruit orchard. Proof remains on you my man. Explaining nothing is impossible, but something...standing in the universe? Go, my man.
Don't be silly. You are the one making the claim - I am the one telling you it is utter garbage. LOLOL
This would be why your religion has caused 2000 years of wars. LOLOLO
Sorry it makes you so angry that I have proved your invisible super being does not exist.
Show me it is real and I will change my tune, because the existence of fruit trees is not cutting it.
You have no authority. None. You know nothing. Please stop telling me nonsense is real.
Mark, you are responding wildly, like a squirrel trapped in a cage. Are you trapped in this very orderly universe?
Man, this is your hub; I responded to your claim of no god. Have you ran away from your own claims? The burden of proof that there is no god has always been in your hip pocket from jump street.
Backing up again, you are still standing in an orderly and well manicured fruit orchard...planter?
You replied to me that there is no god because it is illogical. One who says that something is illogical is implying that they know what is logical. Mark, where did your logic come from? I am sure that you popped up during the past 70 years and learned your logic. Where did that logic come from? Mark must know logic before he can have the knowledge of what is illogical.
Mark, so far you are standing sleep in the universe; open your eyes and begin letting God thru what is seen begin revealing Himself to you thru His Creation, His Word, and His Son, Jesus who has the Spirit of God.
Mark, man is combative; I could make a strong argue that there would have been more wars without religion. Hijacking religion has been the norm for thousands of years of history.
Ho w am I making a negative claim? You are the one making the claim. I am saying it is BullShit,
This is why your religion causes so many wars - you are liars. :(
I said your god was logically impossible. And it is. Even your majik book sez god exists outside of reason.
Have you even read this majik book?
Mark, its your diversions from what I posed to you; this is your true bullshit. Your are running from what I posed. You are standing in an orderly and well manicure fruit orchard...Planter? For you to know illogical, you must first know logic. Where did you learn you logic? You are still standing asleep in the universe...Squirreling and ignoring at the show of something with proof to your mind which has been disciplined to accept something creates something; not nothing creates something. Nothing can not even be defined.
I read the Word of God and shall continue to study it. Things not seen can be understood by the things seen. Things seen are temporary and the things not seen are eternal.
Ok, way to go and all wilmiers77, but doesn't the Bible say not to argue with the fool? (I do appreciate your defending the Word of God!) And Mark Knowles how is our God "logically" impossible!?
AMEN, Me. Thanks for throwing me a bridal...self control. I was beginning to sharpen my teeth and begin consuming Mark K.But, you are 100% correct.
Come on Wilmiers - you are the one making the assertion. I think it is Bullshit - show me I am wrong. Teach me - because "It is a garden therefore there must have been a planter" is not cutting it for me.
In any case - I thought your god existed outside of logic and reason. Have you even read your majik book? LOL
mark K., you stated that belief of my God is bullshit and that belief that God exist is illogical. Am I not right? HOW?
My God not only live beyond our reasoning and logic but created our logic and reasoning. His hand print is on all things. I can see that you haven't read the bible seriously.
Thinking that the fruit orchard...Planter doesn't cut it shows me that you are mostly blind to even your own senses. Your thinking doesn't extend beyond your nose. FOOLISH!
Hmm...I wonder why Mark K. didn't answer my question?
Mark K. if you don't belive in God, do you believe in heaven and hell?
Prove to me your god is not bullshit then. Saying the moon is made of cheese is bullshit as well. Does that mean I have to prove it? LOL
Come on - prove your case. Dear me.
How about this :
The Invisible Star Goat vomited the Universe. Prove me wrong. Surely the burden of proof is now yours to disprove this by your "logic"? LOL
me - I don't interact too much with anonymous trolls.
Come on williers. You are making a pretty outlandish statement. And I guess you have not read your book either. What does your majik book sez about ur invisible super being that I am FOOLISH not to grovel to?
No wonder your religion causes so many wars. :(
Mark K., your are still standing in the universe wearing a lead suit.
Billions of witnesses testifying with tears of joy over the past thousand of years is my first presentation to you. They all say about the same thing; thereby, One with an open mind can deduce that the unique experience is real and points to one entity or source.
Common sense plays the major role in this situation and trumps logic.
Believers have options and goals with God which doesn't include war. It's the nonbelievers who have no other options, but to fight. Unfortunately, selfish, power hungry leaders have stole the banner of God to further their own ambitions.
Stop talking drivel and start backing up your assertions. I know there are billions of ignorant, uneducated sheeple in the world. This is why we have your religion.
Now makes some sort of argument to back up your ridiculous assertions instead of this tripe.
Why have you not dis proven the Star Goat anyway? LOL
Common sense does not "trump logic" because common sense clearly states there can be no Invisible Super Being. Dear me how dishonest. First you claim to be using logic, now you say common sense trumps this? What silly arguments.
Come on - give me something to work with instead of this illogical nonsense because you are convincing me I am right with ever utterance.
Mark, can you prove that there isn't a God? Can you show me the evidence?
Evolutionists are rather WEIRD!
What a stupid statement. Can you prove to me there is not an Invisible Pink Unicorn?
You arn't answering my question.
And you told wilmiers to stop talking drivel!
That is because it is a stupid question. You god is logically impossible and the burden of proof is yours.
So - I can logically an rationally disprove your god, but I cannot show you any evidence because there is none.
Mark K., "common sense" statement was referring to my previous statement about billions of believers over the past thousands of years." How can you over look that? Get out of your lead suit and receive some radiation for the truth. Please take your time and understand my comments. Don't forget my previous sentence as you read the next.
HOW IS OUR GOD LOGICALLY IMPOSSIBLE?!??
Mark, why do you keep saying "you god"?
Billions of uneducated people in the middle ages who were murdered if they said they do not believe nonsense? OK
Come on - stop shoving nonsense at me and make a case. The McDonalds argument doesn't cut it either.
Common sense? LOL
Oh well, you won't step out of your lead suit.
Jesus can save anyone. God bless you.
WHO'S the one shoving nonsense?! By the way if you haven't noticed, we aren't in the middle ages!
Mark, if you don't repent and accept the Lord, your soul is doomed to hell.
P.S. I'm being totally serious here!
Just to let you know, my last post was directed at Mark, in case I made it sound otherwise.
I think I'm going to stop arguing with the FOOL now. Bye!
So - not going to attempt any reason? K LOLOLOL
How is our God illogical?
@Mark Knowles: Have you ever tried praying? Don't you think that you should attempt to find God yourself BEFORE saying that He doesn't exist? He is real. If you truly desire to know, SEEK. You know not what you say. :(
Dear me. No wonder your beliefs cause so many conflicts. Is this the best you can do? - anonymous trolls telling me nonsense? :(
Susie, just to let you know it is a waste of your time to argue with such a PIG-HEADED person like Mark.
Mark K., stop wearing that lead suit. Absorb something! LOLOLOLOL!!
Sorry sweetie - I will not absorb your garbage. Still no logical argument I see. Just insulting my intelligence?
No wonder your religion causes so many wars.
Name one
Mark K., after following your arguments, your demand for logical reasons for God is actually SHOW me God while wearing your lead suit, and absorbing nothing that we have brought to light.
We do have for show, you and the universe. What do you have to show that there is no God? LOL!
Come on wilmiers - at least make some sort of argument instead of repeating the same nonsense over and over and over.
This is why your religion has cause so many wars. :(
Ok, we have an impartial jury; US have exhibit A, Mark. K, and exhibit B, the universe. hee! hee! hee! Now Mark, do you exist? If so, is there any person or group who claim to have created you? If so, US shall concede exhibit A.
The same goes for exhibit B.
I submit to the court that US question of prove that God doesn't exist is as legit as the question prove that God exist. Since Mark opened this debate with prove that God exist and that it's illogical to believe in God, US must assume that Mark believes that God doesn't exist. Is this not fair? Mark is the defender and US is the plaintiff. We have shown our case as plaintiff; now Mark K. must present his case.
Well - let us both be thankful that is not the way the legal system ACTUALLY works. In my country and yours - the burden of proof is always on the one making the claim - in this case - YOU.
So - I put it to you that the star goat vomited the Universe, and as my evidence I offer the fact that the Universe exists.
Now prove The Star Goat does not exist.
See how your argument applies to ANYTHING AT ALL and is in fact - complete nonsense?
Gawd you guys are funny. LOLOLO
Hey, now you are going against scientific reasoning. Atheist scientist and faithful scientist says otherwise...your star goat has not been mentioned among top scientist in this world. I submit to the impartial jury as my professional witnesses scientist that are atheist.
US presented its case; defendant must respond. Is this not legal prudence? Is it not proper legal procedure.
what proof do we have of evolution mark??
Observation by impartial jury to begin.
sorry im only 13 what does that mean
also why do you choose not to believe in God or that evolution is a bunch of unproven lies which just says that evolution is just a theory NOT science.
I thought we were doing this the LEGAL way now? Good grief wilmiers. Now we is doing science logic wot US sez? Popular demand is wot god sed?
No wonder your religion causes so many wars.
The Star Goat sed it in to my head innit. Now prove the Star Goat does not exist.
what the heck is a star goat?
heloooo??? anyone gonna answer cuz i wanna know what a star goat is! just because im a little young doesnt mean i cant get into this debate, cuz im in the mood to debate against this and this is right up my alley.
The Star Goat is undefinable and beyond human comprehension.
Now prove it does not exist - because - unless you can - it must exist.
LOLOL Gawd you people are funny - no wonder you have been fighting over this for so long. :(
ANd I am done with you.
Debate? LOLOLOLOLOLO
Since Mark K. has vacated his position as reflected in his hub by not defending himself to the impartial jury and since the question of prove God exist is equally legit as prove God doesn't exist, US can safely assume that Mark K. has conceded to the plaintiff.
Lets go out for a victory dinner since we have bursted Marks balls!
(And, let the Long Ranger ride into the sunset without the women and without his balls.)
Good grief! You think that is an argument? LOLOL A lot of ignorant people believe there is a god - therefore there is?
Bursted Mark's balls? With nonsensical garbage like that? No wonder your religion causes so many fights. :(
When I think of evolution I think of survival of the fittest. We adapt in order to survive. Will mankind continue to "evolve" past the need to survive? Has there been any study/prediction based on the theory of evolution about where/what man will be/become in the future? Since man is the dominant species on earth, should other creatures be competing against us for dominance to better their survival?
On a side note, I wish there was a theory that monkeys and apes evolved from us.
Things to ponder? This I do know, survival of the fittest has become one with the info is the fittest. We are in the information age. Technological advances shall determine the nature of our survival or destroy us.
@mark- you say our religion causes so many fights and wars, well what about your theory? it does the same thing to christians and other people against evolution like me.
I have learned in my science book that 1. apes/monkeys arent the closest human relatives. Chickens are because of there tear enzymes. My opinion is evolutionists say we came from monkeys so they can seem smarter or be superior maybe, but like i said my opinion. 2. I'm sure that you have heard and know about the "evolution" of the horse, right? well, how did the ribs of it form, disappear, then reform as if "magic"? I truly want to know what you think.
PJ - How can you be "against" a scientific theory that explains so many facts? Are you against gravity as well? Because that is how the earth was formed.
How can the fact that life evolves and eventually changes into new species cause a war?
Your opinion is just that - a faith based incorrect opinion. Please do your own research. Be honest - you don't want an answer to that question - you want to poke holes in whatever I say because you read some creationist nonsense. This is why your religion causes so many wars.
Still waiting for you to prove something or make an argument other than gibberish wilmiers.
Still waiting for you to prove something or make an argument other than gibberish mark K.
Come up with some new balls! hee! hee! hee!
That is pretty cowardly wilmiers. Why make personal attacks now?
This is why your religion causes so many wars.
You are the one making the claim. Under US law - the burden of proof is yours. LOLOLOL
pj1397, you are on the right track. I must remark that Creationist have no problem with evolution of the species in that they continually adapt to their environment. Creationist do have a problem with Darwinism which states that the universe has always existed, and by random chance we evolved into our present states. This contradicts the first sentence in the bible. Keep reading your science books alone with the bible and the truth shall reveal itself to you. "Be still, and know that I am God." is one of my favorite scriptures. "God hanged the Earth as a ball hanged with nothing." is another scripture written thousands of years when people thought that the Earth was flat and was the center of the universe. Scripture does not conflict with science; instead, science support Christianity. "Science is blind without religion, and religion is lame without science...its support." Albert Einstein. "The universe is designed in such an orderly fashion that a Superior Being, a Creator must have created it." Albert Einstein.
pj1397, you can only be defeated by the lack of knowledge. Get the knowledge and put Mark K., the devil's advocate, behind you.
You are confused wilmiers. Darwinism says no such thing. Einstein said no such thing either.
Why don't you try educating yourself before attacking things you have never even read and do not understand. You don't even know what Darwin proposed - which has since been updated. That is the problem with just repeating what other religious liars told you as being gospel.
This is why your religion causes so many conflict. You are all too lazy to do any actual thinking and investigation because your book tells you not to think.
Stop talking lies and nonsense and try and make some sort of sense.
Great hub Mark. The response says it all. I can't recall any other hub on the subject that has bought out the loony religious to this extent. You have given the intellectually infirm scope to display their ignorant controlling BS in one place for all to see. Good work.
Thanks Earnest. Some of them are quite entertaining and a few of them made a reasonable attempt at an argument - but mostly they talk drivel like this latest one.
Wow just came across this hub in the forums. Amazing number of comments. The only vaguely religious hub I have is about the day I swore on the bible. If you think it is amusing I will link yours to it. It gets about 1 hit a month!
Leave me a link here. I am always wanting people to link to me lol
Thanks Mark. I may even try and leave a link for the forum about 6th best performing hubs. Hope this link proves to be the answer to your prayers. (obviously I speak metaphorically). Nevertheless I hope you experience a miraculous (oops these religious cliches are creeping into my writing) adsense recovery. I think I will google and see if there is a patron saint for writers. I think St Jude is the patron saint of lost causes. But things are not at that stage yet.
Now to see if that bluey thing comes up. http://hubpages.comthedayIsworeonthebible
More questions I thought of which I don't understand. What does it require or what causes a gene/DNA to change over time? Are outside influences and environment enough to tweak it? It would be an interesting study to find an interval of time which they think it would take for DNA to change from one stage to another; then do an evolutionary chronological map from when they think it started to now.
I believe truth is truth, and time will tell. and creationism and evolution should have nothing to fear if they are true, and instead of attacking one another should instead support the study of each other, to better understand how/whether each could be proven.
If I were to attack evolution, I would be swinging a sword at a person rather than an idea. I haven't studied to know what evolution defends. In that sense, if either side were to make a valid argument, it would do more for me to encourage both to its fullest point of study/proof without bias and to the benefit of either until a conclusion was made.
I do know that arguing "this is right or this is wrong" because the person saying it is an agreeable individual to our own standard, only proves we each have a standard. I wonder when man gained the understanding and capability to reason what should and shouldn't be?
More questions I thought of which I don't understand. What does it require or what causes a gene/DNA to change over time? Are outside influences and environment enough to tweak it? It would be an interesting study to find an interval of time which they think it would take for DNA to change from one stage to another; then do an evolutionary chronological map from when they think it started to now.
I believe truth is truth, and time will tell. and creationism and evolution should have nothing to fear if they are true, and instead of attacking one another should instead support the study of each other, to better understand how/whether each could be proven.
If I were to attack evolution, I would be swinging a sword at a person rather than an idea. I haven't studied to know what evolution defends. In that sense, if either side were to make a valid argument, it would do more for me to encourage both to its fullest point of study/proof without bias and to the benefit of either until a conclusion was made.
I do know that arguing "this is right or this is wrong" because the person saying it is an agreeable individual to our own standard, only proves we each have a standard. I wonder when man gained the understanding and capability to reason what should and shouldn't be?
pj1397, as you can seen Mark K. and his supporters has said really nothing. Please research Einstein quotes on google and the first principles of Darwinism. The bible says "In the beginning God created Heaven and Earth...". You can notice that Mark K. won't touch where did the universe come from and why is it so orderly, reflecting intelligent design. It can easily be verified that Albert Einstein believed in a Creator who intelligently designed All things.
LOLOLOLO Dear me williers - You Liars For Jesus really do talk a lot of lies.
Iz that wot god sed ter do?
Damn, mark that bluey link did'nt seem to work. You may never recover your clicks unless you link to me. I am getting more hits than once a month. Yesterday I got 3!
There's a law I know that says something to the affect of, some people say the earth is improving and that it has been here since the start of time but if it's improving and has been here shouldn't there have been a being to begin it so it could improve? I think that's how it goes....but I know Isaac newton and Einstein definitely believed God created the earth. Newton even said he only thought Gods thoughts after Him.
pj1397, you are very smart for your age. Keep going; don't let anyone sell you short.
Mark K. is going crazy since he lost his balls!! Check him OUT!!!!! hee! hee! hee!
where do you find these people?
pj - what nonsense. No one thinks the earth has been here since the start of time. Start of time? What are you talking about?
You have no idea what either of those men said or thought - you are just regurgitating nonsense.
No wonder your religion causes so many wars.
williers - you are not worth responding to any more - I can only assume the image in your avatar is you with your daddy. ciao
mark, so you know what those two men said? And why are you afraid of answering williers?
MartinLawrenceScott, I wrote a hub earlier on your question of when will man gain the understanding and capability to reason what should and shouldn't be?
My answer, HE AIN'T. Since the original sin of eating from the tree of knowledge of what is right or wrong, Man was kicked out of paradise, and as a result, man has been on a trip fighting about what is right or wrong. It appears that thru out history, selfish and conceded men have been making it impossible for a conclusion; a miniseries of satan wanting to be God.
Only God will solve your question in the end.
So mark, NO ONE thinks the earth has been there since the start of time? And do you think that Isaac newton and Einstein were NOT Christians?
Mark, where do you get you info? I would like to check it out. Just wondering.
He probably just made it up! LOL!
Thought this might be interesting reading for you.
You bet I am interested in hub. Thanks aka-dj. Shall study it in detail. Thanks again.
Come on guys - at least try and make sense instead of asking questions so you can throw some Lies For Jesus at it.
LOL
No wonder your religion causes so many wars. :(
I read somewhere that atheists are on average more intelligent that believers and that secular countries with a large percentage of atheists are more peaceful. I can find these studies if you need. I find it interesting because ever since I read the study I see glaring evidence of its validity. This hub is a case in point. Did I read that someone said that his science book says chickens are humans closest relatives. I understand he is just a kid, but come on. Where did he pick up that book? Maybe that's the problem.
Goodness knows. Have you seen the Creation Science Museum?
No I haven't. I can't imagine finding my way there.
(The 2005 Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District trial, where U.S. District Judge John E. Jones III ruled that intelligent design is not science, that it "cannot uncouple itself from its creationist, and thus religious, antecedents", and that the school district's promotion of it therefore violated the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.)
Good thing the US has a separation of church and state.
No shit. Can you imagine some of these guys as judges because of their religious beliefs?
Hardly bears thinking about.
More ball-less comments by the Mark K. and his bunch. Good bye girls.
wilmiers, can you imagine mark .k as a judge? (shudder) Now that would be horrible!
Sure would FOTF! A true, hopeless tragedy.
LOL Last thing you would want would be honest. Yeah - I know. This is why you cause so many wars.
LOLOL
Tell me why the Star Goat does not exist again?
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
U kin proob it innit? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
You! Honest? Ha! Don't make me laugh!
Wow - You anonymous trolls sure are brave. Is that because you are wearing the armor of god? LOLOL
Neither Religion nor Science has the Earth's true History "ALL KNOWED UP."
If you want to believe God Created life on Earth, you are going to have to concede; it took a long time: Evolution is a fact.
But the whole concept of Earth History, as presently being taught in our schools, is nothing more than an elaborate myth.
And the site listed below, will prove it to any open-minded person.
