Please, please before you start to get your dogmatic selves all worked up and start spouting off your doctrine upon my reply section of this topic, be aware that I do not believe, endorse or condone any of your sci-fi babble you have that has been written in your precious religiousity faux doctrines that you practice and hold to. Your writers have made it all up and what wasn't made up was embellished and has been distorted over the years to be nothing more than a farce.

So quoting some big nosed gray haired geek that works in a classroom or science lab isn't going to secure your arguement.

Name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely true with the theory of evolution

Oh and why not name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely false about God, Christ, Christianity or the Bible.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/5DmYLrxR0Y8&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/5DmYLrxR0Y8&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Where is Noah's Ark? Where is the Arc of the covenent. Where is ANY proof that there is a god?

if humans didnt evolve or change and adam and eve is true. why are there multiple races and ethnicities of humans?

Does God approve of incest?

if humans didnt evolve or change and adam and eve is true. why are there multiple races and ethnicities of humans?

Does God approve of incest?

the amount of sunlight taken in over several generations would lead to skin pigmentation being darker on some than others.

the amount of sunlight taken in over several generations would lead to skin pigmentation being darker on some than others.

People are born with that pigmentation before ever being exposed to the sun. The only way then it could differ is genetic changes between branches of the human family tree. being evolution.

the amount of sunlight taken in over several generations would lead to skin pigmentation being darker on some than others.
AKA evolution.

lol how retarded

lol how retarded

Please no name calling in here.

In James 5:15-16 the Bible says:
And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.


http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/ap_060330_prayer.html

"NEW YORK (AP)—In the largest study of its kind, researchers found that having people pray for heart bypass surgery patients had no effect on their recovery. In fact, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications. "

Perhaps Heart bypass patients don't count?

Please no name calling in here.

I was testing you.

In James 5:15-16 the Bible says:
And the prayer offered in faith will make the sick person well; the Lord will raise him up. If he has sinned, he will be forgiven. Therefore confess your sins to each other and pray for each other so that you may be healed. The prayer of a righteous man is powerful and effective.


http://www.livescience.com/strangenews/ap_060330_prayer.html

"NEW YORK (AP)—In the largest study of its kind, researchers found that having people pray for heart bypass surgery patients had no effect on their recovery. In fact, patients who knew they were being prayed for had a slightly higher rate of complications. "

Perhaps Heart bypass patients don't count?

If you want to have a conversation or argument with the thread starter you cannot site studies to back up your statements. How would the thread starter respond with his mythology?

whats trippy is that was xcepts 666th post

whats trippy is that was xcepts 666th post

Mark of the beast??? Nice.

If you want to have a conversation or argument with the thread starter you cannot site studies to back up your statements. How would the thread starter respond with his mythology?

true true. Then how about this


Do people ever see God?

"... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." -- Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time..."-- John 1:18

A clear contradiciton in the Bible, so at least ONE of these verses has to be untrue. Meaning AT LEAST SOME of the Bible is false, which already raises serious questions about it's credibility.

true true. Then how about this


Do people ever see God?

"... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." -- Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time..."-- John 1:18

A clear contradiciton in the Bible, so at least ONE of these verses has to be untrue. Meaning AT LEAST SOME of the Bible is false, which already raises serious questions about it's credibility.

I used to be a religious person. I decided to abandon my faith when I realized that they things that I prayed for and felt I needed (not material possessions) were going unfulfilled. If there was a god why do bad things happen to people that only try to do good. I know most religious people will say it is a test. Eventually people get sick of these tests and decide to do what they want and end up more content with their lives in the process.

People are born with that pigmentation before ever being exposed to the sun. The only way then it could differ is genetic changes between branches of the human family tree. being evolution.

Where do you think it originally came from? Are you implying that skin pigmentation is a mutation? If so then how is this mutation beneficial and why did it become so widespread?

true true. Then how about this


Do people ever see God?

