Green Coffee Bean

[Flaw]

why have so many people who have a relationship with God done so many horrible things? They can't be good with him apparently!

You mean people who THINK they have a relationship with God. This is what God is thinking.

Matthew 7:21-23New International Version (NIV)

[SUP]21 [/SUP]“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father who is in heaven. [SUP]22 [/SUP]Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and in your name perform many miracles?’ [SUP]23 [/SUP]Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’

 

[B5150]

I will vouch for PA here. Despite his prickly online persona, in person he is a real salt of the earth kind of guy, agnostic atheist or what ever he calls himself, he is a stand up dude,

I see no evidence to support either attribute. There is only text that is supposedly his word.

 

[bigdavid]

We aren't animals. Atleast some of us

Have we ever really been able to form a stable society and perfect things? All nations and all governments have fallen at some point.

Actually, we are.

 

[B5150]

We know intrinsically what is right and wrong.

Who is this we you refer to? You'd need to be living under a rock to not notice that we (as a whole) know very little about what is right and wrong. I have seen what men know to be right and wrong. Aside from your major societal rights and wrongs (those punishable by society law) there is much evidence to suggest that man knows very little to nothing about right and wrong.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

We aren't animals. Atleast some of us

Have we ever really been able to form a stable society and perfect things? All nations and all governments have fallen at some point.

we are animals that evolved from primates. if you dont believe that then we are far off in reaching common ground

humans have formed remarkably stable societies and have succeeded in conquering the earth. We are, depending on how you measure it, the most successful species on this planet.

nations and governments fall and are replaced by new ones. its part of the evolution of our society

 

[saggy321]

if there is a god then science is the language of god. i have a spiritual side of me but i do not think that spiritual side is seperate in any way from science. it upsets me to hear people talk about science vs. god. and it upsets me when people associate science with atheism.

my whole argument is with the dogma of organized religion. because that is anti-science. and therefore anti-god

I agree wholeheartedly! Science is a tool for a rational mind to come to know God.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

I see no evidence to support either attribute. There is only text that is supposedly his word.

have faith ye non-believer

 

[Patrick Arnold]

Who is this we you refer to? You'd need to be living under a rock to not notice that we (as a whole) know very little about what is right and wrong. I have seen what men know to be right and wrong. Aside from your major societal rights and wrongs (those punishable by society law) there is much evidence to suggest that man knows very little to nothing about right and wrong.

anyone knows its wrong to steal or to kill. we know not to do to others that which we do not want done to ourselves. just like we know not to jump off a mountain or run in front of a bus

yes there are sociopaths out there. they still know what is right and wrong but they dont care

 

[B5150]

anyone knows its wrong to steal or to kill. we know not to do to others that which we do not want done to ourselves. just like we know not to jump off a mountain or run in front of a bus

yes there are sociopaths out there. they still know what is right and wrong but they dont care

We seem to only acknowledge the darkest shade of wrong when there is much that is wrong to less exteme and extroverted. There is much wrong in the hearts of man that doesn't always manifest itself in these extreme behaviors - we are a nation of fatherless children and abandoned wives. We kill the unborn and the criminal and engage in quite a bit of "unfruitful" civil liberties and unions. We have lost site of what is truly right and wrong.

 

[Roniboney]

We seem to only acknowledge the darkest shade of wrong when there is much that is wrong to less exteme and extroverted. There is much wrong in the hearts of man that doesn't always manifest itself in these extreme behaviors - we are a nation of fatherless children and abandoned wives. We kill the unborn and the criminal and engage in quite a bit of "unfruitful" civil liberties and unions. We have lost site of what is truly right and wrong.

His main point is that you don't need religion to obtain morality.You need someone to guide you who has a good moral compass for life.Just how Hansel and Gretel is tale to teach children not to talk or trust strangers and not to stray from the path the Christian myth's stories could be used to help people deceipher what is right and wrong if the parents have no other means.

Though a lot of the stories in the New Testament are moral just because they can have value for society doesn't mean therefore God exists.There will always be immoral people,whether religious or not.