No fees ask or accepted.
All I am trying to peddle is the truth.
And no! I am not a religious zealot.
See: HTTP://PlanetEarthRevisited.blogspot.com/
It is the only true account of our Earth's trek through time, ever written. I DARE YOU TO READ IT.
Mr. Knowles, Interest article, if a bit inflammatory and disdainful. Are you aware and would you like to comment on the recent statement by Dr. Michio Kaku, Theoretical Physicist? "This is the greatest mystery in all of science. What started creation itself? The Big Bang theory has this tremendous hole in it. We are clueless. We are clueless as to what set the Big Bang in motion." Dr Michio Kaku
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kE-qijoOOQ
Doesn't the effect of life demand a first cause?
Sorry? What? Something "set the big bang in motion"? What nonsense. Please explain why there is a beginning where there was nothing. When was there a point where there was "no creation" that your best selling author is selling?
I know you have said that you don't answer to "anonymous trolls", but if you could answer to me, Mark Knowles, that would be greatly appreciated. We've been learning about the evolution vs. creation debate in school and I've found enough information so that I believe in creation.
4 weeks ago you said:
Why? You do not back this up with any sort of argument. Matter and space have always been here. Please prove otherwise. I am glad majik made your life better.
-There is 1/8 of an inch of dust on the moon. This proves that it is a young moon.
-If you back up the age of the universe as far as evolution says, there wouldn't be any comets today.
-Since the earth is cooling at a constant rate and the core is white hot, if the earth is as old as evolution says then the earth would have been so hot it wouldn't have existed.
Mr. Knowles,
Actually the best selling author is also a Theoretical Physicist and he is most likely current in his views. His point is that an effect demands a competent cause. Your answer does not seem to address that. Again, can you explain to me why we have an effect (the Big Bang, Evolution) without a first cause?
Mark K., you have been whipped down the street, around the corner, and back again, by our humble Creationist.
AnonymousTroll - OH Dear!!!
(-There is 1/8 of an inch of dust on the moon. This proves that it is a young moon.)
Why and how does this prove anything other than the amount of dust on the moon. The Apollo 11 lunar laser ranging retroreflector array. Buzz Aldrin and Neil Armstrong put it there on July 21, 1969. They still work. Moon dust is not like earth dust. Moon dust is not organic. Asteroids impacting the moon both crush the rock of the moon and are crushed themselves. The dust is thrown up by the impact and spreads out over the surface of the moon as it is brought back down by gravity.
Moon dust is moon dust.
(If you back up the age of the universe as far as evolution says, there wouldn't be any comets today.)
Why not? The universe is a big place. New stars being born everyday. Looking up at any star. V762 Cas is 15000 LY away from us. We only see it as it were 15000 years The the Andromeda Galaxy is thought to be 2.52 ± 0.14 million light-years. The light we see from is has been traveling 2.52 million years to reach us. Are our brightest minds that far off? Are they trying to trick us?
(Since the earth is cooling at a constant rate and the core is white hot, if the earth is as old as evolution says then the earth would have been so hot it wouldn't have existed.)
How fast does the earth cool? How hot was the earths core millions of years ago? Why are there dying stars? A stars life is more than 10 000 years. Our sun is estimated at being 4.5 billion years old. Are the estimates that far off? Radiometric Dating has been consistent.
Proof of Evolution is in the color of your skin. Humans that have evolved to live farther from the equator have lighter skin. Lighter skin absorbs vitamin B faster. Humans in the north that were born with lighter skin must have been stronger and more able to procreate. Evolution is a fact. Humans have evolved to live in every part of the earth. The peoples of the far north have shorter limbs to help prevent frost bite.
The brightest minds have tested evolution and the age of the earth and none say the earth is less than 10 000 years old. Creationist only have a book written by men a few thousand years ago that states different. The book also says the world is flat and land is held up by four pillars.
LOL Good grief. Thank you Rad man - I don't know where these people learn their reasoning skills, but I suspect the school this one referred to was a home skool in the boonies.
Rad Man, the bible makes spiritual statements, in the beginning and end. Of course the bible uses examples from nature...secular man but the spiritual lessen or precept is the objective.
When the bible says "world" it's referring to the intellect of humans firstly in certain contexts; a spiritual plateau. If the bible states 10000 years, it's context of a certain spiritual precept to establish a spiritual plateau. One must study and learn what the bible is teaching. This requires rebirth into the final plateau thru Jesus...seeing thru the eyes of Jesus.
Niche is dead; Mark K. is still wearing his lead suit without his balls, and God is always alive. The final plateau has no match.
Wilmiers - Now you are directly contradicting yourself. LOL
How funny that a literalist now claims not to take it literally. LOL
I wonder if you even know what you are saying lol
No wonder your beliefs cause so many conflicts.
Christians reasoning comes directly from the bible so to think you can go up against the all mighty God you have under estimated the power of the Lord
oh and Mark K.
I have one thing to say
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
NOT DONE
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
NOW I AM
Niiice :D
Niiice :D
Mark, I'd like to know who the Anonymous Troll is who is attempting to use my name. How Christian of him. It's a little misleading to anyone trying to follow your thread. I would appreciate it if he was deleted. I must have struck a nerve. I don't even know what wilmiers77 is talking about. How does he know what the writers of the bible intended. If they wrote 1000 years they most likely meant a 1000 years. Perhaps when they said Jesus they didn't mean Jesus, they meant Santa. Moon dust? Come on.
Majik into his head I guess. THat is what he sed - I think
So - yeah - MAJIK LOL
Rad Man, scientist do the same logical deduction and inductive reasoning, and theorizing, like anthropologist piecing human history together.
Rad, have you ever read a book and understood what the author was teaching??
The bible is teaching a spiritual lessen first with discrete examples from nature. Of course you don't understand the bible because you don't believe. Have no faith!!! The bible is much more than adding two rock heads together. It's Spiritual.
Markey! I take the bible literally from examples in nature and the affairs of men. The Ten Commandments I take literally, and continually transform my mind by the Word Of God and listening for new revelations from Christ Jesus, The Spiritual Leader.
Of course, anyone who is wearing a lead suit, absorbing nothing, and only attaching the faith understands Not.
wilmiers77, I don't believe I said the bible was not worth reading. I don't believe I said some of the messages are worth listening to. I am a compassionate person. I love, like and help those I can. I'm not trying to hurt anyone. This hub is entitled Creationism vs Evolution? No need to make it personal. You are either a creationist or an evolutionist. Well, which is it? I can't tell from your comments. The Andromeda Galaxy is thought to be 2.52 ± 0.14 million light-years. Either it is much closer and it's light is just getting to us now (within 10 000 light years) or the universe is at least 2.42 million light-years old. No need to accuse me of not being able to read and understand what I read. I'm dyslexic, not stupid.
Rad Man, read your previous comment in which I replied.
Wilmiers77, you didn't reply. You are either a creationist or an evolutionist. Well, which is it? Was my question. I understand you pick and choose what you think should be taken literally. One either believes in evolution or believes the universe was created as it is by God. SamboRambo says he thinks God and People shaped evolution. The catholics finally believe in evolution, but think it's part of Gods plan. Which is it for you Wilmiers77?
I don't understand how somebody could even be a creationist, unless they are blinded by religion. Science, or reason, has been able to come up with evidence that shows that the precious little Bible, is without a doubt, untrue. We have scientific evidence that the Universe was created 13.7 billion years ago, not 10,000 years ago like in Genesis. Remember, the Bible is a book. A book.
Rad Man, I am a Creationist. I don't know who gave you the idea that literal belief must be earthy reflecting nature as you know. You are missing the main reason: God is a Spirit. God is love. The Son Of God has His father's Spirit, the Holy Spirit.
I think that you are confusing evolution vs. creation with Darwinism vs. Creation. We believe in evolution due to changes caused by enteracting with the environment and genic mutation within the species. Everything is in flux and continually changing. We don't believe that everything came to its present state by random enteraction over eons of time. Well, all phenomenons that has probibility over 10x(-58th) can not come into existance and is out of reality. Darwin backed off at the random probility of an eye.
I was convinced when I learned that God had put eyes and a light on fish living 1 mile beneath the sea. Last I heard, it would take a mathematician a month to write all of the zeros beyond 10x(-58th power)...out of reality only after 3 minutes of writing zeros.
I am not confusing anything. I merely asked you what YOU think. Read over my question again.
You were convinced when you learned that God had put eyes and a light on fish living 1 mile beneath the sea.
I would have wondered why he would do that. These fish are irrelevant to us. But evolution might put fish down there. Things evolve to survive anywhere they can. Why are we here? We just are. Is there more life out there? Mathematicians say there has to be.
James, I haven't read in my bible KJV that the universe was created 10000 years ago, stated as scientific proof. I must comment that "world" in those days usually meant the state and affairs of men. I think that is how you became confused. Scripture is the inspired Word of God, and is always a spiritual lesson or guide to intimacy with God thru Jesus, His Son.
My comment to Rad Man states my faith and belief. Please read it. Oh, I also believe that the universe was created arouond 14 billion years ago. I am a science major.
Rad Man, you are not grasping the mathematical significant supporting the creationist.
Fish with eyes and a light to see by 1 mile deep into the sea is already relevant in our discussion. Mathematical treatment has led to results that are not within reality! Meaning that the event can not happen by random occurances. There must be a first principal, God we call it!!
Rad Man and James, please let me know the bible print and scripture location in Gensis so that I can review the sripture that says the world was created 10000 years ago.
Wilmiers77 - I'm not confused. Please don't suggest that because I don't agree with you, I'm confused. I'll give you the same respect.
What mathematician are you talking about? That is simply ridiculous. There is fossil evidence of the evolution of all creatures. Please show me a credible (non-creationist or non-ID or unbiased) mathematician that is finding the possibility of the evolution of all known creatures. A random event cannot happen by random occurrences? Random. It is simply ridiculous that a mathematician suggests a random event cannot mathematically happen. Look, for hundreds of years the catholic church charged and put people to death for suggesting stuff like the world is round and the earth revolves around the sun. Some people are still clinging to the bible as the only knowledge. Some are trying to bridge the two. Bridging the two does not work. But you can try. Intelligent Design tried to find flaws with evolution but it failed. Some kid above suggested that because there is only a small amount of dust on the moon it must be a young world. You are suggesting mathematicians have found flaws with evolution. Very frustrating.
Rad Man, you are still commenting as if you have Darwinism equivalent to evolution. No, evolution is part of Darwinism. Us Christians agree with evolution (there is no evolution vs. creation) in the sense that life is continuously evolving and going thru genetic mutations within each specie due to the environment and chemistry within a smaller environment.
Darwinism is God-less stating that the universe has always existed and not created by God, the first principal.
Rad Man, mathematics is a science and is deterministic. You can google the in/out reality calculation (1 x 10(-58th power). It is not a calculation about fossils which is part of evolution. We believe! The Creationist believe! Its a statement that somethings must have been intelligently designed.
random occurrences = phenomenons = events
The Big Bang Theory has gained overwhelming support from the scientific community.
Sorry wilmiers, nothing you say makes any sense. "Us Christians agree with evolution (there is no evolution vs. creation)" Really. Not all christians have abandoned the literal word of the bible.
Darwinism is a set of movements and concepts related to ideas of transmutation of species or of evolution, including some ideas with no connection to the work of Charles Darwin.
And I don't believe I said anything about Darwinism. Nope just looked back, didn't mention Darwinism.
According to christians, before god created the universe he was always there. Forever in darkness by himself (as I remember it). You are trying to connect the big bang theory with creation. This makes no sense. It's off by billions of years and the order of creation and the time frame is out of order. Some christians use science to make justifications. Some christians ignore parts of the bible that don't line up at all with science. For example: the world is flat and held up by four pillars. The bible was clearly wrong, but christians answer with well the bible was written by humans. Some christians think every word was inspired by god and perfect. Should intelligent design be taught in science class?
Bible Fanatics are just in denial. After denying it for 2000 years and putting people to death for not believing their view of things, they can barely just stop believing in the bible, now.
James, Woow! What are Christians denying? Pleasssee tell me. It appears that you have no concept of inner man...a spirit being. "He who is in you is greater than he that is in the world."
Rad Man, how many times that I have to tell you that Christians have no problem with evolution. Update, Darwinism is now God-less, believe that the universe has always existed and everything has had forever to randomly arrive at our present state. How many times, RAD?
Please tell me the scripture that the earth is flat and held by four pillars? My bible says God hanged the earth as a ball on nothing. Bring it back.
Who in the world told you that God was in the dark and lonely before creating this world? Lord, Lord!
You didn't mention Darwinism in this debate? Man, I telling you that there is no issue with creation vs. evolution. No contendo! No ma'se! Its only the general principals posed by the present day Darwinist. Christians could care less about finding all of the sequencial fossils of any specie.
Wilmiers - you have regressed to speaking utter drivel. But - good that you accept we evolved from lesser species now and are closely related to the other great apes.
Well done., How does that fit with the majik needed from god to make us in its image? Gos is a single celled, bacteria-like organism?
Wilmiers77, how many times do I have to tell you, you do not speak for all christians. You do NOT speak for all christians.
I'm not sure why you keep bringing up your warped version of Darwinism. But since you have.
The dictionary says Darwinism: the theory of the evolution of species by natural selection advanced by Charles Darwin.
I don't know what Darwinism you speak of but I have read this...
(The term Darwinism is often used in the United States by promoters of creationism, notably by leading members of the intelligent design movement, as an epithet to attack evolution as though it were an ideology (an "ism") of philosophical naturalism, or atheism.[17] For example, Phillip E. Johnson makes this accusation of atheism with reference to Charles Hodge's book What Is Darwinism?.[18] However, unlike Johnson, Hodge confined the term to exclude those like Asa Gray who combined Christian faith with support for Darwin's natural selection theory, before answering the question posed in the book's title by concluding: "It is Atheism."[19][20][21] Creationists use the term Darwinism, often pejoratively, to imply that the theory has been held as true only by Darwin and a core group of his followers, whom they cast as dogmatic and inflexible in their belief.[22] Casting evolution as a doctrine or belief, as well as a pseudo-religious ideology like Marxism,[23] bolsters religiously motivated political arguments to mandate equal time for the teaching of creationism in public schools.)
(In the United Kingdom the term retains its positive sense as a reference to natural selection, and for example Richard Dawkins wrote in his collection of essays A Devil's Chaplain, published in 2003, that as a scientist he is a Darwinist.)
My guess is that you are from the states.
I have to say I did have a hard time finding the pillars and earth silliness. Perhaps I was thinking about the Qur'an. I did find these, but I'm sure you will say "they didn't really mean this or that".
In Job 9:6 it says, "Who shakes the earth out of its place, and its pillars (ydwmu) tremble." The LXX says, "Who shakes the earth under heaven from its foundations and its pillars (stuloi) totter." In Psalm 75:3 it says, "The earth and all its inhabitants are melting away; I set firm its pillars (ydwmu)." The LXX says, "I have strengthened its pillars (stuloi)." In I Samuel 2:8 it says, "For the pillars of the earth are the Lord’s and he had set the world upon them." The Hebrew word for pillar is yqxm. The root is qx meaning "to melt" (BDB 1980, 848). Therefore, yqxm means, "a molten like pillar."
(Who in the world told you that God was in the dark and lonely before creating this world? Lord, Lord!) Well, he hadn't created light yet and he was alone or was he at a party with a bunch of other gods. But I suppose you have some knowledge on this you would like to share?
I'll will not post any more, as Mark states "you have regressed to speaking utter drivel"
Rad Man, speaking for all Christians? Never intended. I spoke Christian belief.
How did you know that I would say this and that? Are you acknowledging something else exist? So do Most people.
God is not limited to one creation.
I can easily comment on "pillars..." without locating the scripture: It refers to the surety and strengthen of God whether verse is in the Quran, bible, or book of Zinn. Other details within their dogma most likely won't mesh due to being governed by a higher precept within their belief system.
We have life and our development has been in the same world. There is commonality. Remember Rad, the Bible's objective is spiritual; our relationship to God.
Although, evolution vs. creation is a non-issue with Christians, there is not substantial proof for the one cell evolving into all present life forms. No proof of transmutation. If you know of proof, please let me know, I am very interested.
Mark K., I conceded to evolving species, not to transmutation of species starting from one life cell. No substantial evidence.
When God, an Infinite Potentiality, determines anything than it shall be.
Even if man once appeared to be like apes. It's like our Creator using a common design like wing on the Kitty Hawk and wings on a stealth jet.
Men believe what they want. Just make sure you believe the truth
Hmm...wilmiers speaks pretty well for me! Keep it up wilmiers!
Science does not "prove" anything. If any of you had ever spoken with a scientist, they might lighten that load of crap for you. Observation, experimentation, data collection, analysis, and mathematics provide EVIDENCE from which inferences can be drawn. Save "proof" or "proves" for another discussion. No one has any proof of anything in the strictist sense. That being said, I have conducted experiments where evolution has been observed and confirmed in laboratory experiments, as have many others in the field of biology. Evolution is best defined as an adaptive change in alelle frequences within a given species; it is not the improvement or perfection of an organism. I seriously doubt that most of the people whose opinions I have been mulling over have ever taken a college level biology class or have even taken any real initiative to understand evolution, how it works, and the overwhelming or unifying evidence (which has not yet been refuted, even once) to support this theory. That goes for people on both sides of this debate, generally speaking.
Thats exactly the problem with evolution, nobody can agree on what it is! Look at different textbooks and ask different experts and you will get different answers. The definition Donovan puts forth is only one of many. Do a search "define evolution" and you will see. Donovan's definition is shared by some but you would also find that creationist wouldn't disagree with it either. Everyone knows creatures adapt but there is debate on weather or not they change into different species or are limited in how much they can adapt. Since nobody has ever seen one species become another or even find a fossil representing this change, it is most certainly debatable.
One truly honest and enlightening thing that one of my professors in college said to us was to "remember that everything you learn in science is only theory". The problem with many who blindly believe everything that is dished up by the scientific community is that they haven't realized this.
All the ridicule and insults offered up by those who support the scientific view won't change the fact that tomorrow science will abandon many of it's current theories in favor of other new ones. And it will abandon them because they were never the truth in the first place.
Dear me. What a load of nonsense. The theory of gravity is "only a theory" therefore my religious beliefs are not garbage?
How enlightening is that. Sorry you did not understand what you read about evolution. Oh well - that means your perfectly defined god is real? Not understanding your logic - guess that is because it is actually nonsense.
Thanks for stopping by and sharing your wisdom. Certainly convinced me that science is all bogus. Ho0w odd you used a computer to say so. LOL Ironic huh?
Mark, I see that you are still wearing that lead suit and haven't found your balls yet.
Science observes the after thoughts of God. Albert Einstein
What they observe becomes fact and what they theorize lacks fact, but what has conditioned our development is true reality.
There is spiritual development beginning at the foundation of reality which impacts our minds perfectly. There is confirmation effecting our minds continually unless you wear a lead suit.
Mark, what 509Loretta stated is an advanced point of view. Gravity as defined is very workable with a one to one relation; every time mass changes than a matching force is observed inwhich every time Mass(1): Force(1) is observed; but when a higher concept like quantum mechanics is applied to infinitely smaller space-time relationship we get new values for those paramenters. Is this than reality? No it Aint! Scientist simply thrive for a more general theory that is nearer to reality. So, the preceeding values were inaccurate. Not true, and so on it goes approaching infinity.
God's Spirit can cross infinity at a moment.
Mr. Knowles, I'm sorry you were so unable to comprehend what my professor was saying to us. I will attempt to re-explain.
The theories that are advanced by science are only that - theories.
So science is all theory, but God is real? Do you or anyone have evidence of his existence? Show me some science that even suggests that God exists let allow which Religion is correct. At least science is trying to find the answers. Just silly.
Mark, God Is. Created all that IS. Than, the search for God in our consciences firstly with support from science. Infinite God in which no mind can contain must be worshipped by faith.