"... I have seen God face to face, and my life is preserved." -- Genesis 32:30

"No man hath seen God at any time..."-- John 1:18

A clear contradiciton in the Bible, so at least ONE of these verses has to be untrue. Meaning AT LEAST SOME of the Bible is false, which already raises serious questions about it's credibility.


untrue or misinterprited.

Where is Noah's Ark? Where is the Arc of the covenent. Where is ANY proof that there is a god?

the idea of God isn't anymore crazy than our existance, if we evolved from a little tiny cell, that's even more crazy than believening a higher power. IMO

Gaining Salvation

John 5:29
And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

By good deeds

Titus 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.

By faith alone


So which is it? It's one or the other.

the idea of God isn't anymore crazy than our existance, if we evolved from a little tiny cell, that's even more crazy than believening a higher power. IMO

That's just your bias. Really the ideas are equally plausible from an evidence/scientific stand point.

That's just your bias. Really the ideas are equally plausible from an evidence/scientific stand point.

equally plausible, just as good to me. For everything true there's a counterfit, if it doesn't seem like the real thing nobody is going to believe it. So I agree with it being equal.

the idea of God isn't anymore crazy than our existance, if we evolved from a little tiny cell, that's even more crazy than believening a higher power. IMO

Where did the higher power come from?

Gaining Salvation

John 5:29
And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

By good deeds

Titus 3:5
Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.

By faith alone


So which is it? It's one or the other.

universal reconciliation ftw

Where do you think it originally came from? Are you implying that skin pigmentation is a mutation? If so then how is this mutation beneficial and why did it become so widespread?

What I'm implying is the fact life would have to change for humans to be different. That for there to be one creation of life with no evolution yet still have so many differences between humans who supposed have origins from the same two people is impossible.

Where did the higher power come from?

That's a concept man cannot grasp, everything we know has a beginning and end, God is not this way according to the bible. Think about it though, nothing could start and die if there wasn't something to start it in the first place. How he came to be is mind boggling.

Where did the higher power come from?

It's always existed. Where did the original matter come from?

universal reconciliation ftw

so then hell must be untrue?

It's always existed. Where did the original matter come from?

How do you know?

What I'm implying is the fact life would have to change for humans to be different. That for there to be one creation of life with no evolution yet still have so many differences between humans who supposed have origins from the same two people is impossible.

Ok take everything you know about evolution and allow for 6000 years of evolution to effect humans and there would be some genetic drift.

So quoting some big nosed gray haired geek that works in a classroom or science lab isn't going to secure your arguement.

Name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely true with the theory of evolution

So you're basically saying, proof without using science that a scientific principle is true. What a fun game. In return I ask you to prove without using mathematics that the Pythagorean theorem of right angled triangles is true.

Oh and why not name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely false about God, Christ, Christianity or the Bible.

The bible promises that Jesus answers your prayers. He has never answered my prayers (Please Jesus, I pray that you turn me into a Christian right now). It didn't work. There, I just proved that part of the bible false.

How do you know?

Well at some point you have to realize that something in the universe has always existed as something can't come from nothing therefor you either think that something is a being or a nonliving piece of matter. Neither is more likely than the other.

Chronicles 16:30: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable.”

Psalm 93:1: “Thou hast fixed the earth immovable and firm ...”

Psalm 96:10: “He has fixed the earth firm, immovable ...”

Psalm 104:5: “Thou didst fix the earth on its foundation so that it never can be shaken.”

Isaiah 45:18: “...who made the earth and fashioned it, and himself fixed it fast...”


We all know (at least i would hope) the earth does move as it revolves around the sun and does spin.

Geocentrism was the creationism of the past

It's always existed. Where did the original matter come from?

THis is what I used to contemplate when I used to do LSD. The only thing I learned in those experiences was that no matter how much you believe in something, someone else believes the opposite and your arguments will be ceaseless. In the end it matters not.

Ok take everything you know about evolution and allow for 6000 years of evolution to effect humans and there would be some genetic drift.

Exactly what im saying. There no way it would just be created like that and stay the same and end up like this. Im suddenly unsure if we are agreeing or disagreeing?!?!?!