 

[saggy321]

Who is this we you refer to? You'd need to be living under a rock to not notice that we (as a whole) know very little about what is right and wrong. I have seen what men know to be right and wrong. Aside from your major societal rights and wrongs (those punishable by society law) there is much evidence to suggest that man knows very little to nothing about right and wrong.

True...even great philosophers were unable to resolve this riddle. There is no right or wrong unless you, through a hierarchy. attach certain values to certain actions or intentions. But what determines what actions or intentions are given what value. If its intrinsic then what makes one person's value based system more legitimate than another's. There has to be an objective measure of right and wrong and unfortunately, or fortunately, the only objective system you have is the one provided by 'organised religion' or better term might be a revealed religion. Christianity has been around for over 2000 years, Judaism longer and the other faiths such as Buddhism and Hinduism, which go back further, share the same fundamentals. The entire history of man as we know it has had religion as its framework of right and wrong. Our morals are fundamentally no different than our ancestors, who in turn all believed in a Diety regardless of where you come from in the world. So are we saying that we take everything our ancestors and all of the human history told us about morality to be true but we disregard from where they took this truth from. They were a superstitious, ignorant folk but the morals they believed somehow lasted century after century and are a basis of our whole existence in the modern world.

Just because you have understood some of of creation in a haphazard and partial manner and renamed it using modern 'technical' terms, doesn't mean that it was not created by some higher power. In fact if anything, it should prove His existence. A system so complex that it has taken millions of minds over centuries to only begin to decipher must be created by an overwhelming Intelligent Being.

 

[bigdavid]

We seem to only acknowledge the darkest shade of wrong when there is much that is wrong to less exteme and extroverted. There is much wrong in the hearts of man that doesn't always manifest itself in these extreme behaviors - we are a nation of fatherless children and abandoned wives. We kill the unborn and the criminal and engage in quite a bit of "unfruitful" civil liberties and unions. We have lost site of what is truly right and wrong.

Knowledge does not dictate behavior.

 

[saggy321]

why do the ten commandments resemble the morals of men? Cuz men made them up!!

Religion is, in large part, an invention of men to help maintain order in society. We know intrinsically what is right and wrong. We made up a god to make sure that people dont stray from law and order. And to explain the scary mysteries of the unknown


many species of animals have societies where they get along remarkably well and show generousity and compassion throughout the group. they evolved to be that way. they dont need a god.

You've got that the wrong way round. God created man, provided him with guidance on how conduct himself and live with others and until now all previous societies understood this is as divine guidance and followed it. This is what produced stable societies....man following the word of God the best he can.

 

[B5150]

His main point is that you don't need religion to obtain morality.You need someone to guide you who has a good moral compass for life.Just how Hansel and Gretel is tale to teach children not to talk or trust strangers and not to stray from the path the Christian myth's stories could be used to help people deceipher what is right and wrong if the parents have no other means.

Though a lot of the stories in the New Testament are moral just because they can have value for society doesn't mean therefore God exists.There will always be immoral people,whether religious or not.

I am immoral and there is no washing that off of me. "All have fallen short." There are none righteous, not one."

The fundamental principle of Christianity is attonment for our depraved condition (or what you call morallity) through the washing and cleansing with the sacrificial blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

All your morallity cannot wash the dirt of your depraved condition. We are a fallen species.

Of course some think much more highly of themselves.

 

[bigdavid]

You've got that the wrong way round. God created man, provided him with guidance on how conduct himself and live with others and until now all previous societies understand this is as divine guidance and followed it. This is what produced stable societies....man following the word of God the best he can.

If the previous societies were so stable then why are they gone?

 

[Roniboney]

I am immoral and there is no washing that off of me. "All have fallen short." There are none righteous, not one."

The fundamental principle of Christianity is attonment for our depraved condition (or what you call morallity) through the washing and cleansing with the sacrificial blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

All your morallity cannot wash the dirt of your depraved condition. We are a fallen species.

Of course some think much more highly of themselves.