Jesus, the Son of God, represents God in this world for us Christians.
Mark, please learn what Christianity really is!
I Understand just fine thank you. Show me this god thing and accept that your opinions are just that - opinions. LOLOL There is no god and scientific theories are based on FACTS and observations not biblical nonsense.
No wonder your religion causes so many conflicts. :(
wilmiers77... "Mark, please learn what Christianity really is!"
What Christianity is? Christianity is a business. They are professional beggars. In the case of Catholics they created their own country to fight extradition, they treat woman like second class citizens, they continue to let the young be abused by their own.
Most importantly Christians don't practice what they preach.
Gandhi
"I like your Christ, I do not like your Christians. Your Christians are so unlike your Christ."
Look for your salvation from Jesus, the Son of God; don't expect salvation from the church members. Firstly, Christianity is tailor made for each person, and its an individual thing. Read the bible while looking for Jesus. Every verse refers to the Son of God.
We are not in the phase of personal relationship with our Heavenly Father. Individuals are moving into conversation with God...soaking in God's love.
Correction, "We are now in the phase of personal relationship..." Typo.
"Show me this god thing..." O.K.
1) All of creation demonstrates the existence of a Creator. Yes, I know, this evidence has been and will continue to be misunderstood.
2) Panspermia is a tacit acknowledgment that science cannot find a cause here on earth for the process of evolution, even though they have all of the evidences of the effect here before their eyes. Cause and effect is valid all throughout the universe, and if science claims the effect, it must also explain the cause. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3kE-qijoOOQ Or at least have the courage to admit that it is missing half of the equation.
3) Again, as cause and effect is valid throughout all of reality, what is the cause of physical reality? This lack of an explanation is glossed over by those who dogmatically believe only in scientific theory. You never satisfactorily answered the above quote by Michio Kaku, the theoretical physicist. He understands that there is a true lack in the scientific explanation.
4) Why would complexity evolve? What purpose is there for it on an atomic level? None. Why would atoms organize themselves into complexity for no gain to them whatsoever? They would not. Complex molecules are LESS stable than simple molecules. Again, this demonstrates that there is a Cause.
5) Why has life survived in such an impossible and dangerous environment? One stray meteor would have given us all a very bad day long ago, not to mention all of the other lethal forces... radiation, black holes, exploding suns.... The odds stacked against life are impossible. If you doubt this fly up into space unprotected or go jump into an exploding volcano.
6) Which religion is correct? The religion that is completely congruent with and explanatory of reality, of course. The Bible demonstrates a supernatural understanding of reality; for instance:
"He (God)... hangeth the earth upon nothing." Job 26:7 Written long before we knew anything about space. "It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth...that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in." Isaiah 40:22 Written long before mankind knew anything about the structure of earth's atmosphere. And apparently the earth is and always has been, round.
7) The Book of Genesis has explained the effect and the Cause, and it is being proven to be accurate: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNaVRARsrgg
509Leretta,
1) How does creation demonstrated the existence of a Creator? You have not mentioned any evidence. The bible is the only evidence of the existence of god and yet it is riddled with contradictions. Google bible contradictions.
2) Panspermia is the hypothesis that life exists throughout the Universe. It is just a hypothesis and doesn't explain how life got here on earth. It just means life of some kind could be transported to earth or from earth in space.
3) Don't know what your talking about.
4) Why wouldn't complexity evolve. Living creatures evolve for survival. Evolving atoms?
5) Why are we here? Perplexing question. We just are and in about 70 years we as individual won't be. Enjoy it while you can.
6) You think the bible is most congruent with reality? I'm sure there are some muslims that may disagree. And I think they may be closer, but not any where correct and perfect like the word of god should be. The earth does not hangeth upon nothing. It orbits the sun. Does it say that in the bible? The (heaven or stars are not stretched out like a tent or a curtain. It looks that way from earth. That's how we know it was written by people, not god.
7) Now you speak of proof and accuracy. The book of genesis starts out wrong and ends wrong. It's clearly written by man with no understanding of the solar system let along the universe.
Rad MaN, I whole hearthly disagree with you.
1. Overwhelmingly, the circumstantial evidenced displayed by your body and the precision of the universe is very compelling; more compelling than anything that you have to display. You are standing no where and denying everything.
2. I skip.
3. Cause and effect is a principle in this natural world and appears to permeate metaphysics unto its optimum; turning into theology.
4. Each particle has intelligence which is revealed by two, three,...very complexities interacting. This is intelligent design. God designed all. Or you and some scientist?
5.Why are we here? A Creator wants us to be with Him. He gave us the ability to learn and seek Him. But, all knowledge doesn't lead to the Creator. Self is the main prohibitor. The Creator wants us to know Him!
6. Muslins and Christian worships One God, the same God. Relatively speaking, they are more alike than not alike.
7. Who taught you that the bible is wrong? I can teach you and you shall know the truth. The Spirit is self confirming.
Rad Man Thank you for your reply.
Science thoroughly questions itself to weed out errors but it hasn't been thorough enough. Why? Because the question of whether God exists or not is a basic and fundamental question upon which all other answers must rest. Get this answer wrong and all of your other conclusions will be skewed and distorted.
Science guessed and had a 50% chance of getting it right, but it guessed wrong. It is impossible to disprove His existence because we are limited in our knowledge and perception of reality. And how is that? Well, can you perceive without assistance, any part of the electromagnetic spectrum outside of the visible spectrum? If not, how do we know there are not other planes of being of which we are equally unaware? We found the non-visible part of the spectrum only by accident. What else don't we know of? How can we say that we have physically or mentally explored all of reality and determined that God is not there? We can't and it is not honest to assert otherwise.
The questioning of scientific theory by those who believe in God is done, not out of fear, but out of the certainty that is wrong. Only blind dogmatics fear being asked the hard and penetrating questions. A theory that sets itself as being above questioning has passed into the realm of blind dogma.
1) All of creation testifies to the existence of God by cause and effect. The physical laws point to a law-giver, the order to an orderer, the math that permeates everything around us to a mathematician and the beauty points out the artist.
2) I'm referring to the part of the Panspermia theory that says that the earth was seeded with life from outer space. This new theory has been adopted because some scientists (by their own admission) recognize that life "evolved" faster that they can account for.
3) I was referring to a post I made above. Dr. Michio Kaku, Theoretical Physicist, said: "This is the greatest mystery in all of science. What started creation itself? The Big Bang theory has this tremendous hole in it. We are clueless. We are clueless as to what set the Big Bang in motion." What he is saying is that cause and effect go hand in hand. If you see an effect or creation (all of physical reality) then there must be a competent cause.
4) "Evolving atoms" - Science believes that atoms have had the same basic structure since very early on in the existence of our universe. They've shown no sign of changing that same basic structure. Atoms "prefer" to exist in more simple and stable combinations than are found in life. This is demonstrated when we die.... we decompose and return to the elements. That is to say, our atoms and molecules "choose" a more simple and stable condition. Left on their own, without outside interference, they don't arbitrarily form complex molecules, hence evolution would not have happened without outside interference (a cause).
5) My point was that the odds of survival were so stacked against the formation of life, that it points out to a protector. That is to say, to something that nurtured and protected the process of life formation.
6) Islam claims Jesus and the other prophets as a basis of it's own religion. I'm going to stick with those prophets. The earth is indeed said to be hanging in space. The other quote is a reference to the atmosphere that is stretched out over the earth, not to the stars.
7) Your statement contains no proof, only an assertion. Would you care to elaborate? I provided the link as a further explanation of what I meant.
Oh dear Loretta and wilmiers. Where to start. I'll just make a few more points and leave you alone.
The bibles theory of creation is all wrong. Of course those who wrote genesis had no way of knowing that it could be proved wrong. (The Hebrew word for day is yom and this word appears in Scriptures over 1400 times. And without exception this word, when written in the singular sense, means day. And that's it. Never anything else.) Science has shown that the universe was not created in 6 days. We also know that the sun stars and light came before the earth. We know the earth is not the center of anything. We know the universe is billions of years old not 4 thousand. Some of the stars in our own galaxy take 60 000 light years to reach us. From other galaxies, much much longer. So the fact that you can see the light from any star tells you that the universe is more than 4000 years old.
I was never taught that the bible is wrong. I was once a Christian. I looked critically at things. Not excepting the bible was correct. Why are there flaws? It should be perfect.
Granted science does not have all the answers. It may never have, but the bible only creates more questions to which there are no answers. Where did god come from? Why doesn't the bible explain how vast the universe is? If Adam and Eve were flawed then the creator created flaws. Did he not know they would be flawed? So many questions. Science at least is attempting to find answers.
Good luck...
Rad Man, it has been evidenced to me that you never found Jesus or never remotely came close to Him. You have never been a true believer who knows the Lord Jesus. You are looking out while greater is He that is within you than in the world.
I am a science major, and is aware of the frontiers of science. It is you that sees flaws in the bible; that lets me know that you need revelations from the living word of God when it comes to Jesus.
Why do you need to know where God came from when in essence you don't even know Jesus, His Son. We have the answers; you have the questions, and naturally don't see truth but only contradictions. Try accepting Christ Jesus; listen to Him and obey Him! Than, the contradictions shall decrease as you learn and acquire knowledge of the word of God.
The Word of God is pointing toward the supernatural spirit.
You are still in the baby crib, locked in the natural.
Ball-bursting Rad Man, I must address the so called 4000 yrs. Where in the h**l did you get that the bible states that the universe is 4000 yrs.? Jesus sure didn't. I afraid that you are listening to long hot tongues.
I'll tell you wilmiers if you address all the other issues and questions I presented. Where did your god come from science major?
Rad Man,
God is eternal, omniscience, and omnipresent. There is no "where did he come from...". As a matter of fact, where did you come from? Please don't give me a baby in the crib answer like I came from the womb of...
Rad Man,
God is eternal, omniscience, and omnipresent. There is no "where did he come from...". As a matter of fact, where did you come from? Please don't give me a baby in the crib answer like I came from the womb of...
Ah see... You can't answer the question. My point was that is was stated above that science doesn't have an explanation to the big bang theory and the bible answers that. Well if the bible has all the answers than answer my question. If you can't then give it some thought. Please don't give me answers like eternal, ominiscience and omnipresent because you have no proof or evidence of that. you just hope. Everything has a beginning and an end. Without exception. Where did he come from? Think.
Rad Man
The word "yom" appears in Psalm 95:8-10 "Harden not your heart, as in the provocation, and as in the day (yom) of temptation in the wilderness: when you fathers tempted me, proved me, and saw my work. Forty years long..." The day of temptation was 40 years long. Yom in ancient and modern day Hebrew has more than one meaning, just as the English word "day" means more than just a 24 hour period. (In Lincoln's day....)
It's your assertion that Genesis has been proven wrong. The real problem is not the Scriptures but the interpretation of Scripture that has been taught to you. The Scriptures have been proven correct. For instance life has developed from simple to more complex forms, life did come from the sea, mankind did show up late in the development of life on earth, a hybrid species (now called Neanderthals) did co-exist with modern man(Genesis 6). These are all things taught by Genesis, and now accepted by science as true. Please tell me how you think that Moses could have known these things? How could he have known that the seas brought forth life?
"Everything has a beginning and an end. Without exception." How can you really know that? How can you assert that you know that God doesn't exist because it can't be explained to you? His evidence is all around you and you can't understand that so how will you understand His omnipotence and omniscience and immortality? These are concepts difficult of understanding..... Can you look up into the night sky and truly grasp all that you see there; the vast depth of space, the complexity and uncountable number of galaxies, the idea of black holes, etc., etc. But you do believe in space, right?
Please explain to me why you have dismissed the concepts of cause and effect that I wrote about above. When you see an effect, there must be a cause. Do you understand that?
Rad Man, please, I never said that the bible has all of the scientific answers. Let me say emphatically that the bible has answer to LIFE. One can only please God by having faith, and faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. We can't prove God scientifically the same as you can't prove where you came from nor where did life come from.
Man, reflect within yourself; don't continually look into the world and rely on your senses totally. You will not find the truth in the world, but only experience a fraud in progress. The Word Of God even says, "Don't rely on your own understanding..."
509Loretta,
I agree overwhelmingly with you. Your comment has topped me at this time, and I gladly accept with goose bumps. Thank you very much.
Loretta, (These are all things taught by Genesis, and now accepted by science as true.)
You must be going to the wrong school. Gods immortality is only difficult to understand if you look at it with analytical eyes. You want to believe therefore you do. A day is a day. It didn't take 6 days to get us here. It's a day. It's wrong. So is the order. Don't just look at what they got right. Look also at what they got wrong.
I have not dismissed the concept of cause and effect. I understand. Do you? Where did god come from? Just give me an answer. Don't tell me we don't know anything about the big bang when we don't know where god came from.
(The Word Of God even says, "Don't rely on your own understanding...") WHAT? So, if the bible say you should beat your kids ( as it does ) you should do it even though you know they are helpless. Go ahead? WAKE UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!! You embarrass me. Think for yourself please.
Rad, you are listening to many hot long tongues. The bible never said beat your kids. It says bend (discipline) the sapling when it is young; quite a difference.
Oh! Poor helpless kids! Are you serious? What kids have you been watching? I know of thousands of streets that you must out run the fastest kid or else your behind is mud.
Get real!!
By the way, who were all the senior people that taught you or do you have all original thoughts. Did you form all the channels for your logic and thought processes? Maybe you are Omega Man who has all original thoughts and ideas.
Or, maybe each of your thoughts are universal superceeding Einstein because Einstein was taught much by others.
Ball-burster Rad, I think that you have bursted your own balls.
Crikey Wilmiers. Is this how the bible tells you to behave? You are sure convincing me that self professed Christians behave worse than non believers. Therefore the bible is utter garbage that you do not understand or actually believe and your Invisible Super Being does not exist. Good job.
"The Enemy" must be very happy with you. lolol
Christians are labeled as wimps by the devil, not Jesus. He kicked ass and ran the merchants out of the temple. Just doing God's biddings.
Believe me, the enemy has a bounty on me. They shiver in their boots at the thought that I just might be right about my God. I know that I am right; my soul, mind, and heart says so. Faith.
And for you, Mark, come out of that lead suit. Find yourself some new balls.
Wilmiers77 - I know you think you are being brave by calling me a coward when you know full well I will never meet you in person, but - this is just reinforcing my opinion of religious people and especially christians. LOLOL
Mark, where do me meet so that I can deliver in person in the name of Jesus. So, it appears that you did hear the long hot tongue lying that Christians are wimps! Think again.
Rad Man
"Gods immortality is only difficult to understand if you look at it with analytical eyes. You want to believe therefore you do."
These are two blind assumptions, both of which are untrue. I look at everything (and I mean everything) with analytical eyes and I don't have any particular desire to believe anything, one way or the other. The more I learn, the more I realize that reason and facts dictate the existence of a Creator.
Yom(day) - The narrowness of your interpretation of the word yom is not supported either by the Hebrew meaning of the word, nor by the context within which the word stands in Genesis 1 ( http://www.godandscience.org/youngearth/yom_with_n ) .
Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines it as having both a literal and a figurative meaning. That, together with the two times it is quoted as not being a 24-hr period (Ps 95:8-10, Hosea 6:1,2) demonstrates that the word has more than just the 24 hour meaning.
"God's immortality is only difficult to understand if you look at it with analytical eyes." I've always looked at everything analytically, so I don't follow what you mean. The idea of an everlasting existence is difficult to understand, irregardless of how you look at it, because our minds and experiences are so finite. Can you tell me what is on the other side of the edge of the universe? Can you tell me what the inside of a black hole looks like, just by thinking about it? You don't really know these things and yet you believe in them. Do you believe in them because you want to believe in them, did you reason them out yourself, or do you believe in them because someone told you to?
"Everything has a beginning and an end? Without exception." How do you know this? Have you been around the entire length of reality and seen all of it, so that you are confident in your assertion? Did time have a beginning and will it have an ending? Do you know?
A being that has the ability to create all of physical creation with it's laws, order and complexity, and who also created time itself, is probably not amenable to time. And indeed, that is what the Bible says: "Blessed be the Lord God of Israel from everlasting, and to everlasting." Psalm 41:13 "Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God…For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday (yom etmol - day yesterday)..." Psalm 90:2
"Where did God come from?" God is non-corporeal, i.e. He doesn't exist in this plane of being: "God is a Spirit" John 4:24 Where is He? "God is in heaven…" Ecc 5:2 "The heaven is my throne…" Isaiah 66:1 "Who only hath immortality, dwelling in the light which no man can approach unto; whom no man hath seen, nor can see…" 1 Tim 6:16
"Why doesn't the Bible explain how vast the universe is?" Why should it? It tells us that the earth is hanging in empty space (Job 26:7) and that he spread out the atmosphere around the world like a tent to dwell in (Isaiah 40:22) and yet that is dismissed, without any real thought. Would you believe if it told more?
I didn't say that you were taught that the Bible is wrong, I said that the interpretation given to you is wrong. The Genesis account is accurate and logical, understood correctly. Genesis Ch. 1 & 2 cover the preparation for and the creation of life on earth. It begins with the earth already created ("And the earth was, though without form and void..." Gen 1:2), and doesn't describe the creation of the universe, at all. There's no need to, as mankind at that time, could not have understood it anyway. The reference to the sun, moon and stars in verses 14-18 are set in this particular time period, in order to demonstrate what is said succinctly in verse 6,7, that the earth was covered by a thick cloud layer. The sun, which shown feebly at first ("Let there be light" Gen 3), became truly visible only later on.
Adam and Eve were created perfect (Gen 1:31), what they lacked was experience, that is why Eve was fooled. Did God know this would happen? Yes. "Great is our Lord, and of great power: his understanding is infinite." Psalm 147: 5 "Declaring the end from the beginning…" Isaiah 46:10 "Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world." Acts 15:18 So why allow sin into the world…? That's a long sermon…. I sincerely doubt Mr. Knowles wants to hear about any of this, but if you want to know, then ask.
Loretta, you obvious intelligence does not escape me, but you are not analytical or subjective. You comments like "understood correctly" proves my point. It's not understood correctly it understood as you want to believe.
"There's no need to, as mankind at that time, could not have understood it anyway." But we can understand today. Why not get everything right for all time. Simply put. The bible was written by people that didn't have our knowledge. If it was divine it would have had our knowledge and that of the next 1000 years and more. This is what you need to ask yourself, "why not?" If the bible explained the vastness of the universe there would certainly be more believers. The earth does not hang in space, it's in our suns orbit.
You obviously have no idea where god came from so please don't sell science short for at least attempting to explain and learn about the beginning.
You certainly can't change my mind and I certainly can't change yours. Good luck and think with that beautiful mind.
Wow! Are you trying to threaten me Wilmiers77? LOLOL How very brave of you. No - I think many Christians are violent psychopaths and history bears me out on this. You have no ethics, morals or respect for others. Wimps? - you are real brave and violent. Like wot Jesus said. Love thy neighbor and if he doesn't agree with your ridiculous beliefs - kill him. LOLOL
I am in France so any time you want to pop over and share the Word of God - feel free.
How very, very brave you are. LOLOLOLOLO
Yes!! 509Loretta, you warm my faith and give me joy.
Yes!! 509Loretta, you warm my faith and give me joy.
Mark, good thing that you are so far away; it's going to take me longer to get there, giving you more time to chicken out and run.
I have a taste of French blood, and plan to visit the country.
Well, don't expect for the Word of God to change. You shall hear it again and again.
Well Wilmiers - you are certainly showing your true nature. This is why your religion causes so many wars. LOL
Well, there is a major difference; war spills blood and we oppose bad spirits... {S}piritual warfare.
You guys have already spilled the blood of Christ.
Rad Man - Best wishes, my friend.