:pooh_on_ball::moil::x wing::abduction:

Well at some point you have to realize that something in the universe has always existed as something can't come from nothing therefor you either think that something is a being or a nonliving piece of matter. Neither is more likely than the other.

I agree that something has always had to have existed (Law of conservation) but i was asking how you know it was some benevelent creator.

Exactly what im saying. There no way it would just be created like that and stay the same and end up like this. Im suddenly unsure if we are agreeing or disagreeing?!?!?!


:pooh_on_ball::moil::x wing::abduction:

Ok first off I completely agree that evolution is a possibility and that things liek natural selection and sexual selection occur what I'm saying right now is that in 6000(around when man was created according to the bible) years it's possible for enough genetic drift to have occured to changed the color of our skin.

I agree that something has always had to have existed (Law of conservation) but i was asking how you know it was some benevelent creator.

I never claimed it was, just that it was just as plausible as being a nonliving piece of matter.

THis is what I used to contemplate when I used to do LSD. The only thing I learned in those experiences was that no matter how much you believe in something, someone else believes the opposite and your arguments will be ceaseless. In the end it matters not.

Are you suggesting that we should keep a closed mind because an open mind allows to many of other peoples ceasless and sometimes wrong arguements to effect your thought process? Or have I totally misinterpreted you?

Ok first off I completely agree that evolution is a possibility and that things liek natural selection and sexual selection occur what I'm saying right now is that in 6000(around when man was created according to the bible) years it's possible for enough genetic drift to have occured to changed the color of our skin.

This being my arguement as well. This would show that at least SOME evolution would have to occur even if the creation story was true (Which i don't think it is however that aside) or not.

This would have been my arguement to xcept for evolution (In response to his implication its nothing more than a fairy tale), perhaps allowing him the oppurtunity to acknowledge it without necessarily completely abandoning his faith (which would take more than some internet forum to do I would imagine).

I never claimed it was, just that it was just as plausible as being a nonliving piece of matter.

We know there is non-living matter, however we have no proof that there is now nor ever was any "God" or similar entity (though I wouldn't necessarily count it as an impossiblity)

I think I may be getting lost a bit lost as im sleepy as a pillow.


So would you be implying for the possibility of a God or a certainy of a God? (though I don't like using the term in this context as it could include something entirely separate from or even contradicitory to any religion understanding of the term)

This being my arguement as well. This would show that at least SOME evolution would have to occur even if the creation story was true (Which i don't think it is however that aside) or not.

This would have been my arguement to xcept for evolution (In response to his implication its nothing more than a fairy tale), perhaps allowing him the oppurtunity to acknowledge it without necessarily completely abandoning his faith (which would take more than some internet forum to do I would imagine).

When xcept says evolution he's referring to the belief that we came from a single celled organism. He's even admitted in earlier posts that he believes in things like speciation.

We know there is non-living matter, however we have no proof that there is now nor ever was any "God" or similar entity (though I wouldn't necessarily count it as an impossiblity)

I think I may be getting lost a bit lost as im sleepy as a pillow.


So would you be implying for the possibility of a God or a certainy of a God? (though I don't like using the term in this context as it could include something entirely separate from or even contradicitory to any religion understanding of the term)

Possibility, I'm 50/50 agnostic I see both possibilites (God and no God) being equally possible according to the evidence available.

Are you suggesting that we should keep a closed mind because an open mind allows to many of other peoples ceasless and sometimes wrong arguements to effect your thought process? Or have I totally misinterpreted you?

No, not keep a closed mind. Just know that arguing this topic has been debated forever, and we are not closer to any answers what so ever. Just more arguments and WARS. If people would respect others beliefs then the world would be a better place.

When xcept says evolution he's referring to the belief that we came from a single celled organism. He's even admitted in earlier posts that he believes in things like speciation.

he did? WOW.

Anyways. I simply interpreted his reference to evolution as a fairy tale as stating that any evolution or change in life was impossible and that life was the way it was said to be created in the bible and unchanged since.

I had no idea xcept was open to that sort of thing.