As a whole I don't believe you are immoral.I don't believe myself to be immoral,or that Patrick is or any other skeptical or religious poster in this thread.

That little dig at me is not appreciated.We're not a fallen species.We're one that resembles all the traits of an advanced society through our evolution.As humans have advanced so has our morality and lack of it in certain individuals,as has our understanding of the world and universe.We should think highly of our species for how far we have come in such a short time.I think highly of myself and others who partake in arguments like this as it actually shows that through intellectual thought you have been affected by our existence,purpose ect.....all the major,and important questions.

Though of course being a person in a position of power you would understand that personal attacks get you nowhere,no matter how indirect it is or how much you will more than likely deny the attack.Lets just get it straight here-you think I'm an idiot for being skeptical don't you?Lets not sugar coat this debate any more,lets just get it all out there like mature adults.

 

[AE14]

You've got that the wrong way round. God created man, provided him with guidance on how conduct himself and live with others and until now all previous societies understood this is as divine guidance and followed it. This is what produced stable societies....man following the word of God the best he can.

couldnt disagree more. If history has shown us anything it is that man doesnt follow one singular god, it has followed a plethora. Out of that plethora, as been a conglomeration and mixture of all the stories to create what we have today. A "melting pot" so to speak.

There is evidence to support that even the earliest humans had rituals of significance (based on burials, etc....) but there is nothing until Zoroastrianism (or Atenism) that illustrates a "god".

 

[saggy321]

If the previous societies were so stable then why are they gone?

Patrick was one the one who said previous societies were remarkably stable and they went because they because they practised less and less of what the religion taught, hence the reason for another messenger being sent to re-establish these teachings.

Another point, everything is subject to change accept God. Creation has been created to undergo change as the completely stability is the premise of only a Diety. So inevitably you will see countries, peoples and races fall and be replaced by others.

 

[B5150]

As a whole I don't believe you are immoral.I don't believe myself to be immoral,or that Patrick is or any other skeptical or religious poster in this thread.

That little dig at me is not appreciated.We're not a fallen species.We're one that resembles all the traits of an advanced society through our evolution.As humans have advanced so has our morality and lack of it in certain individuals,as has our understanding of the world and universe.We should think highly of our species for how far we have come in such a short time.I think highly of myself and others who partake in arguments like this as it actually shows that through intellectual thought you have been affected by our existence,purpose ect.....all the major,and important questions.

Though of course being a person in a position of power you would understand that personal attacks get you nowhere,no matter how indirect it is or how much you will more than likely deny the attack.Lets just get it straight here-you think I'm an idiot for being skeptical don't you?Lets not sugar coat this debate any more,lets just get it all out there like mature adults.

You have completely taken the wrong message. I think no less of you or anyone. There is no personal attach here at all whatsoever. I'll apologize for both of us that you misunderstood the sentiment of my statement.

But I must mention that you have displyed the greater if not the greatest shortcoming (or sin depeneding upon ones inclination to negative connotations) which is pride. We pride oursleves a great deal and anything; a god, the God or religeon or the likes attempts to convict us otherwise is met with great disdain. You have displayed IMHO the wrong in whats wrong with man (not you) - a lack of humility in the sense that you truly believe that our intellect has created an evolved state of a moral, ethical and social condition.

Again, no offense implied or otherwise intended. Simply an observation of your response to a non-specific statement that was not with ill will or intended provocation.

 

[Flaw]

we are animals that evolved from primates. if you dont believe that then we are far off in reaching common ground

humans have formed remarkably stable societies and have succeeded in conquering the earth. We are, depending on how you measure it, the most successful species on this planet.

nations and governments fall and are replaced by new ones. its part of the evolution of our society

Show me the proof? I have yet to witness a ape evolve into a human. I have seen evidence of adaption. That is all though.

The evolution theory of humans hangs on The science of dating and there is way too many flaws in dating science. You will find literature after literature that bones originally thought to be millions of years old have been reduced to mere thousands of years time.

What's your defintion of stable? Survival?

 

[B5150]

As I posted earlier in the thread, here is one attemp that was proven to be a fraud.