CRipes Wilmiers77 - You are certainly reinforcing my opinion that you Christians are violent sociopaths that aught to be locked up for their own safety. I didn't spill this non existent person's blood. LOL
So - is this why your religion causes so many wars? God killed Jesus to save us and you blame me? LOLOLOLOL
I thought he came back to life with majik in any case? LOLOL
Mark, you accuse Christians of making some wars, but your friends are constantly combatants...aspects of war is part of their nature. No peace, my friend!
Come out of that lead suit, get some balls, and open your eyes. Or else, it's hopeless.
You and your friends have no options; you fight over material things. At least us Christians have in conjunction Christ over material things. Guess what quantum mechanics would say about these probabilities of who is starting more wars.
Wilmiers - What? Are you saying non-christians are materialistic? What? Does the Pope have gold? The tele-evangelist always asks for money while he cruises for prostitutes. Christianity is big business. Open your own eyes. Do they hit you up for money when you go to mass or are you hitting up the parishioners? Give until it feels good. Give until it hurts. Professional beggars.
Wilmiers - you are not convincing me of anything other than your insanity. I heartily suggest you see a mental health professional. There is always hope - get some help before you infect your children with the same disease.
Rad, read carefully man! "...in conjunction..." meaning both.
Mark, you have evidenced that you know not the Son of God, Jesus. This means that you are totally blind to the supernatural world of God.
I shall pray for you to see the light, and receive the Kingdom of God.
That lead suit!!! Balls are still missing even in the natural! LOLOLOLOL!!!!
Ecclesiastes 2:14
The wise man's eyes are in his head; but the fool walketh in darkness: and I myself perceived also that one event happeneth to them all.
Ecclesiastes 2:13-15 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 2 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 2:15
Then said I in my heart, As it happeneth to the fool, so it happeneth even to me; and why was I then more wise? Then I said in my heart, that this also is vanity.
Ecclesiastes 2:14-16 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 2 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 2:16
For there is no remembrance of the wise more than of the fool for ever; seeing that which now is in the days to come shall all be forgotten. And how dieth the wise man? as the fool.
Ecclesiastes 2:15-17 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 2 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 2:19
And who knoweth whether he shall be a wise man or a fool? yet shall he have rule over all my labour wherein I have laboured, and wherein I have shewed myself wise under the sun. This is also vanity.
Ecclesiastes 2:18-20 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 2 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 4:5
The fool foldeth his hands together, and eateth his own flesh.
Ecclesiastes 4:4-6 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 4 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 5:2
Be not rash with thy mouth, and let not thine heart be hasty to utter any thing before God: for God is in heaven, and thou upon earth: therefore let thy words be few.
Ecclesiastes 5:1-3 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 5 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 5:3
For a dream cometh through the multitude of business; and a fool's voice is known by multitude of words.
Ecclesiastes 5:2-4 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 5 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 5:7
For in the multitude of dreams and many words there are also divers vanities: but fear thou God.
Ecclesiastes 5:6-8 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 5 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 6:3
If a man beget an hundred children, and live many years, so that the days of his years be many, and his soul be not filled with good, and also that he have no burial; I say, that an untimely birth is better than he.
Ecclesiastes 6:2-4 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 6 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 6:8
For what hath the wise more than the fool? what hath the poor, that knoweth to walk before the living?
Ecclesiastes 6:7-9 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 6 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 6:11
Seeing there be many things that increase vanity, what is man the better?
Ecclesiastes 6:10-12 (in Context) Ecclesiastes 6 (Whole Chapter)
Ecclesiastes 7:6
For as the crackling of thorns under a pot, so is the laughter of the fool: this also is vanity.
Wilmiers - what ar you doing posting biblical nonsense? All this demonstrates is that you either have not read or do not understand your majik book. LOLOL
Mark, did U really mean that "I" don't understand the Gospel? Foolish!
"Listen to every word from the mouth of God and obey." I can not work myself into the Kingdom of God, and U can not quench the works of the Spirit.
Obviously you don't Wilmiers. Keep on fighting like wot Jeebus sed though - you have certainly convinced me you are a hypocritical psychopath. LOLOL
Obviously you don't Wilmiers. Keep on fighting like wot Jeebus sed though - you have certainly convinced me you are a hypocritical psychopath. LOLOL
If we evolved from monkey then monkey must had evolved from squirrel. Squirrel from ant and ant from Angel's eggs. Who the donkeys even think about your presented evolution theory? Evolution theory is atheists' resorted theory. If evolution theory is a theory then why there is no new evolved animals recorded, why monkeys are still monkeys from prehistoric age? Why other animals don't evolve to monkeys next to human?
Mark, you are bluffed by your fashionable knowledge. There is enough time for you to become a god lover. It'll cost you nothing.
OMG!!!!!! upal19. "It'll cost you nothing" How about dignity and self respect. You expect someone to ignore every bit of information humans have learned about our universe in the last 2000 years because of a book that was written 2000 years ago. Go ahead and believe in God if you must, but don't throw away knowledge. The two can go hand in hand.
You only have to look at the color of your skin to understand evolution. Notice how different the peoples of central Africa are from the Inuit of the far north. They evolved/adapted to their environment. This adaption to the environment happened in a rather short time frame. Imagine leaving these two peoples apart for a few hundred thousand years. They would no longer look like the same species. Much like a Chihuahua and a Great Dane. The fact that we share 98% of our DNA with Apes is not enough for you. Why? Because it wasn't written in your 2000 year old book. What, your book doesn't mention DNA? The best minds of that time didn't know anything about DNA or Electricity or Computers. But you'll have us believe that they were right. You need to wake up my friend.
We need more Hubs like this one... Or more people who agrees on the fact that there is no creation vs evolution debate. What is more, Creationism is just a fancy word for a stupid idea we will hopefully get rid off sooner or later.
Rad, I can't believe it that there is no creator. You must admit that in every creation there must have a prior design. When you make a hub you must first design it in your brain. So, how can I throw the idea from my brain that there is a god, a creator?
If I found no religion in human history then your idea could be followed. There are religions. There is at least one religion approved by god. You can find it very easily.
Who are the prophets? Why all they sang the same song centuries after centuries? Why didn't they differ each other as scientists do?
God's theory 2000 years old? No, the theory was introduced by the first man Adam. If you go back you'll find only one man on this earth. Why can't you throw the oldest marriage theory? So, everything can't be thrown away.
"Rad, I can't believe it that there is no creator."
What nonsense. Arguments from incredulity mean nothing. Why must he admit anything? There is no "prior design" to a tree - simply DNA instructions. This does not imply an intelligent designer - simply nature doing it's thing.
Your inability to understand means nothing. Go!
Upal19, If I try to follow your logic, (You must admit that in every creation there must have a prior design). Then, where did God come from? Using your logic something or someone must have created God.
Are you one of those who think all peoples came from Adam a few thousand years ago? And you don't believe evolution is possible? Why are we all so different. Should we all look alike?
Mark, why does nature do what it does? Where did nature come from? Or, do you believe that everything came into being thru ramdom enteractions? Where did matter come from?
Rad, God is that entity who has existed forever. Why must matter be eternal and not God?
Nature does what it does because it follows certain natural laws such as gravity.
Can you explain to me how you conclude there was a time when nothing existed please.
Oh! Nature follows certain laws. Who made it with certain laws? Who put the law in dirt?
You prove to me that something has always existed besides God.
Without God, you are holding a losing hand, and going to no where.
Wilmiers77, you make no sense at all. You can't imagine the universe always being there, but you can imagine a being (your God) always existing with no company and suddenly deciding to create a universe. You only think God has always existed because it says so in a book and you refuse to question the book. I'm beginning to think that all religious people have no analytical skills what so ever.
Rad, Man, I make no sense to you, but sense to millions of Others. Why have you abandoned cause and effect, action and reaction, and implied intelligence or now revealed intelligence?
The Good Book is about human life, spirituality, first with metaphysical examples. Us religious people have among many other things the truth that has held for thousands of years under the test of fire, and is confirmed in our spirits that it shall endure forever. This is superior to analytical skills which is for nonbelievers. The facts that you use for your analysis is not complete so you get an incomplete(s).
God sent Jesus, His complete and whole answer to life.
Understand the Word of God to great degrees; receive from a living spirit, and know God, Jesus, the Son of God; He who is alpha and omega, the beginning and the end, the author and finisher of our faith.
I am making a time capsule statement to you. Pray that sometime during the next twenty years my testimony shall reveal itself to you.
@Rad Man I wholeheartedly agree with you. The more I argue with creationists the more I lose hope in a credible opponent.
@wilmiers77 Just because you make sense to 'millions' doesn't mean that you are correct. Slavery once made sense, racism once made sense, yet they both seem irrational now. Your argument is circular. God did this, God did that. Bottom line: Your whole belief system is based around a book.
My faith is based on Jesus, a historical figure, who was crucified for our sins and was resurrected from the grave. Also, worked miracles during the interim. Have any of your mentors come back from the grave?
Slavery is innately wrong. Christ Jesus teaches love which has no physical pain nor mental anguish. Millions are an inducement that Christ Jesus is in the spirit of God's truth, not the desire of man to control or own others which is not part of God's truth.
Yes, at one time, millions had induced thousands or millions of others to believe in slavery...snow balling against God's truth.
thank you wilmiers77 for making sense out of this! Jesus is the only truth and if we educator ourselves with the knowledge of his perfect plan, all of this makes sense. God is the creator and controller of the world.
(Jesus nor St. Paul, nor any other Biblical figure is recorded as saying anything in opposition to the institution of slavery. Slavery was very much a part of life in Judea, Galilee, and in the rest of the Roman Empire during New Testament times.)
Matthew 18:25: "But forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold, and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be made."
Exodus 21:1-4: "If thou buy an Hebrew servant, six years he shall serve: and in the seventh he shall go out free for nothing. If he came in by himself, he shall go out by himself: if he were married, then his wife shall go out with him. If his master have given him a wife, and she have born him sons or daughters; the wife and her children shall be her master's, and he shall go out by himself."
You know I could go on for days with quotes from the bible... You claim Slavery in innately wrong, but you Jesus didn't seem to know this. Show me where the bible condemns slavery?
Very simple explanation. Jesus' main mission was to institute the new covenant, the final covenant. Jesus knew that God's Spirit would terminate slavery if and when accepted by the people. Slavery was extensive as you stated, and would have taken many life times to just curtail. God's Spirit changes the heart of men. Force was not part of Jesus' forte, and certainly not part of the new love covenant.
Rad Man, you ask the question that if god created everything then who had created the god? This also doesn't make any sense because how far will you go? You must stop at some point. You must stop at a real cause.
Rad, I'll request you to read the quran. This book can't be made by an ignorant man. Just read it first to last and then talk to me. Ask me any question on quran.
Mark, You are such an arrogant human being!!!!
@Wilmiers, You just made that up. You are so transparent. If God wanted to end slavery he would have done so by making it the eleventh commandment or have Jesus speak out about it. It's that simple. You need to analyze instead of rationalize. God wanted to end slavery but he thought he'd wait a few thousand years????? (Force was not part of Jesus' forte) He didn't have to use force, he just needed to resist it. The most christian part of the world (the southern US) used the bible to condone slavery up until a few years ago. Your answer is an embarrassment to christians because it makes Jesus and God look passive and without compassion.
@upla19, you and I went down this road before my friend. You seem like a nice person, but the quran is full of the same contradiction as the bible. The earth is shaped like an egg. No it's not. Not at all. Wrong wrong wrong.
Rad, Man, you are crucifying me! Read and wake up! I thought that you knew that God gave freewill.
Damn Rad, resisting force requires force all day long.
Many people did take a scripture or two out of context, and especially applied them with love missing. Sorry, that's the way it was. The main freedom movements came from the church. Please research before telling me that this isn't true.
Oh! So You mean you can tell God how to create and develop an eternal being?
The earth is round and the quran never says it is oval or like an egg. Perhaps you have read a misinterpreted one. Mind it that not all eggs are oval, an egg can be roundish too. If you find it in quran just think it that how can an ignorant person can tell that before 14 hundred years back? How can an untaught person can claim himself as the promised prophet of Bible and Torah? You'll still find those promises in those books. Those books were written 500 years to 1000 thousand years back.
Those books were written 500 years to 1000 thousand years back of the claiming person. Please tell me what other contradictions you have found in quran.
@wilmiers77 - God simply should have spoken out against slavery. Somewhere in the bible it should say that. How can you justify this? Instead verse after verse condones slavery. God spoke out against many things. Not to kill, not to sleep with your neighbour... "Resisting force requires force all day long" No it doesn't. If Jesus thought slavery was wrong he would have or should have said so. Don't justify this. Accept it.
@upal19 - “And we have made the earth egg shaped”. [Al-Qur’an 79:30]
The Arabic word Dahaha means egg shaped. It also means an expanse.
I understand it's a translation problem. We've gone down this road before. As I have said before I've never meet a Muslim I didn't like. It's the fanatics that are a problem. They need a separation of church and state.
There you go, telling God how to create an eternal being! Or, are you leading me on?
Rad, I am a physics major. If I said that around my other physics buddies they would laugh me out of the building. Action causes a reaction! Equilibrium requires balanced forces, two opposing forces.
I think that you are confusing potential energy with kinetic energy or mixing the two one way or another.
What are you afraid of Wilmiers? The bible should have spoken out against slavery. It's just that simple. It spoke out against murder, taking your neighbors wife and using the lords name in vain. For one second don't justify but, analyze. I'm not telling God how to create an eternal being. Mostly because there are no eternal beings. None. It makes no sense. But I can tell you this. If I were a god. I would have done a much better job. I would have made a perfect book. With details like atoms and dna. Two thousand years ago it would have made no sense, but it would have been a eye opener today. Much like Einstein's theory of relativity. We are constantly learning that he is right. With both the bible and the quran we are learning that the authors only knew what people of the time knew. The earth is like a carpet, not it's like an egg, no it's held up on pillars. Nothing nothing nothing nothing. No more talk, you are incapable of looking at your religion critically. You should.
`With both the bible and the quran we are learning that the authors only knew what people of the time knew.' This words are not true because you are looking at these only as an criticizer.
I'll not wholeheartedly defend Bible. Bible too is a god's book as other religious books are, there is a tremendous wrong proclamation in the bible that Jesus is god's son. Christianity is based on this belief. There is no such proclamation in other religious books such as Torah and quran in support of god's son theory. God's son theory is an absurd theory.
Quran is much more advanced than it's revealing time. Dahaha should be expansion. Earth is round but what we see it in our eyes is like a leveled land in most places so that people can reside on.
Rad, I've read all the religious books. Religious books are not giving you answers of all your questions. Then what should we do? disbelieve god? No, my intelligence call upon me not to do that. It is risky. I fear god. I'm not a brave man like Mark and you. I've believed one verse of quran, 'Why have I created you? Just to see who and who believe me without seeing me.' I'm greedy for a promised heaven. You must know what is heaven. People will not die in heaven. Quran has proclaimed, 'They'll never die after their first death. Disbelievers will be burnt in the hell, there they'll not die nor they'll live.' So, should I endanger my life for nothing? Quran has also said, 'Do they think that I've created all things for nothing? Very soon they'll see it.'
As I said before, I like you upal19. But you need to be brave like Mark and I. Never be afraid of questioning anything. Question everything.
upal19, your Quran also says a bunch of silly stuff. You've got people blowing themselves up because they have been promised a whole bunch of virgins in the after life. What did those poor virgins do wrong? Is there sex in the afterlife? Why would there be? Silly! You make the mistake of thinking that I am looking for answers. I'm not. I've got my answers. I'm trying to help others look for questions.
Rad Man, you are not thinking pass your nose.
How have you got all the answers? Reading books? Or thinking yourself? Do you think that people believe in god only for having sex with women in after life? What other things atheist people can think except having sex, sleeping, eating etc. just like animals? Don't you think that only human can think other animals can't? Why? Why the earth moves round the sun 30 km. per second? Why there is no human in other planets? Why only human is dominating on this earth? Who gave human this power? Why clouds give us rainfall? There are questions, questions. Can atheism answer all those questions? If can, I'll be an atheist too. Carry on.
upal19 - I think it's important to give a lot of thought to life. I was raised as a Catholic, but started to question Christianity at about 12 years old. By about 14 years old I realized that the whole God thing didn't make sense not just because of the conflicting information in the (books) but also because of the evidence around me. For instance, why would there be a need for sex in heaven and why would a suicide bomber get a bunch of virgins in heaven. Shouldn't it say he would be surrounded by inner and outer beauty? Kind of makes it sound like it's good to be a dirty old man wanting 40 virgins. No regard for the poor girls at all. What about their soul?
Tell me upal, why do you think only humans can think? All animals feel pain and the will to survive. My dog communicates with me. You should see what researchers are doing with primates. Humans aren't that special my friend. We are weak and frail. We can't run fast, but we can run long compared to other animals. We are smart, and that have given us the ability to adapt to all parts of the world. But there are still more cockroaches in the world than humans. We are not that special. Research have proven that other animals think and communicate.
Science have been squashed for a thousand years by leaders of religious communities, because they are afraid of being proven wrong. Lets just say the earth moves around the sun at 30kms a second. So what? That must be the speed for it to stay in orbit. Did the quran predict 30kms a second? That would be cool if the quran predicted that speed and todays science showed it to be true. Science sends lots of stuff into orbit around the earth. They no the math to do it. That is amazing. Einstein was and still is amazing. Why are humans dominating this planet you ask? We have evolved with a certain set of abilities which helps us control our environment and keep us and our children safe. But it wasn't always this way. Humans were and are sometimes preyed upon by stronger and larger animals. We also have the ability to screw this planet up. Why do you need to think someone gave humans the power to control this planet. Perhaps we just are.
Why do clouds give rainfall you ask? Science answers how and perhaps the why. It just does on this planet. Moisture in the air rises and forms clouds. I can tell you this my friend, it's not for us. The rain is not here for us. We may be here because of the rain and the sun and the temperature of the earth. Only the arrogant would think these things are for us. There have been rain on this planet long before we came to be and there will be rain here long after we are gone.
Atheism can't answer any question, but it can open a mind to see beyond what we are taught and what religion hides from us. Science and answer all these question and many more. Does the quran tell you have fast light moves? Science does and can prove it. Does the quran tell you how fast sound moves? Science does. Can the quran tell you how far the sun and planets are from us? Science does my friend.
Rad, what i see is right. I see a lot of people especially Christians of modern age don’t believe in god. I’ve read it in quran saying ‘i’ll fill the hell with human and stone.’ it is god’s will, god is willful. I wonder how easily people are fooled by Satan and fulfilling god’s will. Rad, you find contradictions in religious books but what you believe there are too many contradictions too. So, you can’t claim that what you are saying is right undoubtedly.
There are no contradictions in quran and science. quranic scientific words are not contradictory with modern science. If you found any please show me. You can’t believe god because god is promising people virgins in heaven. You feel for virgin’s souls. What about the animals we eat? What about their souls? You can’t live without eating other animals because god has created them for your eating. Do you feel shame for this? Can you stop eating other animals being an animal? So, can’t create god virgins in heaven for your companionship? Someone marries a woman only for having sex? Not for her companionship? Only males are happy with female companionship but not females with males? Did you found it in quran that suicide bombers will be rewarded heaven with a bunch of virgins?
On thinking power: you are saying other animals can also think like human. This is alright that animal can think and animals are mightier than human but what is the level of their thinking power? Humans are dominating on them, that’s why you can call your dog ‘my dog’. That’s why no mighty animal can call ‘my human’.
“Let’s just say the earth moves around the sun at 30kms a second. So, what?”
so what? who the hell told it to round at that speed?
‘That would be cool if the quran predicted that speed and today’s science showed it to be true.’ quran doesn’t tell it directly but what quran tells on it is sufficient for today’s science.
“And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. And the Moon, - I have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)” : surah yaseen, verse:38,39,40.
‘Why do clouds give rainfall, it's not for us.’ yes it is for us. it for us for the most because it comes to grow everything and we eat everything, we are not eaten by anyone. This earth is for human and everything on this earth is because of human.
‘Does the quran tell you have fast light moves? Science does and can prove it. Does the quran tell you how fast sound moves? Science does. Can the quran tell you how far the sun and planets are from us? Science does my friend.’
Nice! What is science? Who are the persons behind the science? Can any scientist protect himself from death? so, don’t call science, science, science it is god, god, god and god. quran is enough for this ‘this is from your god the creator, don’t disbelieve him in any situation.’
“And the sun runs his course for a period determined for him: that is the decree of (Him), the Exalted in Might, the All-Knowing. And the Moon, - I have measured for her mansions (to traverse) till she returns like the old (and withered) lower part of a date-stalk. It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)” : surah yaseen, verse:38,39,40.
What upal? Did I read this correctly? ( Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law) ) By each you mean the Sun and Moon. So this implies the Sun orbits the earth. Don't you see? An all knowing being would know the earth orbits the sun. You book was written by people using the best knowledge they had at the time.
I don't see any contradictions in my thought. If you do please show me.
( ‘i’ll fill the hell with human and stone.’ ) Your god does not sound loving at all. You have been brainwashed. You have been told to believe or suffer, so you believe. I wouldn't keep a friend like that. Why would a god say that? It's just silly.
You simply don't or can't understand my concern with virgins in heaven. It's sexist. Does a female bomber get a bunch of male virgins? Can you not grasp how silly it sounds? Do you think heaven divides up virgins and non-virgins? What about children or infants who die. Do they remain that way in heaven?
‘So this implies the Sun orbits the earth.’ No, not that, how? It doesn’t imply that. It doesn’t mean which round around which. There is no mention of earth but the above saying means sun, moon or earth or other planets are all running or swimming through their set path and these sayings are so advanced for that time of writing quran because the prophet himself was an untaught person and there were very few educated people in that society. Those educated people were mainly educated in bible and torah. When Prophet Mohammad declared himself that he is the promised prophet of bible and torah those people believed him after questioning him.
‘Your god does not sound loving at all.’ how do you expect love from him when your conscience fail to recognize him? This is his silly test. God has said if you fail you’ll be paid nothing but hell. God has given you the freedom for choosing. Mr. Rad, I’m not brainwashed at all. If I’m brainwashed then all the god believers are that. How is it possible so many god believers are brainwashed? If there were no religion, there were no prophets yet I would believe god. I see him everywhere. There are eyes behind your two eyes; those eyes are in your heart, just open those to see him. God has declared that if someone believes me the reward will be the highest and if someone disbelieves me the reward will be the highest too.
In heaven, every woman will be virgin and every man will be so, they’ll be all aged 25. Died children will be children there. They’ll serve foods, fruits and drinks for elders. So, what do you want more in heaven? These are the rewards for believers.
Not only you, there are so many people don’t believe in god. What is that to god? What is that to me? What is that to those prophets who called upon people to come to the god’s path? Prophets didn’t ask for help from people. They helped people. Prophets didn’t denounce each other. All prophets sang the same song. How is it possible?
How is it possible bible and torah declared of coming of a last prophet centuries ago? Don’t you see them in Old Testament and New Testament?
( It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day: Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)” : surah yaseen, verse:38,39,40. )
This certainly states the sun orbits. There is no mention of the earth and it says the sun is not permitted to catch the moon. Catch meaning it's moving. Each swims along in orbit. Each (only Sun and Moon) mentioned. Wake up you poor soul.
'So this implies the Sun orbits the earth.' and 'This certainly states the sun orbits.' Orbits the earth? It doesn't mean that. Do you know the sun also has its own course in the galaxy along with it's family? Our sun and other suns are moving around the galaxy's center along with their family members. So, sun is not stationary as you say. So, quran is right in its saying and this moving of sun is not around the earth but around the galaxy center. Scientists have said, there are 1 hundred thousand suns in our galaxy.
It certainly does imply the Sun orbiting the earth upal, because it references night and day. It does not reference a cosmic year. And I am willing to bet that there is no reference in any holy book of a cosmic year (the time it takes our solar system to circle the center of the galaxy). I'm also willing to bet there are no predictions about of how long it take us to circle the the center of our galaxy. Science tells us this. I understand it to be 225 million years. What does your books tell you? To bad holy books don't mention a cosmic years or atoms or molecules or dark mater or the speed of light or sound. You would have my attention then. I'm sure you are nice caring man upal, but you are not going to change my mind until you show me something in the quran that wows me. Sorry. The above verse simply implies the sun orbiting the earth for us to have night and day.
"Each (just) swims along in (its own) orbit (according to Law)” How does this imply sun orbits the earth I can't understand. It means they are moving but which moves around which doesn't tell it. So, how can we suppose it that the sun moves around the earth the quran is telling? It only means they are not stationary.
“It is not permitted to the Sun to catch up the Moon, nor can the Night outstrip the Day:” ‘because it references night and day.’ This reference doesn’t indicate the sun moves around the earth because quoted moon is not responsible for day and night. Sun is responsible for day and night when the earth spins around its axis. So, “nor can the Night outstrip the Day” this reference can’t be implied on sun moves round the earth. This will be over hypothetical if you imply that. I would say, above mentioned words (sun, moon, day, night) are not referenced to each other.
You are looking for everything in a religious book. ‘Mosquitoes have two wings’ you can’t expect it written in quran. A religious book is a constitution or principal laws. You can’t expect a religious book as a scientific book because there are other things beyond science in a human society a religious book has to cover. When there was no science people have to live. Whatever quran tells on science you must admit that those are much more advanced than the society of that time. An untaught person can’t make such remarks. quran is also a book of history because this is the last god sent book for human and you’ll find the quran a poetry first to last. Just listen to an audio of quran along with its English meaning. An ignorant person can’t create those poems. Don’t read only interpretation in English but listen it in Arabic with good voice and with English meaning.
I'm sorry you can't or wont understand that it says the sun orbits the earth. It's to bad it doesn't say the earth spins on it's axis to cause night and day. It doesn't say that because the science of the time didn't know it. Only Europe thought the world was flat.
You never answer why the quran doesn't mention atom or molecules or how far we are from the sun or how large the earth is. Nothing to convince me. Just science of the day.
You are demanding such things should be written in a religious book which is quite absurd. Some people used to demand answers of some questions from some prophets. The god warned those people because those questions are not related to their life. A religious book is enough for this answer on god's existence. I'm sorry for you people. How foolish you are! quran's words are true for you. 'They have eyes but can't see, they have hearts but never realize, they have ears but never can hear.'
Even a simple math can’t convince you. How should you be convinced? This is no duty of me to convince you. So, go your way. What I do realize is enough for me. Thank god who has made me realize, who has not made me a negative thinker.
Upal, you are the one that keeps saying the quran has all the answers. You keep saying it explains everything. You keep saying it's science is perfect. But when I question it, like I should you have no answers and say its a religious book and should have these answers. It should be convincing. If your neighbor tell you he is a profit do you not question him? Or do you just take his word. There are many people today who claim to be a profit. How do you know if you don't question? Your entire belief system is based on a book. You should be allowed to question that book. Why would god warn people these questions are not related to their life. That is just silly. Good luck in your life upal.
'Your entire belief system is based on a book.' When we've realized that the book is from the almighty god then what should I do my friend?
You should question the book like you would question a friend that tells you he is a prophet. You don't know it's real you only think it's real.
'You should question the book like you would question a friend that tells you he is a prophet.' You can ask a person but not a book. What is the principal question of human? The question is ‘is there any god?’ quran answers this question. There is only one book in this world that is quran claiming itself from god directly. This answer is answer for all questions. If you say that this book is false then you must have arguments for your claiming. If you show arguments then you must face counter arguments.
‘You don't know it's real you only think it's real.’ What makes my thinking positive on it? Surely there are rational reasons for that. If you refuse to accept those reasons then you are deceiving yourself.
upal - the only rational reason you can have is that it makes you feel good to believe this.
Respected Mark, If I feel good, if billions of people feel good why not you? What makes you isolated? Come and jump into the crowd. Heavenly feelings will surround you although heaven is far from you.
Believing nonsense will not make me feel good. I am not scared enough to do this. And - lets be honest here - you are talking nonsense.
I already feel good. Your divisive, war mongering religion actually divides you from me. I am not the one doing the dividing. You are.
Upal, with respect you are still trying to convert. It's silly. It's like asking me to believe in Santa again. If you don't believe in Santa you'll get a lump of coal for Christmas. If you do all your prayers will be answered. Same concept. Do you believe in Santa upal? You know Santa is always watching right? I'm not trying to insult, I'm just trying to help you see through my eyes.
Brave men, just enjoy your life. I'll pray for you, not for your salvation but think positive to the last. God's will must be fulfilled. Deceived poor ones!
@ Mark
I am sorry if it has already been discussed somewhere in the middle, did not have patience to read through all 2-year discussion :)
You are stating several times, that evolution theory disproves God's existance. I fail to see how exactly, to be honest.
In fact, people use evolution as well - directed evolution of enyzmes, for example, has made huge advances over past decade. Assuming chemist performing experiment is filling in a position of a god for his experiment, we could try to draw some logical reasoning behind said "god's" actions.
The obvious use of evolution is exactly to prevent time-consuming work. You know (more or less) what qualities you are looking for in the end, but you don't know (and don't care) how to achieve them. You create necessary conditions and mechanisms (at least three - procreation, change and selection), and let it stir. Sometimes some unforseen errors would lead your experiment into a dead end or terminate it. So you will start anew or "stir it up" a bit to change a direction, creating "divine intervention" of sorts in the process.
My point is, that from perspective of the experiment you will not exist. There is no real reason for you to interact directly with any of specimens, as they are all but transitive stages, and the whole reason behind this experiment is to avoid interaction. Any rules or laws they will perceive as "natural", as they always existed, seemingly never change and can't be easily summarized and understood, unless you have same knowledge the designer has.
In the end, there is no way to prove God's existance, neither there is a way to prove otherwise. Any theological question is outside the realm of logic and science, and "disproving" it places you on the same level as said religious fanatics, at least in logic's department. Any scientific analysis will end up with observation of natural events, as it was (and is) the way science works. And by the way, alternative comsogonic views ("universe always existed" and "happened by chance") answer as many questions as God's theory (that is, none) so are by no way better.
To sum it up, I do believe in God's existance, I guess. I do also believe, that human nature corrupted any political structure that gives real power, religion included. Hence the holy books consist of history, folklore, some advice to legislate individual's way of life for the benefit of society (sometimes very outdated) and some very blatant attempts to concentrate political power in the hands of the clergy.
@ Upal
If I try hard enough, I can believe that following exactly some rules will give me happiness everlasting, and not following will bring me everlasting pain (not really clear how will it benefit God, but hey). The problem I have, is which religion to turn to - they all sound alike but, sadly, require me to frown upon all the other religions. So I guess my only hope is to stay true to some general guidelines most big religions have in common (like don't kill etc.) and hope to score at least some points with all of them :D
Paul - seem as though you did not bother reading the article either. Which is pretty typical of people who believe in a god. When you have read what I wrote - you will understand why what you just said is incorrect.
What's interesting about God... and the idea of evolution proving / not proving His existence... Maybe He doesn't have a DIRECT hand in evolution, but could He have set up the system / environment so evolution "developed" from it?
Remember, Charles Darwin himself very much believed in God.
So what? You cannot have a developmental destination preordained, therefore anything could have evolved, therefor it was not planned in any way.
@tschang - you are just speculating. "Maybe" you say. I say which answer makes the most sense.
In 1848 Darwin stopped attending church on Sundays. "an agnostic would be the most correct description of my state of mind." You see we don't know what he was thinking. The church was a pretty powerful institution and one did not want to be on the wrong side of the church. Perhaps he learned from Galileo.
He could have set up the system, but he would have mentioned the system in one of his books. He would have know we would discover evolution eventually and when we did we would known his words are divine. But no such evidence exists. No mention of any modern science exists in any holy book. Prove me wrong.
Trying not turn this into a religion vs. science war, but may be failing...
Religion's ultimate purpose is control of its member, usually for good (rather than evil) by enforcing social norms (i.e. moral code) for the greater good (allegedly).
Science, however, is amoral. It is just science. The natural laws won't change just because you don't believe in them. Thus, it cannot be "controlled" by religion.
Thus they are opposites... in a way.
The best way to reconcile the two, would be to maintain a polite truce (polite fiction, if you insist), at least on the matter of Creation vs. evolution, that God didn't create the universe, but he defined the framework / ground rules to allow evolution. After all, we could be composed of neutrinos, or dark matter, or antimatter, but our universe doesn't work that way. Why? Still yet undetermined.
I'm actually all for evolution and I consider pure Creationists bigots, but really, even scientists (or "Darwinians" should extend an olive branch every once in a while. :) or would that compromise the science too much?
Why? Why accept lies and nonsense?
I am back! Creation now and creation forever.
As everyone know there has been a never ending debate between evolutionists and creationists.This will never end because it is two believe systems and not one can be proven.(thats why it is called believing and not knowing)
So forget about the neverending attemps with science and bible proofs etc. The fact is that whoever are reading this WILL DIE someday(you dont believe you will die you know that you will).So if you dont believe and you were right in thinking there is no God, well then nothing will happen when you die(hard to percieve nothing but try thinking of it as a neverending sleep without any dreams, very sad) if you were wrong and there is a God then you will be in a not so nice place called hell for not believing.If you believe there is a God and you were wrong well then nothing will happen again or you will be in heaven if you were right.So the choices are: Nothing or Hell if you dont believe, and nothing or heaven if you do.Seems to me like the first choice is the only one with a losing side and that is why atheists are somewhat stupid dont you think.To be an Atheist is like playing roulette and betting on a number that is on the layout but not on the wheel.You have everything to lose and nothing to win.
Sorry evolutionists, you were too busy being scientific and clever to realize you were dumb but we love you anyway!
As everyone know there has been a never ending debate between evolutionists and creationists.This will never end because it is two believe systems and not one can be proven.(thats why it is called believing and not knowing)
So forget about the neverending attemps with science and bible proofs etc. The fact is that whoever are reading this WILL DIE someday(you dont believe you will die you know that you will).So if you dont believe and you were right in thinking there is no God, well then nothing will happen when you die(hard to percieve nothing but try thinking of it as a neverending sleep without any dreams, very sad) if you were wrong and there is a God then you will be in a not so nice place called hell for not believing.If you believe there is a God and you were wrong well then nothing will happen again or you will be in heaven if you were right.So the choices are: Nothing or Hell if you dont believe, and nothing or heaven if you do.Seems to me like the first choice is the only one with a losing side and that is why atheists are somewhat stupid dont you think.To be an Atheist is like playing roulette and betting on a number that is on the layout but not on the wheel.You have everything to lose and nothing to win.
Sorry evolutionists, you were too busy being scientific and clever to realize you were dumb but we love you anyway!
@Mark Knowles -- what exactly is "nonsense" about some sort of entity having setup the system to allow evolution to play out? While you can't "prove" such an entity exists (or does not exist), it is very much like String theory... both are impossible to test (based on our current knowledge level).
@Barry Vorster -- what issue are YOU discussing? "Is there a God?" or "Did He create life on Earth?" I thought we're discussing the latter, while you seem to have made a jump to the former. I may love you, but stay on topic, please?
Kschang - Did you really ask "what exactly is nonsense about some sort of entity having setup the system to allow evolution to play out"? It's nonsense because you just made that up. You have no evidence of an entity. You have a few holy books that don't mention evolution or any other modern science. Show some evidence of an entity. Any evidence would be great. Wanting to believe is not evidence. I want to believe in life after death, but I also want to be 6 feet tall.
Science and Religion are not opposites. They are not related at all. We do not need Religion or science to be moral. We get our moral code from society. Religion was used to give us a moral compass at one time, but today laws (in secular societies) do a much better than any religion. The bible talks about how to beat children and how to keep slaves. We know better now don't we?
Kschang, might consider that our knowledge of the scriptures grew also. After all, the bible is prophetic extending unto the end of our existence. Obsolete? Impossible.
Kschang - you did not even bother reading my article did you? I explained why this is impossible. We must discount everything we know about evolution if this was the case. And your Invisible Entity could not have "setup the system to allow evolution to play out" - it would have needed to control every single action that had an effect on every single organism every step of the way throughout millions of years. Otherwise a species of Spiders or some other creature could well have evolved self awareness instead of humans.
You do not understand how evolution works - do you?
wilmiers - considering you appear not to have read any scriptures and do not know what they say - that is hilarious. Not only are you scared of biology - you have not bothered to try and understand your majik book either.
Mark, hearing from someone who lost his balls several hubs ago, and continue to seal yourself in that lead suit of your, I won't give dignity to your accusations.
Creation now, and creation forever.
Will see you in France. Pick your street. I must warn you that I haven't lost a street fight since the 5th grade, and that guy was three years older than me. LOLOLOL!!!!
Barry - you missed the rather obvious alternative. Lets say for a moment that a god id possible. Logically - this is untrue, but - for the sake of argument.
That means there is an infinite number of possible gods. So - your Invisible Super Being is infinitely unlikely. Therefore you are likely to have picked the wrong one and may be punished for having done so.
You must be very scared now.
Mark, hearing from someone who lost his balls several hubs ago, and continue to seal yourself in that lead suit of your, I won't give dignity to your accusations.
Creation now, and creation forever.
Will see you in France. Pick your street. I must warn you that I haven't lost a street fight since the 5th grade, and that guy was three years older than me. Loser buys the first three drinks. LOLOLOL!!!!
An unending debate of the believe and unbelieve systems! I think both systems are based on choices. LOL. Mark, I rather believe the Scriptures and become an unbeliever to Richard Darwin ideologies and the likes.
Wilmiers - I know that your majik book tells you to threaten and physically attack non believers - but don't be so silly.
This is why your religion causes so many conflicts. And you think this is love? LOLOL Awfully brave of you though. DO you think you can beat me into believing? LOL
In any case - I don't believe in hurting peopel unless I am left no choice,. It goes against my ethics and moral code. What a shame your religion doesn't teach you morals or ethics?
Andrew - who is Richard Darwin? Dear me - bet you choose science when it comes to making your computer work. Or do you prey to the Invisible Super Being to do that? LOL
Not really true. The bible teaches me to love my neighbor as myself, and in the natural, gives the practical codes of human behavior on which all other civil codes hang.
Dismiss the bible, and some of your unkept neighbors shall eventually dismiss you. Your lofty ideals are noble, but you ignore what is needed to achieve and maintain such ideals among the masses. Mankind is not naturally good because we live in a fallen world.
We have relative peace in the USA now, but it is naive to build an ideal belief system founded on temporary conditions or do you think that present condition are forever? Your belief system must consider the possibility of any and all events happening; one that causes pain and suffering or rebellion or enslavement to an idealogy which is unacceptable to us.
Wake up, and observe reality!
From threats to gibberish. Not sure which is worse.
Mark, as expected, you have missed the point again, and have resorted to folly. Get some balls.
@Everybody -- from a "neutral" observer here...
Religion considers science to be amoral, and thus, "dangerous" to all.
Science consider religion to be unscientific control gibberish.
One side declaring each other to be gibberish doesn't really help either side, except radicalization of both sides.
Wilmiers - I have not missed the point - you speak nonsense and threats. This is why your religion causes so many conflicts.
kschang - you are not a neutral observer - you are a liar.
@Mark -- what lie? I merely raised the theory that perhaps a God could have setup the sandbox / system to allow evolution to take place.
Are you trying to employ 'false dilemma'? Seems you're trying to do "you're either with me or against me".
No - you are a liar. You are not a neutral observer. LOL
Is time bigger than evolution or did evolution make time.I think I am going to start believing in time and start a new debate- the time vs creation debate- its going to be a thing!haha
@Mark Knowles -- as you have not provided proof that I'm NOT a neutral observer, you seem to have employed circular logic.