Archaeology - Charles Dawson, Reiner Protsch von Zieten, Shinichi Fujimura

In 1912 England, Charles Dawson had made a stunning discovery: the link between humans and primates. The so-called Piltdown man, named Eoanthropus dawsoni, was dug up by the amateur archaeologist, and had a human-sized brain compartment and ape-sized jaw. Dawson unearthed a LOT of other spectacular finds, including a previously unknown species of mammal (Plagiaulax dawsoni), three new species of dinosaur, and a new form of fossil plant, Salaginella dawsoni.

Just 41 years later, scientists concluded it was a forgery. The human skull was just 6000 years old. And the jawbone? Orangutan. All of the fossils found at the landmark Piltdown site had been planted.

No wonder Dawson didn't find a link - the real missing link between Neandertals and modern humans was hiding in a peat bog near Hamburg - or so said Reiner Protsch von Zieten, a German professor. Von Zieten was acclaimed for such finds as the 36,000 year old Hahnhöfersand Man, the 21,300 year old Binshof-Speyer woman, a 50 million-year-old "half-ape" called Adapis that had been found in Switzerland, and the 27,400 year old Paderborn-Sande man. His work work "appeared to prove that anatomically modern humans and Neanderthals had co-existed, and perhaps even had children together," according to the 2005 Guardian article. Oops - apparently von Zieten literally had no idea how to work the carbon dating machine. The heralded findings? H-Man: died 7,500 years ago; B-S woman (ha): died in 1300 BCE; Adapis: actually dug up in France (not sure about dates); P-S man: died in 1750.

It's not bad enough he falsifed data and rewrote the history of anthropology. He also faked his own history - not of noble blood at all, but the son of a Nazi MP. He is tied to the shredding of documents detailing "gruesome" Nazi scientific experiments and the disappearance of heads from some of the 12,000 skeletons at the university.

Another archaeologist, Japan's Shinichi Fujimura, can at least be excused for planting his "finds" - the devil made him do it. Or so he said when he was caught in 2000. His nickname, "God's hands," came from his uncanny ability to find prehistoric artifacts. Too bad he was caught on camera digging holes and burying objects.

[

 

[MuscleGauge1]

This is great stuff. Thanks for sharing

 

[anathemax]

I suppose we are gna tie this all back into Green Coffee Bean extract?

No? OK.

FLAW - You misunderstand evolution. Individual organisms don't evolve - It doesn't work that way. It never has. Evolution suggests that apes and humans evolved from an as yet undiscovered common ancestor. If you read any scientific magazines/journals, you may hear about the search for "the missing link". More discoveries are being made, little by little, to support the Theory of Evolution. It's all very interesting, and I suggest that you make a concentrated effort to study it, if for no other reason than to be better prepared to defend your position.

Personally I like Mike Alder's take on Newtonian thought: "what cannot be settled by experiment is not worth debating"

 

[bigdavid]

Show me the proof? I have yet to witness a ape evolve into a human. I have seen evidence of adaption. That is all though.

The evolution theory of humans hangs on The science of dating and there is way too many flaws in dating science. You will find literature after literature that bones originally thought to be millions of years old have been reduced to mere thousands of years time.

What's your defintion of stable? Survival?

:facepalm: That statement just shows you have no idea what evolutionary theory is. We did NOT come from apes. Apes and humans share a common primate ancestor.

 

[Geoforce]

:facepalm: That statement just shows you have no idea what evolutionary theory is. We did NOT come from apes. Apes and humans share a common primate ancestor.

I love when I hear people say "I ain't no monkey" to disprove evolution.

 

[Roniboney]

:facepalm: That statement just shows you have no idea what evolutionary theory is. We did NOT come from apes. Apes and humans share a common primate ancestor.

sweet jesus I had no idea that these guys were creationists.That quote from Tropic Thunder comes to mind ....''Never go full retard''.

Our DNA shares common ancestry with apes.Just as we do with dogs,cats ect.....Chimpanzees are our most common ancestor.
Evolution is accepted by the Catholic Church you do realise.They believe it to be part of your God's grand plan.