@Barry Vorster -- who's to say that God's "day" is same as humans measure our day? (Indeed, I believe St. Augustine said that many passages in the Bible are NOT to be taken literally, unlike some Creationist insist on doing)
kschang. You provided your own proof. Just stopped by for a fight huh? lol
@ Mark
Your method of replying to questions "you obviously didn't read my article" without even considering copying 1 sentence from said article for the purpose of discussion strangely resembles overly religious people behavior :)
"There cannot possibly have been a divine hand guiding the process therefore god does not exist. " [sic]
Absence of evidence of anything can point to our inability to notice said influence. For example, electron was first discovered on the break of last century, when methods to prove it's existance became available. Using your logic, electrons did not exist before.
Using truly scientific approach, you can say that today belief in God is baseless. That does not exclude the fact, however.
If some facts lead you to believe one way or another, feel free to do it. Just don't use the word "prove".
There are many cases in science, where some theories were postulated without any evidence whatsoever (Schroedinger equation at the time of its writing, for instance). With time, collected information would let people believe one way or another, and it was also not uncommon for this "scientific consensus" to change. "Right" and "wrong" are not scientific terms to begin with.
So if you are living in binary world, you are as blind as religious freaks - both of you call for absolute truth.
"The Oracle of Delphi called me the wisest man in Greece. That is because, of all the greeks, I alone know that I know nothing" (Socrates)
@ Rad Man
"he would have written it in Bible" made me laugh :) Let's imagine that there is God and he gives a Holy Text to his followers. You are saying, that all knowledge should be included there, literally everything. I bet the heads of ancient Jews would blow up :)
When your 5-year old kid will ask you, what are the bright spots in the night sky, you will give him entire diagram of star composition, complete with nuclear fusion equations and Rassel's sequence? Well, even if you did, he wouldn't understand or remember it anyway.
It may be naive to believe, that every word in [insert_holy_text_here] is absolute truth. It is plain stupid to believe, that any one text can contain all the knowledge of mankind.
Talking about Holy Texts, keep in mind, that these are horribly outdated. If you put them into historical and geograpical context, they perfectly make sense. The ideas behind moral code (commandments, for instance) still make sense today, as they are connected to human nature rather than religion. Specifics of day-to-day life are mostly unusable now: if a muslim goes to the north pole during Ramadan, he could die of starvation during long nights, or go crazy trying to pray three times in 10 minutes during short ones. The ideas behind Ramadan are still applicable, however, and arguably beneficial.
None of scientists I know have any problem with "God vs. Evolution" question, regardless of their religious affiliation (most of them do believe in God, for the record). Maybe if I'd do my PhD in US instead of Germany it would be different, but I highly doubt it.
Paul
P.S. If merely allowing the possibility of God's existance puts me on the same line as religious fanatics, I am afraid there are precious few sane people in this world.
So - honesty is not something you value? Gotcha. LOLOL Another Liar For Jesus.
Thanks for making my point Paul! "Talking about Holy Texts, keep in mind, that these are horribly outdated". So can we conclude that these texts were not written for us? They were written with no knowledge of the future, which doesn't sound divine at all.
I think a lot of people who say they believe in God only say they do out of fear (see upal19 above). Fear of thinking, fear of being perceived as different, fear of spending eternity in hell. I don't offer my religious opinions in mixed company.
@Mark -- I provided my own proof (that I am not neutral)? Care to explain that? Or are you just going to use circular logic again and again?
So far you sound as judgmental and illogical as the people you accuse accuse others of being. Arbitrarily designate people who don't agree with you as lying. Are you *sure* you're a fan of Dawkins? He'd at least have employed some logic.
I have read Mr. Shermer's book "Why People Believe Strange Things" which has a whole section on the stupidity of creationism, and strangely, I find YOU, Mr. Knowles, employing some of the same tactics the Creationists are using, namely blanket dismissal.
As for "stopping for a fight", now you're attributing motives to your opponent. Isn't that ad hominem attack? I came offering a middle ground and instead of attacking that, you attacked me personally instead.
@Paul -- while *some* scientific theories are formulated on pure speculation (much as String Theory is now), such theories are quite weak because they cannot be 'tested' based on the knowledge or experimental methods we have now available to us. Similarly, "creationism" cannot be tested as we can't test for "His" presence or absence. On the other hand, evolution CAN be tested and HAVE been observed to occur. Thus, evolution is a far more valid theory than creationism (which can't be validated or proven).
However, debating religion vs. science is rather obtuse. One does not invalidate the other. Your point seems to be a variant of "proving a negative" used by Creationist folks.
@Rad Man -- You're declaring obsolescence of religion and replaced by societal law. I thought we were debating creationism vs. evolution? :)
As for whether religion rules through fear or love, I've observed that most religions offer a bit of both, though rarely in equal proportions, but that's REALLY going off topic. :D
kschang - so you do not believe in a god then? lol
Of course I dismiss everything. This is not blanket dismissal - this is rational, logical thought. I do not dismiss it out of hand. Creation by a god is logically impossible and I have explained why evolution contradicts the suggestion that a god started it. You did not bother reading my article - nor did you address the points I made. I did not make an ad hominem attack. Going to motives is a reasonable judgment to make and it not an attack of any sort.
You are clearly biased - and therefore lying when you claim to be impartial.
Try addressing my points instead of repeating nonsense and attacking me.
@ kschang
I see my point is being continually misunderstood. All I argue against is the fact that evolution "proves" the absence of God (what this "article" stated), which is as faulty as argument that bible "proves" his presence. I hate it when people accuse others of being ignorant, while, in all reality, being as ignorant themselves.
Again, in all God debate I don't really have definite opinion, and also don't care too much. If I have to choose between rational design and chance theory, I'd go with the former because for me it is making more sense (especially after molecular biology class). I am not going around preaching or believe in all heaven/hell thing, as it is most obvious the tool of enforcing social rules on people. How could you make peasants obey kings if they do not believe in "divine mandate"? If not for monotheistic religions, civilization would still be a bunch of clans fighting for dominance. Monotheism in it's different forms emerged completely independently in different regions, because it was needed, not because some higher power decided to reveal itself.
I don't like creationism one bit - it's pure politics, which has nothing to do with either religion or science. If you stop affiliating me with creationists, hopefully my logic will become clearer. Creationism as a view is almost nonexistant outside US, and is definitely way less vocal.
Speaking of which, I guess most of the people in this thread are from US. Talk about stereotypes...
Paul
P.S. I believe there is no "off-topic" in this discussion. The original purpose of the whole thing is bashing creationism until said creationists arrive, and then yelling "LOLOLOL" at them, feeling overwhelming intellectual superiority. For the absence of creationists, anyone with slightly different opinion will do, it seems.
Paul - You have said you do not believe evolution disproves god. I have not claimed that. You are too lazy to bother reading my article - you simply jumped in to tell me the nonsense you believe. You have just told me you prefer Creationism to "chance" and then say you are not a creationist.
Why not try addressing the point I did make - i.e. - if a god was involved in evolution - it would have needed to control every single environmental shift and mutation in every single organism on the planet over millions of years and we would need to discard every single thing we know about how evolution works.
Now - that is a strong argument against an intelligent designer or god.
@ Mark
I said it in my very first comment. In order to benefit from evolution, you don't need to guide "every single step". That's the whole point!
Please try to abstract of all creationists you used to talk to and take into account only things I actually ask you to.
Let's assume, there is rational designer. No profets, Bibles, popes, afterlife or anything. Just a creator. For whatever reason, he sets up experiment, with no intention to create humans or any specific life form. He just defines rules and starts the process, to see what comes out in the end.
In short, evolution (and many other things) disprove belief that Bible is literally correct, and attempts to find compromise (like people living thousands of years) are pretty pathetic. It in no way disproves rational design's idea.
The only other cosmogonic idea, "the chance", has it's weaknesses as well.
Imagine glass of water. Every single molecule involved has very well defined energy, movement speed and direction. We employ "random" because of our measurement limitations, not because of inherent "randomness" of the system. For example, in CERN, where they work with just a dozen of particles, they very well measure lots of parameters for each of them.
Now, let's stop the time and look. Every single particle can be (potentially) completely defined. That means, next moment of time is defined as well. There is no "random" function involved. So, if you have unlimited calculation possibilities, you could describe the universe in all it's complexity, and predict everything.
Your thoughts?
Paul
Well Paul, you are making a little more sense now, but you are still a little unclear. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding and if I am I apologies. Are you suggesting a rational designer could have set out to experiment with earth. Put all the raw materials on earth and sat back to watch? The problem is you've given him unlimited calculation abilities and unlimited knowledge of particles. With that ability he doesn't need to experiment. He could just let it play in his head.
What I described is not my belief per se, it is just a theory (I am not the first to come up with it either, of course) which is entertaining to think about. Not that any results of God discussions would give you any tangible benefit anyway :)
I see universe as a model. When we, humans, try to find some answers about our world, we frequently create models with simplified laws, and try to observe some trends in order to later apply them to the real world.
Why couldn't our creator do the same? From our standpoint he is "allmighty"; that does not mean that he is on the absolute scale. I bet even when creating universe he had limitations - not all possible setups are viable or even possible to create.
Creating life in order to better understand himself and world around him is one of only two reasons I can imagine any living being creating anything. Second being just for the fun of it.
The analogy itself contains the answer to your question about "unlimited power" - we do know all laws we apply when we run simulations, yet we don't know the outcome until we run it.
There are some more possibilities of creator being involved and yet have no problems with evolution or any other of science advancements, but I personally find this one more appealing.
Blindly following some doctrine (not necessarily religious - USSR being a good example) will always put you at odds with common sense and rational thought. Accepting the idea of supreme being will not, as it is purely philosophical concept, unless you try to actively communicate with that being (and that will make you delirious).
I am sorry if my initial arguments were not worded clear enough. On the other hand, it would help not to label someone as "creationist" just for refusal to outright deny God as a concept.
Paul
Paul - you are wrong. If you have a developmental destination in mind - you do need that to happen. Otherwise cockroaches could as easily have gained sentience instead of humans.
Your words - "If I have to choose between rational design and chance theory, I'd go with the former because for me it is making more sense" brand you a creationist and you use of the word "chance" label you ignorant of evolution.
@ Mark
I suggest you read up on evolution of brain. There was quite recent article in Science.
Generally, there is a gene that stops brain development on certain stage. Around 1 million years ago, some primates experienced genome-shortening mutation (when genes are completely thrown out; most frequent type of mutation after crossingover between gametes) which has lead to brain-limiting gene being underexpressed, resulting in excessive brain development.
This has happened numerous times over the history of our planet, but in almost all cases results in evolutional disatvantage, prolonging time that individuals needed to mature and be able to procreate/fend for themselves. Primates were unique case, as their body gave them an opportunity to actually use surrounding enviroment to their benefit, turning bad gene in huge benefit over less intelligent creatures.
I fail to see how "intelligent cockroach" can benefit from his intelligence, if it lacks the physical means to do so?
Your understanding of evolution is very limited.
And using your own style, it "brands" you a hypocrite.
Yep, and about "destination". Who said humans was "destination"? You want to say, evolution stopped now, when its glorious end is achieved? You really believe humans will not evolve into something else in next million years?
You manage to unite belief in human being the pinnacle of evolution (coming from your so-hated Bible) with fundametalistic-like atheism?
As I said, a hypocrite.
Please stop lying at me Paul. I do not believe there is a pinnacle of evolution. Nor have I said any such thing. You on the other hand believe in a "design" and said so.
You have no understanding of evolution . How funny you religious liars are.
Good bye
A well-written hub, which gets to the heart of those who deny the evidence in the hope of convincing themselves of the truth of their particular religious view. I am used to creationists saying 'show me the evidence.' Yet when they are shown the evidence, they say 'show me the evidence.' They have a wonderful ability to ignore what does not fit with their beliefs.
Unfortunately, I don't believe these fundamentalist beliefs are disappearing. In fact they are gaining in influence, and science seems to be losing ground to the creationist. I am rather pessimistic, and believe that eventually science will be entirely replaced by ignorance, and mankind will return to the Dark Ages. Already, in Western society, the numbers of people accepting the evidence of evolution is falling dramatically. 50% of people in the US believe the universe is 6,000 years old. Even in the UK, the land of Darwin's birth, only 25% of people believe evolution to be a fact.
It is impossible to please God without faith. Why? Because Mark will never evolve to the level of God of the universe! LOLOLOL!!! Mark is restrained by his lead suit and doesn't have the balls to break out.
The suit is atheism which he attempts to conceal with his approach "prove to me that there is a God?" while millions of us is living it...God's Spirit says it all.
wilmiers77, who made you the all knowing boss of what makes your god happy? Do you speak to him directly? Does he answer you? You are, but a sheep. You will live your life as a lie and die like the rest of us and never know how wrong you are. In a few hundred years people will talk about modern day religion as we do about the greek gods. Fantasy.
Perhaps you want to meet me in a dark alley as you do Mark. Perhaps you should look at the percentage of atheists in jail compared to christians. Perhaps you are wrong!!!!!!! Gods spirit? Where is gods spirit while thousands die a day in africa? Seems more like evolution than gods will to me. But you won't see it that way. You are to afraid. Aren't you?
Poor wilmier. God has rejected him and he has not been overtaken by the Holy Spirit. He displays none of the Fruits of the Spirit as extolled in Galatians.
Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.
How many do you think he exhibits?
I am a SHEEP when it come to the Lord. I do talk directly to God. I quoted straight from the scriptures, idiot. The Word of God says it, not I.
By all means, I would love to met in a dark alley. Although, don't expect much from you alone with Mark. I would be ashame to encounter tbb; I am above hurting a sissy. I do have a history of kicking a*s when attacked.
God shall decide when the fruits of the Spirit reveals themselves. Meanwhile, I am presently in spiritual warfare and ready for physical warfare just as Jesus whipped a*s and ran merchants out of the temple. Please don't reply with the inadequate statement that "violence breeds violence", the world is perpetually very violent, so much so until force must be used to bring about peace.
tbb, the Lord and I have been traveling together for a long time. I don't expect to stop anyway soon. He has saved my life 1/2 dozen times.
tbb, learn to give the Lord credit, and stop getting in His way. Pride will do it every time.
I have noticed that you write of the attributes of God, and serve the attributes only. From your writings you appear to push your golden pen for yourself, worshipping faith instead of the faith giver; same goes with all other atributes of God. Have you thought about starting with the whole and complete Spirit, and writing within; giving all the glory to God.
Wow - more threats Wilmiers? History is littered with proof that Christians are violent and aggressive, and are incapable of turning the other cheek.
Odd you think threatening me with physical violence will make me believe the nonsense you lie about believing.
Why are you so angry that I do not believe in your Invisible Super Being? Could it be that you are slowly realizing you have been fooling yourself? How brave of you to threaten me from behind the Internet. So very, very brave. Jesus must be very proud of you. LOL
'Do you speak to him directly? Does he answer you?'
So, you'll not believe in god until you talk to him directly? Until the god answers to your questions directly?
wilmiers,
Show me in scripture where Christ violently touches another human being, as opposed to tables. I'll be waiting.
You reject the Fruits because you are too weak to pursue them. The things that make your faith a challenge to the soul and to the black human spirit are what you have chosen not to even attempt. You celebrate your weakness as a man and your willingness to spit in the face of the Christ you pretend to worship.
God has already called us all to accept the Advocate in our lives and live according to the Fruits, if you believe your scripture. No one needs a God to justify their anger, hatred and violent tendencies. Humans come to these traits quite readily, and stand strong against them with great difficulty, and need no help from a deity to pursue them. There is nothing of God in you, not the God of John, a God of love.
Few people will successfully chase people away from the love of God as effectively as you. You are in spiritual warfare, but it is with yourself.
Those who pray, pray for this man. He is truly hurting.
Upal19, you never understand. A person who have conversation with another being in thier own head needs some help. You can talk, but if you hear voices or answers, you need some help. Wilmiers may need some help.
Mark K., several comments ago you made the statement "are you this bold in person...?" So, in no uncertain terms, covering all bases in which you may have been implying sneaky, physical or mental, I replied. You started this crap and now you are hiding in your lead suit without balls.
What mentality are you displaying? Considering the fact that you think that I was threatening instead of standing my ground, there is no such sequence of threatening leading to making a person believe. What queer school of thought do you come from?
No, I am not angry but enjoying myself with you girls. I detect the "broken wrist" in your last few comments. Tootie Fruity!!!!!
brucebeat,
Idiot, why do you think MEN ran. You think like woman-golden pen writer. Jesus was born masculinee and dealt with MEN.
Pale face, you are a false witness in which God is giving me the momentum and I am enjoying every reply.
Do you even believe that Jesus is the Son of God?
Your bravery is in a nursery. My bravery is shown in the arena of MEN.
You still continue to reply as If you know the moment by moment thoughts of God. You are going to discover that there is a season for all under the sun. Oh, the OT applies more today in a practical manner than NT; criminal, murders, and deceptive persons as I suspect of you. You speak as if you are the advocate. Or maybe your hitler!
GIRLS! I haven't shifted into high gear yet. I can go coast to coast, and than head for the stars. You girls are in for a long, enduring, and grueling trip with me.
@Mark -- you claimed "You did not bother reading my article - nor did you address the points I made"
But your article says very clearly: "this will be a purely emotional, completely un-factual attack on those who choose to attack a valid scientific theory for religious reasons"
Or did I quote your article out of context?
"You are clearly biased - and therefore lying when you claim to be impartial."
Another blanket statement... uncorroborated.
kschang, you can't be impartial. Nobody can. You have an opinion therefore you cannot be impartial. I can claim to be impartial as well. Perhaps I should. I am impartial on this debate. Does anyone agree that I am impartial? Claiming to be impartial and then having all kind of opinions is down right silly. You are smarter than that.
I want to thank wilmier for the repeated compliments of my "golden pen". I appreciate you recognizing my writing. It is always a thrill to know my work has touched someone.
As for your theology, we will keep praying for you. You are far down the rabbit hole and have left Jesus far behind.
@Rad Man -- "nobody can [be impartial (when it comes to God)]". That's the sort of radicalization that turns believers (both sides) into fanatics and start wars. It's clearly a "you're with me or against me" type false dilemma.
@Mark -- You commented that "Paul - You have said you do not believe evolution disproves god. I have not claimed that." But your article says "There cannot possibly have been a divine hand guiding the (evolution) process therefore god does not exist." So which is which? In your view, does Evolution disprove God or not?
Wilmiers - please stop lying at me. I asked you if you were that bold because you kept attacking me verbally. Now you have made it clear you would attack me in person if you met me. How very brave of you. I already know believers are violent psycopaths,.
Kschang - have you heard of irony? lolo There cannot have been a divine hand in evolution. That does not actually prove there is not a god - no - but it is a fine argument against one. Why not address my point instead of lying to me?
Go on - explain to me how there could have been a divine hand in evolution without throwing all the knowledge we have away.
I have presented proof and evidence that there is no god. Actual proof.
No, I have no reason to attack anyone. I only defend myself, but I do witness the Word of God boldly, making people like you desire to destroy me.
One good thing, I don't have to worry about homosexuals attacking me as I do straight males.
Mark K., what proof have you presented that proves God doesn't exist? You are dreaming, fellow!
I am aware of the intricacies of the human body and the orderly universe. What proof do you have for starters?
It is impossible to please God without faith. No one can prove God, but God continually proves Himself.
Wilmier,
Great to know you only "do" straight guys. Would that make it rape or do you just convince them to try it?
It kind of worries me, because you are such a he-man I'm afraid you will be rough on them their first time.
Now do you see why being able to use the English language can be useful?
Wilmiers, aside from you (doing straight men), How do you know it's impossible to please God without faith? How does God continually prove himself. Is it the famine in Africa, Disease, violence? You talk like you are talking to children that wont question a thing you say.