If you don't believe or accept evolution then read a book for crying out loud.The evidence is there.Study it.

Very tempted to leave this thread due to a friendly debate turning to blind ignorance.

 

[Royd The Noyd]

This is great stuff. Thanks for sharing

Why do you always come across more like a spambot than a human? Maybe you're an ape?

 

[bdcc]

Why do you always come across more like a spambot than a human? Maybe you're an ape?

I genuinely thought this was a spambot until I saw the username lol.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

We seem to only acknowledge the darkest shade of wrong when there is much that is wrong to less exteme and extroverted. There is much wrong in the hearts of man that doesn't always manifest itself in these extreme behaviors - we are a nation of fatherless children and abandoned wives. We kill the unborn and the criminal and engage in quite a bit of "unfruitful" civil liberties and unions. We have lost site of what is truly right and wrong.

we should go back to the good old times when the christian faith ruled the land. 600-1500 AD, you know....the golden era

 

[Patrick Arnold]

You've got that the wrong way round. God created man, provided him with guidance on how conduct himself and live with others and until now all previous societies understood this is as divine guidance and followed it. This is what produced stable societies....man following the word of God the best he can.

no your wrong and i can prove it here

[video=dailymotion;x735v7]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x735v7_xtc-dear-god_music[/video]

 

[Patrick Arnold]

The fundamental principle of Christianity is attonment for our depraved condition (or what you call morallity) through the washing and cleansing with the sacrificial blood and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
.

what a macabre doctrine

 

[bigdavid]

sweet jesus I had no idea that these guys were creationists.That quote from Tropic Thunder comes to mind ....''Never go full retard''.

Our DNA shares common ancestry with apes.Just as we do with dogs,cats ect.....Chimpanzees are our most common ancestor.
Evolution is accepted by the Catholic Church you do realise.They believe it to be part of your God's grand plan.

If you don't believe or accept evolution then read a book for crying out loud.The evidence is there.Study it.

Very tempted to leave this thread due to a friendly debate turning to blind ignorance.

Very religious people seem to deny evolution with all their might. I don't see the point? It doesn't deny the existence of a higher power, it just shows the mechanism by which we now come to see ourselves in this form. Also, people who deny evolution have never really studied it in any detail, and if they did, they approached it with a closed mind and would never even consider the possibility of it being true. That is no way for society to progress.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

Patrick was one the one who said previous societies were remarkably stable and they went because they because they practised less and less of what the religion taught, hence the reason for another messenger being sent to re-establish these teachings.
.

there must be another patrick on this board

 

[Patrick Arnold]

Show me the proof? I have yet to witness a ape evolve into a human. I have seen evidence of adaption. That is all though.

The evolution theory of humans hangs on The science of dating and there is way too many flaws in dating science. You will find literature after literature that bones originally thought to be millions of years old have been reduced to mere thousands of years time.

you might as well ask me to prove the earth is round or we revolve around the sun.

give me an alternative to evolution and tell me why the preponderance of evidence is in favor or your alternative

 

[Patrick Arnold]

As I posted earlier in the thread, here is one attemp that was proven to be a fraud.[

i can get a geneticist professor from campus to come on here and explain to you how DNA analysis clearly shows that we come from primates. But I suppose DNA is a false science and he is a fraud

 

[Roniboney]

i can get a geneticist professor from campus to come on here and explain to you how DNA analysis clearly shows that we come from primates. But I suppose DNA is a false science and he is a fraud

Didn't the professor who discover DNA sequences also believe that a snake spoke to Adam and Eve.I remember Dawkins making fun at it in one of his books.

Please get your friend on.It's creationist hunting season.

 

[chimeranD]

Didn't the professor who discover DNA sequences also believe that a snake spoke to Adam and Eve.I remember Dawkins making fun at it in one of his books.

Please get your friend on.It's creationist hunting season.

lol. Creationist hunting season? Calm down there big guy.

 

[Jiigzz]

Interesting Discussion.
In the end, there is no definitive evidence that will disprove either parties (either atheists or christians) as if there was, the arguments for atheism or christianity (which ever was PROVEN to be wrong) would collapse. If you wish to believe the universe created itself, by random possibilities and that life somehow began, then so be it. Science can explain lots of things, but many things cannot or have not been answered and are merely based on limitations of the human mind. On the other hand, christianity does not provide any solid 'proof' either.

However I choose to have faith in God for this very reason, if things cannot be proved through science, then there is no evidence to disprove God exists.




://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/designss.html

 

[B5150]

we should go back to the good old times when the christian faith ruled the land. 600-1500 AD, you know....the golden era

There is an abundance of data and evidence that demonstrate that this increasing adulterous and lascivious propensity of man has been a detriment to our society socially, culturally, economically, and legally yet our enlightened intellectual state does not seem to be able to manifest itself in a solution to the decline of our morals and values as a whole.

The collective morality of man is like a puddle - it finds the lowest level and then becomes a stagnant cesspool.

All this intelligence and scientific enlightenment has not elevated mankind in thousands of years. It's a heart condition.

 

[rob112]

Symbiotic theory seems to be the closest thing to reality IMO(going back to single celled organisms). For any who may be unaware:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/822529/

 

[saggy321]

sweet jesus I had no idea that these guys were creationists.That quote from Tropic Thunder comes to mind ....''Never go full retard''.

Our DNA shares common ancestry with apes.Just as we do with dogs,cats ect.....Chimpanzees are our most common ancestor.
Evolution is accepted by the Catholic Church you do realise.They believe it to be part of your God's grand plan.

If you don't believe or accept evolution then read a book for crying out loud.The evidence is there.Study it.

Very tempted to leave this thread due to a friendly debate turning to blind ignorance.

Now that is funny! The evidence supporting evolution is in the books?! The first thing my evolutionary biology professor told us in our first lecture was that the theory of evolution is just a theory and no one should accept this as fact due in part to the huge gaping holes in it. It does not stand up to simple scrutiny. When leading proponents of the theory are asked a simple question about gene mutation and if they are able to name one instance where a single mutation in a gene has resulted in the development a fully functioning organ that confers an advantage upon the organism over its community, they are unable to.

Tell me do you think both Einstein, Newton, Boyle Faraday etc etc. were all ignorant fools, lacking intelligence and rationality when it came their personal beliefs about a Creator, but were intellectual giants when it came to science?! Is that rational? I don't quite see the point of brining up DNA as a method of disproving God. It's like saying because we've discovered that all of creation can be reduced down a single sub-atomic particle, there mustn't a Creator. If someone who's never seen a car finds one and through a structured and logical process begins to decipher how it works does that mean it wasn't created by someone else who was more technologically advanced? Just because you begin to understand the mechanics of the something doesn't disprove that it was created.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

Now that is funny! The evidence supporting evolution is in the books?! The first thing my evolutionary biology professor told us in our first lecture was that the theory of evolution is just a theory and no one should accept this as fact due in part to the huge gaping holes in it. It does not stand up to simple scrutiny. When leading proponents of the theory are asked a simple question about gene mutation and if they are able to name one instance where a single mutation in a gene has resulted in the development a fully functioning organ that confers an advantage upon the organism over its community, they are unable to..

i am going to consult my geneticist friend and get back to you on this one.

 

[Whacked]

Sadly, his beliefs will skew his interpretation/feedback as well either way (be it Christian or Athesit).
Think about it.

i am going to consult my geneticist friend and get back to you on this one.

 

[Patrick Arnold]

Sadly, his beliefs will skew his interpretation/feedback as well either way (be it Christian or Athesit).
Think about it.

i am not looking for an opinion from him, i am looking for some facts

he happens to be a christian

anyway i think he is ignoring me because he probably finds the idea of someone denying the theory of evolution as being too inane for him to bother

 

[Roniboney]

Now that is funny! The evidence supporting evolution is in the books?! The first thing my evolutionary biology professor told us in our first lecture was that the theory of evolution is just a theory and no one should accept this as fact due in part to the huge gaping holes in it. It does not stand up to simple scrutiny. When leading proponents of the theory are asked a simple question about gene mutation and if they are able to name one instance where a single mutation in a gene has resulted in the development a fully functioning organ that confers an advantage upon the organism over its community, they are unable to.