Rad, we live in a fallen world. The norm is not all-is-well, and it haven't been so since Adam and Eve. The norm is thank God that everything is not "F-ed" up!
Rad, no one, local, and temporary Man can wrap his mind around God or even completely know Him. Please don't tell me that you can comprehend an infinite Being or Enity. Although, His Holy Spirit comforts us and tells us what we need to hear to be full of joy one thing at a time because we can not contain ALL now.
There you go again wilmiers making stuff up. That nonsense about we can't wrap our minds around God is crap. It's a cope-out. Wake up. Use your brain. What do you know about the holy spirit? It's like trying to convince me Santa is watching so you better be good. I'm good and I don't need santa. Stop making stuff up.
@Mark -- You wrote "... therefore god does not exist" then you wrote "have you heard of irony? lolo There cannot have been a divine hand in evolution. That does not actually prove there is not a god - no".
Trying to wipe away your inconsistent position by claiming "irony", eh?
"Why not address my point instead of lying to me?"
Addressing your inconsistencies is my point. Your evidence, at best, is periphery and circumstantial, as it's a "proving a negative" argument. However, it makes a lot more sense than the Creationist pseudo-science bull****.
LOLOLO Kchang - u r 2 funny innit.
Sorry Rad, but you are relatively good. Relative to social norms. Your are a sinner relative to God whether you know it or not as all of us.
Using your brain is the perpetuation of relative good which is incomplete and never receiving from the supernatural, the whole and complete.
You must look inside your peanut brain for the Spirit of God who is the Holy Spirit, the Spirit possessed by the Son of God, Jesus. Tell Jesus to come into your life and wait, and talk to him as a person. You either seek and find or remain not knowing Jesus. In the latter case, you have no idea what I am talking about, but I shall continue sounding stupid to you until...I pray.
tbb, did not state nor imply that I do staight guys. That came from your gay mind.
Are you should that you are on the same page with the normal world? I suspect that you "AIN'T".
wilmiers, I knew Jesus once, then I grew up. You should do the same.
"One good thing, I don't have to worry about homosexuals attacking me as I do straight males."
Now I'm sure that's not what you meant, but it is what you said. Your inability to handle the language we grew up with will get you in trouble that way. You'll say absurd things and then try to defend them because you aren't bright enough to understand what you said.
When you can't use English in a very basic way, why should anyone have any faith in your more complex ideas on theology? Your credibility simply doesn't exist.
"Are you should that you are..."? What on earth does that even mean?
The real reason you won't be attacked by homosexuals is probably because of the picture of the creepy pedophile you use as an avatar. It sure won't help.
@ Mark: First you accuse me of being a liar with no evidence. Now that I pointed out your own inconsistencies you think it's funny. Is this the way you usually argue?
kschang - please address my points instead of attacking me and I will stop laughing at you. lol
TBB, I mean every word that I write.
Your responses reveal to me that you lack experience in the world. You react as if you have no idea of what goes on at the basic level of human interaction. You appear to have been raised in a very sheltered environment by the way you hang and die with proper English, and doesn't acknowledge or is not aware of other communitive methods. You must leave you mother's house and leave unexcorted.
Like my creative writing professor at UCLA professed; you must throw proper rules of English out of the window if you are to be a creative writer. Seek to find new words and phrases to express your ideas, and not use overly used words for they are boring to the readers.
Experience is the Father of knowledge. I attended a seminar at 20th Century movie lot alone with Steven King, the famed Hollywood writer, a few years ago; hosted by such creaters and writers of "Perry Mason" and "Murder She Wrote". They reinforced what I had learned at UCLA. One host said that there is many eloquent writer, but most all don't experience; thereby, having no content worth reading.
@Mark -- I am not attacking you. I am attacking your position by pointing out inconsistencies. Is there a persistent refusal in addressing the issue, as you just kept on repeating "address my points"? I did address your points: they are inconsistent.
Rad Man, you continual to make statements that leave me looking over the top of my shoes. It's obvious that you never knew Jesus because the blessed ones who find Jesus never grow away from Him. You know not God's Holy Spirit.
wilmier,
"communitive"? "unexcorted"?
You aren't creative. You're a moron.
This is not creative writing. You aren't writing a short story, poem or novel. This is expository writing, and you will find if you ever try to get anything published that you will be laughed out of the editing process. You will get a rude awakening regarding the style books that are critical to success in publishing articles that can be turned down by professionals, as opposed to all of us pretending to publish articles on Hub Pages that anyone can publish to, even people who are unable to master the basics of grammar, like yourself.
People of even modest education sit around and giggle at the soiled attempts at "communitive" (sic) writing by earnest rubes.
Keep posting. You make my responses redundant.
For life to be sustained on earth there is hundreds of critical factors that must all be in place all the time.The factors include things like the precise inclination of the earths axis, the precise distances of the earth from the moon, sun , other planets and stars.The precise composition of elements of the earths atmosphere including its volume.The precise mass of earth and the precise speed at wich it spins around its own axis.This is only a few of the factors crucial to life.Now for maths to do the rest:If you would calculate the probability of all of these factors being perfectly in place at the same time all the time you would find the answers is an infinite number with other words "very very very impossible to the power of infinity"
I once heard the anology that to believe in evolution is like believing that a big strong wind or twister can blow through a scrapyard over a long time and the perfect boeing 747 would be formed with all the intricate electronics and machanics etc in place for its maiden flight.And a boeing does not even compare to the detail of life in humans.
Why is earth still here I ask, why are we mysteriously protected from comets, asteroids and black holes drifting through space to suck in everything.Why is there no life on any other planet of our solar system-why is our situation so perfect?Why is everything kept in balance on earth, why does it rain and dew and why does the lightning hit earth to make nitrogen critical to life?
*are hundreds - sorry english is my third language
kchang - - no - you did not address my points at all. You refuse to understand that this was an ironic article with some serious points made. LOL
barry - is it majik?
come on kchang - address the points I made instead of tel;ling me I cannot prove that some super being started evolution therefor that is a reasonable position to hold.
I assume you understand how evolution works - so - if that was the case - this super being could not have been the god of the monotheistic religions - right? There is a good chance that once life evolves - it will eventually become self aware - but it could have been any number of species that developed this self awareness. We just got "lucky". lol
Right?
Mark- can you explain it then please?Or is the childish mocking all you have?To me it seems like evolution needs a whole lot more magic than creationism.If you take any electronic device like say your pc, can you just put all the pc components in a box and shuffle it around and pull out a perfect working pc or is it more reasonable to believe that someone put it all together with a blueprint.Do you believe in magic Mark?I dont
Mark, what is your evidence that supports your continual bashing of any and all faiths in God? We have pondered on the evidence of the intricacies of our bodies and the precise working of the universe plus others. What is your ponderous of evidence that justifies your bashing of all religions? Please tell me.
wilmiers,
it's "preponderance of evidence".
Barry,
To compare inanimate objects with biological ones and expect them to behave in the same way is ignorance. Biological ones reproduce, providing the opportunity for errors that result in positive changes that survive. How do computers reproduce?
Barry - please stop lying at me. Thanks. There are more than enough explanations available to you. Please educate yourself. This is not childish mocking - this is adult mocking of your childish nonsense. You speak nonsense and lies. Mock. Mock. Mock.
wilmiers - Your behavior. You and people like you. Disgusting behavior. Still - at least you did not fly a plane into a building - so some comfort there I suppose. Just threatened to beat me up in a street fight. LOL Plus - of course - you speak gibberish most of the time.
@Mark -- so you admit your article is not serious, but instead, trolling for religious nuts?
So which position are you holding? That God (whether He exists or not) did not play a hand in Evolution, or God does not exist, period? I'm going to guess the former instead of the latter due to you stating that the hub is a sarcastic piece of work. (BTW, it's sarcasm, not irony, and I've been guilty of mixing up the two as well)
@Barry -- that is a false argument, because you're not really comparing the same things, and it's a staple of Creationist arguments.
Basically, Creationists (I didn't say you are, I'm just saying it's the same argument) say life is too complex that the chance of it is so infinitesimal it'd be the "infinite monkey theorem".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infinite_monkey_theor
However, this is arguing that each monkey is completely independent and each generation also is completely independent. What Evolution did was chose only monkeys that came close to the desired result (i.e. survival of the fittest) and discard the rest, and those monkeys, through successive generations, will come closer and closer to the "ideal" form to survive in their environment. In terms of the infinite monkey, where the goal is to reproduce a sonnet from Shakespeare (or some body of text), imagine the monkeys that didn't hit the right keys are fired, and those who did hit the right keys are allowed to keep typing. Soon, you'll only have the monkeys that CAN type properly.
(See Mark, I read Richard Dawkins too. Still think I'm partial to one side?)
kchang. My article is ironic with a serious point to it. You have not attempted to address that point.
Try addressing the point I have made instead of attacking me and lying that you are not partial to one side.
Did you even bother reading it? DO you know the point I have made?LOLOLOL
@Mark -- you mean the section you bold'ed, then contradicted in the comments was NOT your point? :)
LOL right back at you.
chang - not going to bother then? LOLOLOLOLOL
tbb, lady, I am brainstorming these small comments. If I were to submit an article for publication, than I would carefully proof read. It is very strange that you knew what I was attempting to communicate; well, idiot pinhead I must have "communicated".
When I complete my novel, I am going to have it proof read because my concern as the author is to caught the idea and paint it in words. After being proof read, I am going to submit to publisher; whereas, their editor shall make suggestions for a rewrite. This is much better because at that time I shall know what the publish wants. Does this make sense, pinhead?
No, not in english it doesn't.
You don't need a proofreader, you need a ghostwriter.
Care to compare published work? Dream on, wilmier, for you will never live the fantasy.
Peace, love, joy, patience, goodness, kindness, faithfulness, gentleness and self control.
Why have you been passed by?
Well, I love you too. It looks as if I have a free proof reader; sad that he has no material worth reading alone with not much experience to feed his imagination.
I'll let you know when I publish my first novel. I am running late because God is first in my life. I had to listen to Him for a long time.
@Mark -- we can play this "20 questions" forever, or you can just "reveal" your point. I don't do well in word games.
wilmier,
Once again you concoct some fiction about knowing what my experience is, and make that the centerpiece of your criticism. Silly, and completely without merit.
You'll forgive me if I don't wait at my computer for your "first novel". I have been published, and know exactly where your manuscript will be headed. So does everyone else on here with a passing acquaintance with the written language.
I pray for your poor deluded soul.
chknag - my "point" is in the article you were too lazy to read. I have repeated it twice already and you simply attacked me and said "we cannot know either way".
Actually, there is plenty of evidence for intelligent design for one who will look at all the evidence. Lets start with geology. Some evolutionists say that the fossil record speaks for itself. Not so. The interpertation of evidence is subjective science. Quite honestly, the fossil record is in great opposition to evolution because it contains no missing links as well as the fact that no one has found a real geologic column.
Oh an how about biology? Organisms con onlt lose genetic information, NOT GAIN IT. So how can molecules evolve into a man without adding new genetic info? Now even if there was an unknown process by which genes could be added that still would not prove evolution. Because, (and I type in bold for emphasis) NEVER EVER HAS LIVE BEEN KNOW TO ARISE FROM NON-LIFE!!! EVER!!! AND EVEN IF IT DID ARISE ON A PRIMITIVE EARTH THE HARSH CONDITIONS WOULD HAVE KILLED IT ALMOST INSANTLY!!!!!
Now all of you who are reading this I want you to do a little experiment when you get home. Hole punch millions and millions of blue and green dots. Then put them in a bucket and go out on your driveway. Next, throw all of those litte tiny dots in the air and hope that they land in a perfect map of the globe. Repeat until they do. The probability that evolution would occur is even less than this. (this is even after asuming the genetic priciples and boundaires we observe today did not apply)
So if evolution is not true then the only other logical explanation to our exsisance would be that God put us here. (yes science does confirm the bible but I am running out of time to go into that)
My point is I DONT HAVE ENOUGH FAITH TO BE AN ATHEIST 'nuff said :)
LOLOL Faith being the KUNT option? LOLOLOLOL
tbb, you are one uptight and moulded guy (I won't say gay.) Don't be surprise if you read about me one day, and all that I have said haunts you for the rest of your life. Repent O'sinner. LOLOL!!!
Mark knowles... i believe that you trying so hard to prove the idea of creation wrong is proof that something inside of you is wrestling with the idea..why be so harsh on peoples beliefs? and how do we explain jesus christ in all this? way to many people have a world view on this. and are constantly throwing there theory's around and facts they think back these theories up..i cant say for sure but i definitely feel like you havent made any attempt to make a relationship with christ in your life. and untill you make a relationship with him. and feel his guiding hand in your life, you have ZERO experiance. making everything you have said in this entire argument null and void. if your so positive with what you say.. then why not pray? why not ask god to come into your life and make something out of you. see what he does for you.
tanman - please do not insult me so. There is no Invisible Super Being. Sorry - The Truth hurts - it is not harsh - it is just true.
wilmiers77 - I for one wouldn't be surprised to read about you some day! (I won't say gay) LOL
your yet to explain to me jesus christ.( who there is historical evidence of) thats all i want.everything is here somehow, am i correct? why not believe that the man that came down, preformed miracle after miracle, simply saying he was the son of god, and all you need is to follow him, then he died, and rose again. anyone who can die and rise again is 100 % worthy of putting my faith in.
your yet to explain to me jesus christ.( who there is historical evidence of) thats all i want.everything is here somehow, am i correct? why not believe that the man that came down, preformed miracle after miracle, simply saying he was the son of god, and all you need is to follow him, then he died, and rose again. anyone who can die and rise again is 100 % worthy of putting my faith in.
There is no evidence of jesus christ.. If you would like to proof me wrong go ahead... you only have THEORIES same as the rest of us. Ours just seems more logical and i dont want a fake higher being running my life shoving ethic morals down my throat.
Refer to the website address, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC169803 pertaining to the advantages of hair loss. However, there are more reasons that the hair loss among human beings could not bring about the advantages of human beings and this brings the query about why there have to be hair loss among animals and in turn, the query about the reliability of evolution:
a)It is mentioned in this website that humans evolved hairlessness to reduce parasite loads, especially ectoparasites that may carry disease. This might seem to be true at a glance. However, this could not be true on our heads since the hair on our heads could keep on growing and this would lead to ultimate parasite loads if it were uncut for more than 30 years. The total mass of the hair that a person would keep for 30 years would be a number of times heavier than the hair that has grown up in apes’ body. The only thing that causes human beings to differ from apes is the hair among the apes has been distributed over their bodies and yet human beings’ hair is concentrated on their heads. When we compare the hair from human beings and apes, human beings could be parasite loads, whether in length or in mass, when the hair was uncut for more than 30 years. Thus, the hair among human beings could not reduce parasite loads. Instead, it might turn up to be the other way round to increase parasite loads on the condition that human beings did not cut their hair for more than 30 years. Thus, the hair loss among human beings and to cause it to grow continuously over the head might increase parasite loads and causes a disadvantage to human beings if their hair were uncut for more than 30 years. The over-concentration of hair growth on heads would not show any advantage in the long run since it would increase parasite loads.
b)It is mentioned in the website address above that hairlessness is made possible in humans owing to their unique abilities to regulate their environment via fire, shelter and clothing. Refer to the website address, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Androgenic_hair, it shows the distribution of hair among men and women. Despite human beings might put on clothing, yet the hair among human bodies especially those parts that are covered by clothing would not reduce. This gives the implication that our hair might not be able to reduce in spite of our capabilities to regulate environment via fire, shelter and clothing. Or else, men and women should not have hair on those parts that have been covered by clothing.
c)It is also mentioned in this website that hairlessness, then, demands some sort of explanation in evolutionary terms, and especially so as, in humans at least, hairlessness is not without its costs. Humans are more exposed to the sun, may suffer greater heat loss when the ambient temperature is low (Newman 1970; Amaral 1996) and, with the exception of the naked molerats, differ from the other hairless mammals in not having a thick or toughened hide for protection.
d)Many people in this world might have encountered hair loss problem that leads to the ultimate bald heads to annoy them and causes them to have no choice but to seek help from clinic, hair salon and etc. Yet this hair loss problem persists from generation to generation. As hair loss could cause problem among human beings and yet it persists, it places the query about the reliability of evolution. This is due to why there should be hair loss that would result in bald heads among human beings and this could not occur among apes or other animals.
e)Human beings’ hair loss brings about the disadvantage of causing them to turn up to be gray or white at old age and this might be in concern by the old folks. Yet the situation could not change unless dye hair. However, this disadvantage of turning into gray or white hair could not occur among other animals especially apes. Or in other words, there is a disadvantage of hair loss among human beings as a result of gray or white hair in old age and this places the reliability of evolution into question.
f) It is mentioned in this website that Wheeler (1992) acknowledges that naked skin increases the rates of both energy gain and loss during periods of too much or too little heat, respectively. This might mean that naked skin is actually a worse solution when the entire day is taken into account: more heat must be dissipated from daytime exposure and, at night time, more heat is lost (Amaral 1996). 3. There is certainly a disadvantage of hair loss here due to rapid energy gain and loss as a result of hairless condition of our bodies.
Despite of our hair loss, the redundancy of hair in length, such as underneath the armpit and even from the front body onwards up to the legs, remains there without removing away or evolve away, brings a query about the reliability of evolution since what it tends not to be used and yet it still retains instead of vanishing away.
It is also mentioned in the website that humans are not literally hairless, having about the density of hair follicles expected of an ape of our body size (Schwartz & Rosenblum 1981). What distinguishes human body hair is that it is very fine and short, making it, effectively, invisible. we use ‘hairless’ with respect to humans, then, to mean that they lack a dense layer of thick fur. However, this could not be true to the hair that is on our heads that could grow exceedingly and could even cause parasite loads on our head if this has been uncut for 30 or more years. Indeed, the hair on the human beings’ heads is the longest among all animals.
It is also mentioned in this website that hair loss could be meant to promote cooling of the body. However, many men might have exposed half nakedness of their upper bodies and yet could not feel cool on their bodies and seek help from fans or air-conditioning system or breeze or etc. even at the absence of sun especially early in the morning or at night. Some people might even suffer from high fever and need to seek help from doctor despite hairless bodies could cool it down. All these have placed the query whether hairless bodies could really cause their bodies to be in cool.
From the above analyses, there places a query why there should be hair drop and it seems to have adverse effect of evolution and that places the reliability of evolution into question
You've obviously been had and those little demons are making you work overtime.
Mac4,
Any person who rised from the grave and walked about town for 40 days would impress people enough to pass the event by word of mouth into our present.
Although, there is historical proof of Jesus existence. Lots of it!
The shrud(?) of Turin is being examined and authenticized as being the picture of Jesus. This miraculous image with 3-D property is believed to be made by an impulse of enormous energy at the time Jesus was resurrected from the grave. Although, my faith in Jesus doesn't depend on this picture because Jesus has been confirmed by God's Holy Spirit possessed by His Son, Jesus.
The Holy See permitted radiocarbon dating on portions of a swatch taken from a corner of the shroud. Independent tests in 1988 at the University of Oxford, the University of Arizona, and the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology concluded that the shroud material dated to 1260–1390 AD, with 95% confidence. This 13th to 14th century dating matches the first appearance of the shroud in church history.
Too bad, if it had tested to be from the time of Jesus it still would not have been proof that Jesus is the son of god or that the shroud was an impression of Jesus. But it would have been cool. Wilmiers you should listen to yourself sometimes (Jesus has been confirmed by God's Holy Spirit possessed by His Son, Jesus.) WHAT?
The geological record does in fact support and even unifies the theory of evolution as carbon, argon, and other methods of radiometric dating are being used to estimate the time period in which life began (estimated approximately 3.8 billion years). The "missing links" that you are referring to were found earlier this decade or even some more recently. There are fossil records of fish with leg and arm bones. I encourage you to investigate these things on your own, but I would caution you not to go around stating scientific "fact" when you really aren't up to date on research.