I don't even want to argue this with you your clearly biased.You professor must be low in his profession because it is widely accepted as being proof.Is he in anyway on par with Richard Dawkins?Probably not.Was he a creationist?

Tell me do you think both Einstein, Newton, Boyle Faraday etc etc. were all ignorant fools, lacking intelligence and rationality when it came their personal beliefs about a Creator, but were intellectual giants when it came to science?! Is that rational? I don't quite see the point of brining up DNA as a method of disproving God. It's like saying because we've discovered that all of creation can be reduced down a single sub-atomic particle, there mustn't a Creator. If someone who's never seen a car finds one and through a structured and logical process begins to decipher how it works does that mean it wasn't created by someone else who was more technologically advanced? Just because you begin to understand the mechanics of the something doesn't disprove that it was created.

Einstein was never a theist.It is a common myth.Check your evidence more carefully.Newton,Boyle and Faraday weren't in an age that could have accepted and actually thought of this belief.Did you know that Descartes was an atheist.He was threatened to change I think therefore I am to I think therfore I am therefore God under pretty unscrupulous circumstances.

Did I ever say that I 100% think we're not created?Nope because I would never say it because it's not provable.It would not be logical.Just how the belief in a single God,whats more the Christian God is the one true God is not logical.

None of you creationists have answered my question about how your religious beliefs is just a matter of geography.But oh no of course that one true God would have come to you some way or another right.

If we understand the mechanics we're getting closer to the answer.If it ends up being God I'll believe but don't try and belittle the guys in labcoats who are trying to look for an answer instead of blindly saying this is what we should believe because we can't answer the question and apologise for being human every Sunday.Anyone who does that has a screw loose.

 

[Flaw]

tell me why the preponderance of evidence is in favor or your alternative

Well for one the part of my post where you and others ignored. That is the innacuracy of fossil records. Some quotes


"Instead of finding the gradual unfolding of Life, What geologists of Darwin's time and geologists of the present day actually find is a highly uneven or jerky record; that is, species appear in the sequence very suddenly, show little or no change during their existence in the record, then abruptly go out of the record" - Evolutionary paleontologist David M. Raup.

The vast majority of fossils show stability among types or creatures over extensive periods of time. The evidence does not show them evolving from one type to another. What is this so called "missing link" that connects us with other primates? We HAVE NOT found it so you can't say where we truly came from.

Since fossil records have shown creatures have appeared suddenly then it would support the theory of creation.


The "cambrian explosion" throws a big wrench in the theory of evolution because many new and distinct life forms appear so suddenly and do not "evolve" over a long period of time.

In a National Geographic article in 2004 they likened fossil records to " a film of evolution from which 999 of every 1,000 frames have been lost on the cutting-room floor".

So what your theory is doing is taking fractions of information and making up a story. That's pseudoscience at it's best.

"Nothing is known about when or how the human line actually emerged from that of apes" - The science journal Nature "A new species of great ape from the late miocene epoch in ethiopia. 2007

What happend with the the fossil in 2009 "IDA"? Proposed to be a missing link in the human evolution. It's buzz died.

"Ida is not a missing link in human evolution" -UK science journal "New Scientist", May 30, 2009 pp-18-19

What about the images that depict how we evolved from the ape/chimp/monkey?

"The faces of earlier human ancestors cannot be objectively contructed or tested. Attempts to do so based on modern apes " are likely to be heavily biased, grossly inaccurate and invalid". "Any facial reconstructions of earlier hominids are likely to be misleading"- Science and Justice vol. 43 no. 4 (2003) section, Forensic anthropology, "Anthropological Facial Reconstruction"- recognizing the fallacies, unembreacing the errors and realizing mthod limits- C.N. Stephan P. 195

There's a good question to ask yourself. If evolution says species evolved by extremely slight modifications over time then where is the evidence? The evidence is opposite. Mutations cannot transform a original species into a new one. Both in the animal and plant world.

Then there's darwins Natural selection and the study of 13 species of finches on the Galapagos islands.

A study was done in the 1970's by Peter R and B. Rosemary Grant of princeton UV. They found out that as the climatic conditions changed certain type of finches were dominant. In a drought finches with larger beaks become dominant while otherwise "normal" climate conditions showed the domination of smaller beaked finches. This showed the ability of a species to adapt. Inventually interbreeding of the 2 species would produce one specie over time, not a entirely new one. Adaptions happen to humans as well. Skin pigment is just one example. Here's a good link on how the human body has adapted to climate changes.

http://eng.1september.ru/2003/29/1.htm

In the end the finch was still a finch and humans are still humans. We have no evidence that we are evolving into something entirely new.

This is only proof of adaption, not evolution.

Microevolution is more plausible and has more evidence then macroevolution. Microevolution in many senses is adaption.

 

[Roniboney]

i am not looking for an opinion from him, i am looking for some facts

he happens to be a christian

anyway i think he is ignoring me because he probably finds the idea of someone denying the theory of evolution as being too inane for him to bother

I never got how Christian could really accept evolution.I'd like for some acceptance but it is directly contrary to their holy book making them a sort of pseudo Christian or closet atheist.I believe in God but the means he created us are measurable by man.................cmon let bygons be bygons and affiliate yourself with one or the other.There lies very little middle ground in this discussion.

 

[Geoforce]

I never got how Christian could really accept evolution.I'd like for some acceptance but it is directly contrary to their holy book making them a sort of pseudo Christian or closet atheist.I believe in God but the means he created us are measurable by man.................cmon let bygons be bygons and affiliate yourself with one or the other.There lies very little middle ground in this discussion.

Didn't Darwin originally say evolution is proof of God's existence? It's been a long time since I heard that, but I listened to a professor for a class like ten years ago make the argument that God and evolution were a match made in heaven according to Darwin. My grandma is a die hard Bible beater and she says the evidence for evolution is all around us.

I think (and I could be wrong) a lot of it has to do with God creating the world basically and then evolution being what takes place. Most Christians want to put God into everything and call him an active designer of all that goes on. Yet it doesn't have to be that way. Why can't God have created the world and the natural laws and evolution be shaping the differences throughout the ages?

Like I said I could be off, but I know many argue about them coexisting. A whole lot of people don't think it has to be one or the other.

 

[JudoJosh]

Now that is funny! The evidence supporting evolution is in the books?! The first thing my evolutionary biology professor told us in our first lecture was that the theory of evolution is just a theory and no one should accept this as fact due in part to the huge gaping holes in it.

Sigh.. Come on now. I thought you said you were in the science field? If so then you should know the meaning of the word "theory" in science is different then the everyday common use of the word. In the context of science the word theory is used to denote a collection of ideas that are useful in understanding some aspect of nature. The word theory is also used to describe a set of principles which organize an extensive set of observations. In everyday use, the word theory doesnt hold this much weight. In the context of science a theory is the set of ideas we use to explain things. By claiming evolution is just a theory, is just a cheap attempt to discredit it to those who dont fully understand the meaning of the term.

Remember the theory of universal gravity is also "just a theory" and has "huge gaping holes" in it.

 

[Flaw]

:facepalm: That statement just shows you have no idea what evolutionary theory is. We did NOT come from apes. Apes and humans share a common primate ancestor.

Ohh I'am sorry I ment GREAT APES. Does that clarify it better for you?

If we evolved from The Hominidae family then how come Chimps, Orangs, Gorillas still exist? Why haven't they turned into us? They continue to breed and make the same species and we continue to breed and make the same species. I've never seen a human give birth to a chimp or have seen a chimp give birth a human. Have you? Even if a human tried to breed with a chimp the chimp would not give birth to a half-human/ half-chimp hybrid. No conception results at all.