I would like you to consider something my tutor and I were discussing during my freshman year of college: There has been enough time since the formation of the universe and many of its planets, suns and moons for life to have evolved on another planet.. intelligent life just like ours.. in fact enough time has passed in our universe's existance that life could have evolved over the course of 3.8 billion years just like it has on earth only to go completely extinct, and then start over again in several cycles before the EARTH EVEN EXISTED as a planet. There has been alot of time. That is how life formed and evolved on earth, because there are infinite possibilities and alot of time.
nice!!! debate . . . both parties has a great ideas. I L?VE IT.
Dear Mark Knowles, I am just a young teenager looking through everything my teachers have taught me!
So if you are even still looking at this article, I have a few questions for you:
You say that you are against creationism and that they are just throwing Useless unrealistic facts at peoples faces, but I researched everything you said, and things that a creationist said, and your "facts" have not been proven! So why are you fighting people if you are doing EXACTLY what the creationist are doing!
Also,where is your proof? I would really appreciate it if you showed me?
And lastly, since technically evolution is only a theory after all these years... how can you say for a fact, since you're not a real scientist that Evolution is real?
P.S. I read your answers to a lot of peoples questions, so I would appreciate it (Since I am only a teen) if you would answer me kindly (not sarcastically) and with your own words; not ones from scientist that you don't even know.
Thank you Mark Knowles if you read this and spare a few seconds of you time to answer.
Sincerely,
A questioning teen
A questioning teen that asks for proof? I suggest you go look for yourself. There is plenty of proof of evolution and geology - none of the Invisible Super Daddy.
Seems clear which is more likely - don't you think? Or have you not been able to find any proof that evolution occurs?
See that's the thing, all of the intermediate species, aren't exactly solid evidence since they could just easily be extinct animal following Darwin's Micro-evolution! I really am wondering, I mean what about Nebraska Man? He was just pig bones! Charles Darwin said that we would have plenty of intermediate bones, once geology had evolved more. Well?! It's evolved plenty and I am not seeing anything that I can look at and say, "Wow! Evolution is real." I'm sorry Mark, the more I look in to it, and the more I see that it would have to be "Invisible Super Daddy" as you called him! I have been taught to always be respectful to others belief; but the only religion you seem to be attacking is Christianity; what about the other religions that don't believe in evolution? The harshness you leave toward one religion and a group of people who you don't even know leaves a bad taste in my mouth. I respect that you have your own beliefs; now that I am searching I hope that you are respectful of my wish to move on from this theory.
I hope you have a good life and that you always search for what YOU think is right!
It was a pleasure asking you questions Mark!
Sincerely,
A now searching teen
Oh and P.s. thank you for answering me kindly!
Seeking the Truth, Look no further than the color of your skin for the proof of evolution. Humans evolve very quickly to a change in climate. Colder climates produce lighter skin. People with lighter skin absorb vitamin D from the sun much much faster than their darker skinned counterparts. People living in very cold climates typically have shorter limbs to prevent frostbite. They also are better at moving blood in the bodies to resist frostbite.
You need to look no further than the back your own hand for the proof you are looking for.
Look for the same proof in God that you request from evolution. Even Catholics except evolution.
But that is just the theory of Micro-evolution! That technically would not be Macro-evolution. I am all for Micro-evolution. But Macro-evolution just doesn't make sense to me. But thank you for trying to help, I really appreciate it!
Wow, perhaps it doesn't make sense to you because you have been convinced it's wrong. Small changes over time can add up to a large change. That's not hard to understand. We have almost identical DNA to chimps, but we look different.
Imagine if you will a chimp like ape going through a climate change. Fewer trees means they have to come down to the ground. On the ground they have to protect themselves and hunt. Turns out that you need a large brain to accurately throw a rock or spear. The chimps born with larger brains are more successful and pass on their larger brain genetics to their offspring. A few thousand years go by and you have chimps with much bigger brains.
Look at what we have done to the wolf in just a few hundred years. Through selective breeding we have turned the wolf into the Chihuahua and the Great Dane. The same process can be done to humans.
You seem like a smart kid. You must be able to understand the process. It may help to separate religion and science. Science takes religion out of the equation. Religion should not interfere with science.
The origin of the world, and earth cannot be proven. Since nobody was there to watch it, we will never know. So really, any theory, idea, or hypothesis made, is made by faith. It takes faith to believe that God made the world, and it takes faith to believe in evolution.
Let's just put religion aside and talk about evidence. I believe that the world was created in six literal days by the Lord God Almighty. I believe that there is overwhelming evidence that this earth did not evolve.
actress0998, you forgot to mention the evidence! You said "Let's just put religion aside and talk about evidence", then you told us what you believe. WHAT EVIDENCE!!! The only evidence you have that god created the world in six days is words in a 2000 year old book. We've come a long way in 2000 years. The bible says a lot of stuff. It condones slavery and murder. See http://rad-man.hubpages.com/hub/Do-we-get-our-mora
@ Seeking the Truth,
Macro-evolution, there is plenty of proof of macro-evolution. One example is the horse and donkey. They have evolved so differently that they have a different number of chromosomes and yet can produce infertile offspring.
So how did the world start?
Was it the "big bang"? And if so, did that make the planets?
Forgive me if someone has already mentioned this, but there's a fallacy in your conclusion. A being outside of time doesn't wait any number of years or even seconds to reach a conclusion, and people are not the desired end product of either evolution or creation. We are the one part of it free to choose the nature of our relationship with the universe or creator, whichever we perceive it as.
Mark, it took me awhile to find this hub and glad I did.
Bravo! A well-balanced take on the debate. You cover a lot of bases with this.
I agree that religion has the potential to do a great deal of good, but the problem has never been religion. It has been the ego of those who flock to religion. Ego has been the source of all evil--from Osama bin Laden to Adolph Hitler.
In fact, ego is the problem in any line of endeavor. Take for instance the squabbles amongst scientists. All too frequently ego is at the heart of their off-track debates and it makes science look downright ugly. Which is a shame, because I love science. One example is the late and unlamented "Clovis first" dogma of North American anthropology. Scientists were afraid to dig below the Clovis horizon for fear of jeopardizing their careers. Aarrrgh!
On the subject of religious timelines, I think you came close to my own solution when you suggested having the religious give Noah an age of 4 million. Outrageous, but clever!
Science has the market sewed up on the study of reality. Our civilization and technologies are based on their work. So, for the religious fundamentalist to disrespect science because it disagrees with their "interpretation" of their holy books is tantamount to delusion. After all, science is one with reality, and ignoring science is equivalent to delusion.
In any endeavor, ego can get in the way and most of the religious I've met have ego big time. It takes humility to discover anything new. Good scientists know this and so do those in religion who have a good heart.
Genesis has some interesting secrets to reveal, but the fundamentalists don't want to look. In their arrogance they already have it all figured out, so they miss the clue in Genesis 5:2 that shows that Adam is all of humanity (the tribe, not the individual). So the seemingly outrageous ages of the early patriarchs are too short, and yes they need to be much longer because they pertain to tribes--not individuals.
The crafty writers of Genesis purposefully hid some of their wisdom in the Bible. Why? To elicit the very valuable trait of humility.
The factors needed to enlarge the early patriarchs is in there. And it yields an age for humanity far greater than that currently held by anthropologists. But that's okay. Scientists have not yet dug up all the available bones.
We could all learn a lesson from this--to be humble in the search for answers. As soon as we decide we already know everything, we stop looking.
The religionists who deal only in absolutes are the lazy and the arrogant. There are enough of them around. I was afraid that one of them might have a shot at the American presidency--Rick Perry--but thank goodness he's been bumped from the race.
Evolution works. The evidence is overwhelming. And what many fundamentalists forget is that on the 7th day, God rested. Well, it seems we are living in that 7th day. So, no "guiding hand" necessary. It's all running on "inertia"--purely physical cause and effect. Intervention is only an exception, but I've witnessed enough to know it exists.
I happen to be a Christian who is also a scientist. Sometimes, it seems we are a rare breed, but I keep attempting to add some sanity to the pursuit of understanding things outside the purview of science. Shakespeare was right when he wrote that there are more things in heaven and earth than are dreamt of in Horatio's philosophy.
Thanks for commenting. Sadly - you are no scientist and this feeble attempt at appearing reasonable and rational does not fit well with your claims to be able to do miracles - nor does it address the obvious flaw in your statement.
Evolution has no predetermined developmental destination and we are but another intermediate species. There can not have been a god involved - if there was - everything we know about evolution must be discarded.
Thank you, Mark. I appreciate the opportunity.
And thankfully we don't depend on your apparent omniscience with regard to who is or isn't a scientist or whether or not miracles have ever happened. Such an anti-empirical stance is neither logical nor scientific. Based on your other statements, I rather doubt you are truly omniscient. Without omniscience or empiricism, I'm left to conclude that you're merely blowing smoke.
As for the "obvious flaw," if you are referring to "predetermined developmental destination," then you are confusing something someone else wrote with my own attempt at reason. I never mentioned such a thing. But perhaps you knew that already and merely decided to blow more smoke.
And your conclusion is most interesting! Throwing the baby out with the bath water? Can you explain how God being involved in initial creation (even a purely deist viewpoint) could warrant us discarding everything we know about evolution?
If any outside source nudged evolution at one or two points, that does not invalidate everything else about evolution. Analogy: In a billiard game, someone touching a ball in motion does not wipe out the laws of inertia; but you're implying such in the case of evolution.
Such generalities as "everything" (in your last sentence) don't sit well with a logical approach to things. Not very scientific.
Scientific? LOLOL Come on - show me the majik miracle you did. Really - I am actually laughing out loud at you claiming you can do miracles and then saying that is science.
Yes - everything we know about evolution. Apparently you did not actually bother reading my article. Unless you are now saying that your god did not know what would emerge from the primordial ooze and - you now have decided that the bible is garbage and the Earth was not ACTUALLY created especially for us. lol
"A" god who threw it all together and waited to see what came out is a very different proposition to the majikal super being you claim exists.
I am keen to hear how your proposed Majikal Super Being is a "testable theory," because for it to be "scientific" - it needs to be predictive and testable.
Anyway - as you did not bother reading my article - I will quote from it for you - "There cannot possibly have been a divine hand guiding the process therefore god does not exist.
This would imply a developmental destination, and also imply that the conditions to reach this destination where deliberately manipulated to achieve said destination – which was us, according to the religionists. This is why the Catholics dance around the subject of evolution, and the evangelicals get all bent out of shape, start calling unbelievers fools and liars. There is no debate about creation vs evolution. All there is, is a bunch of religionists protecting their gravy train. If you throw a predetermined destination into evolutionary theory, it makes the entire theory worthless, useless, and invalid."
Care to address that instead of telling me you are a scientist that does miracles?
Go look up what "science" means first.
"All there is, is a bunch of religionists protecting their gravy train." Well said Mark. Anyone who gives money to those guys are suckers. Unfortunately this includes a majority of the population.
I understand the views of the paper, as well as the views of those who agree and disagree. But has anyone ever considered continental drift and how the earth's crust became plates? Consider Noah's Ark. There was a flood for 40 days and 40 nights according to scripture. That in turn would've been the perfect time for the earth's crust to crack and turn into the plates we know of today due to the pressure on the earth's surface. Which means that Pangaea, the supercontinent, would've spread apart. And this would've been the perfect opportunity to start over. Just a thought.
Not only that, but it would also explain why different forms of dating in geology are inaccurate because of the erosion that would have occured at the time as it progressed.
@ Chewy5555
With all do respect Chewy. Pangea broke around 200 million years ago. There is no evidence of anatomically modern humans before 200 thousand years ago. Who told you different forms of dating in geology are inaccurate?
"Who told you different forms of dating in geology are inaccurate?"
@Rad Man: I'll tell you that.
Okay nicomp prove different forms of dating in geology are inaccurate enough to allow for a 199.8 million year discrepancy. Not only that but do it consistently. Not one modern human has been dated earlier than 200 thousand years ago. It's not like sometimes dating shows they lived 80 years ago and sometimes they lived 200 million years ago.
"It's not like sometimes dating shows they lived 80 years ago and sometimes they lived 200 million years ago."
Straw man. No one made such a claim.
I was just pointing out to Chewy5555 that his claim that Pangea may have resulted in the flood in the ark story is completely impossible and no problem with amount of inaccuracy in geological dating could account for the discrepancy. So unless I've missed something you've just make the same claim?
I was not following that thread. I just commented on your logical fallacy. Nothing more.
Well, perhaps you should follow the thread before you make a judgement. (No one made such a claim) your words. Well Chewy5555 just did. Who's logic was wrong? Mine or Chewy5555? I had even directed my comment to Chewy. If you do find a logical fallacy with any of my Hubs or comments then please draw my attention to them rather then making a broad claim.
My bad if someone did make that claim. I did not wade through all the comments before posting mine. I will search for '80' now... I could not find any reference anywhere on this hub, or in the comments, to any event taking place 80 years ago. Please enlighten me.
@nicomp, I see what your getting at. This augment is getting a little unnecessary. I was trying to explain to Chewy that humans were no where to be found when pangea broke apart. Humans have never been dated before 200 thousand years ago (as far as I know). 80 years ago just represented any time between 200 thousand years ago and the present day. No amount of dating discrepancy can account for the 199.8 million year difference.
funny, Mark actually proved a point for creationists
Creationists are now saying that god can;t use evolution because he just would have used the end product. Thanks Mark for helping your hated enemies!!!:)
"No amount of dating discrepancy can account for the 199.8 million year difference."
Prove it.
hellokitty - what?
hellokitty - what?
@nicomp - Okay I'll prove it. No modern humans have ever been dated before 200 thousand years ago let alone 200 million years ago. If dating was flawed you would expect to see discrepancies. They look for them. If you have any contrary evidence. Show me.
@Rad Man- Consider the fact that we have Carbon-14 dating, as well as other forms of dating out there doing with radioactive decay. As you well know, each element has a half life, and that's what the dating is based off of. So taking that into consideration, every form of dating will get you a differeent outcome, therefore making it inaccurate to use a source such as that to date the history of our earth. And who's to say that we never did? If the flood were to come, those in its path would've been taken into the same erosion as the earth itself, making it unlikely to find such a source. However, there are some cases where scientists have found humans around when dinosaurs were, so how do you explain that if no human existed at the time?
The truth about the Genesis creation narrative basically is that this story is not any literal account. It is neither supporting the creationists nor contradicting evolution or scientific findings in general.
"@nicomp - Okay I'll prove it. No modern humans have ever been dated before 200 thousand years ago let alone 200 million years ago. If dating was flawed you would expect to see discrepancies. They look for them. If you have any contrary evidence. Show me."
You don't prove something by giving your opinion.
"...but the amino acids and various other parts of primitive cells which still exist today can be manufactured in the laboratory. "
Which proves nothing. A laboratory is a rather controlled environment and amino acids are nothing close to anyone's definition of life.
@chewy and nicomp, you guys are unbelievable, all I can do is shake my head. No humans have been dated before 200 thousand years ago and no dinosaurs have been dated after about 65 million years ago. If carbon dating inaccurate as you say you would expect to see discrepancies. But you can use the bible as your source of information if you like because you can't find flaws with that. Get real. Don't mix science Religion.
@Rad Man:
"@chewy and nicomp, you guys are unbelievable, all I can do is shake my head. No humans have been dated before 200 thousand years ago and no dinosaurs have been dated after about 65 million years ago. If carbon dating inaccurate as you say you would expect to see discrepancies. "
Carbon Dating is only used by scientists to date back to about 50K years. Here's a link from a secular institution that explains it: http://www.biology.arizona.edu/biomath/tutorials/A
It wasn't me that brought up carbon dating. This is a stupid argument. Chewy is stating that the biblical flood may have happen 200 MILLION years ago. I have another idea, the biblical flood was just a story. He couldn't have built a boat big enough to fill every animal alive at that time (including all dinosaurs). Hang in there. I think you guys have been reading some misleading stuff. Don't mix religion and science and you'll be fine.
"It wasn't me that brought up carbon dating. "
dost thou read thine own posts?
Look a little ahead. I talked of dating, not carbon dating. And for those that think that the world is only 6000 years old (and I know your out there). Explain how we are able to see the light from distant starts and galaxy's that are millions of light years away.
@Rad Man:
Look back. You wrote this after you shook your head at me:
"If carbon dating inaccurate as you say you would expect to see discrepancies. "
Chewy brought it up. Look up his comment from 10 days ago.
We still do not have a single shred of scientific evidence showing a link from ape to man.They dont call it the missing link for nothing. The other thing is carbon dating is inaccurate. I could easily push carbon into steel and test it showing it is much older than it really is through heat treating. This has been done with numerous things. What it is, is indoctrination and following the status quot.They literally force the world to believe that God does not exist and that its wrong to believe He does. They do not allow for critical thinking anymore. They force their beliefs down everyones throat but the minute someone says I believe in God they are considered morons and idiots. This is the psychology of today eliminating and form of a divine creator and putting a label of segregation and hatred toward those who dont follow it. I for one would never believe anything they tell me for this simple fact. I do not believe anyone should be forced into their science and theories and should not be ostracized for challenging it. We have become ignorant blind fools with egos bigger than our brains. For anyone to claim they know the answers to the universe is the idiot for the vast size of it and the sheer minuscule size of our puny little planet and solar system. Humans havnt even been able to fly to mars let alone explore the universe. We are in a box and and people are being indoctrinated. If you believe that something came from nothing that is your right and if you believe in a divine creator that is your right but to say someone is stupid because they do not believe in your theories shows that ego has taken over for intelligence. They do not allow for any other form of theories or beliefs period. That is why you all need to wake up to the social psychology that is making you all blind. Stop taking a few scientists theories and putting them into a single category as if all scientists believe this.Their theories are not absolute truth to the origin of the universe so stop treating it as if it is. Your idea of how science works is seriously flawed. Let go of your egos and maybe you can learn something for a change.
Wow Jason, that was interesting, You are right in that we know very little about our universe. Unfortunately you've missed the point. Science doesn't care about the bible or god. It searches for the truth and then tries to prove itself wrong. They are still trying to prove Einstein wrong. We do however know a lot more about the universe today as compared to when any critical thinking would have you up on charges of blasphemy.
Do you really think that all your critical thinking has led you to believe that all the science we need is in a two thousand year of book. Did it give up the instruction to go to the moon or map the universe or how to feed the hungry.
You are right in that scientific theories are not absolute truth, but we are learning. Should we stop learning and go back to the middle ages and or form a government without the separation of church and state. Iran come to mind as a matter of fact most of the middle east come to mind.
I am a scientist, yet I believe in a mix of both sides. The reasoning behind this is due to the fact that science and religion alike are both flawwed, and we can never truly discover where we came from. I'm not making any real attempt to disprove any ideas that anyone may have. All I'm suggesting is that they quite possibly coinside with one another in order for one to balance the other. I have nothing against any views or ideas stated previously, but everything has its flaws somewhere along the line
Chewy - you are a liar. Odd how many religious people are prepared to risk eternal damnation in this fashion. Almost like they don't ACTUALLY believe. LOL
I've studied science for the past 6 years, and have analyzed the connection between religion and theory. It is discrediting that you may call me a liar, though i speak nothing but the truth. Who is to say that religion is wrong, or science? Now, considering the previous comments posted earlier by my argument, i did not exactly say that all science is wrong. I merely stated that some scientology out there is inaccurate. Furthermore, my argument is not to go for or against either side, but to combine both sides in order to create a possible understanding of our existence.
@Chewy5555 : Don't take it personally. MK trolls his own hubs. You're at no risk of being discredited.
Ralph Deeds Level 6 Commenter 2 years ago
Well done, Mark!