Possibility, I'm 50/50 agnostic I see both possibilites (God and no God) being equally possible according to the evidence available.

I share that belief. I think that no one could really know for certain at this point. Which is probably why i find myself so critical of religion as it seems to pretend to know things it couldnt possibly actually know. (along with the wars, genocide, oppression, superstition, intolerence etc it often causes)

I share that belief. I think that no one could really know for certain at this point. Which is probably why i find myself so critical of religion as it seems to pretend to know things it couldnt possibly actually know. (along with the wars, genocide, oppression, superstition, intolerence etc it often causes)

Some atheists do the same thing or atleast preten like their alternative is more plausible.

Yeah religion has been used for alot of bad things but the again so has metal and it's still pretty useful when used correctly.

he did? WOW.

Anyways. I simply interpreted his reference to evolution as a fairy tale as stating that any evolution or change in life was impossible and that life was the way it was said to be created in the bible and unchanged since.

I had no idea xcept was open to that sort of thing.

Actually there is no proof for evolution (meaning one species evolving into another distinct species). Speciation (Micro evolution) is a fact, but we Christians believe that too. It fits just fine into the Biblical model, in fact would have had to have happened much faster than what evolutionary theories dictate. Look at the number of cat species (over 4700) we have today and most of these cat species were bred fairly recently. That's merely speciation, not true evolution. Oh and that was covered very well in Genesis 30 when Jacob varied the cattle.

http://ninjashoes.net/forum/showthread.php?p=882785&highlight=speciation#post882785

No, not keep a closed mind. Just know that arguing this topic has been debated forever, and we are not closer to any answers what so ever. Just more arguments and WARS. If people would respect others beliefs then the world would be a better place.

I'm not looking for answers myself, just merely trying to show others how far away we are from obtaining them.

Please, please before you start to get your dogmatic selves all worked up and start spouting off your doctrine upon my reply section of this topic, be aware that I do not believe, endorse or condone any of your sci-fi babble you have that has been written in your precious religiousity faux doctrines that you practice and hold to. Your writers have made it all up and what wasn't made up was embellished and has been distorted over the years to be nothing more than a farce.

So quoting some big nosed gray haired geek that works in a classroom or science lab isn't going to secure your arguement.

Name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely true with the theory of evolution

Oh and why not name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely false about God, Christ, Christianity or the Bible.


ok, when u take anti biotics and dont finish the course , 0.1% will survive(because of a natural immunity) , than they will breed and become the new population of whatever is infecting you immune to that antibiotic or the same can be said when cunts tried to poison fruitflies , some fly's survived and became the new population immune to that poison

Some atheists do the same thing or atleast preten like their alternative is more plausible.

Yeah religion has been used for alot of bad things but the again so has metal and it's still pretty useful when used correctly.

Thats true about some athiests.

I guess thats true about religion having some positive potential though I feel like we'd be better off if we could take the positive values while abandoning the superstition and hatred it brings.

YAWWWN. Well its been nice but I gotta sleep now. Good night there blevie.

Where do you think it originally came from? Are you implying that skin pigmentation is a mutation? If so then how is this mutation beneficial and why did it become so widespread?

darker skin pigmentation is benaficial because it reduces th chance of skin cancer, so its possible that all the lighter skin cunts died from cancer the ones that survived where naturally darker, that from breeding they became darker as a population

god is a massive asshole , seriously commit 1 sin, and you will burn in hell for eturnity, dont you think thats a little bit harsh lol

Nice one to the person who figured out what my post number was for starting this thread by the way. Oh and I'd like to say you guys have done a great job of trying to go at this one and figure it out thus far. Keep it up. When you have something really good I will be in here to help you with it. I'm really looking forward to it and also enjoying the read so far.

Name one single solitary thing that has been proved completely true with the theory of evolution

Okay xcept68. You disagree with Darwin's theory of evolution. In non scientific terms, that would be you disagree with Darwin's explanation of the fact of evolution. Afterall, a theory in science is just an explanation of factual observations.

Which part of Darwin's theory do you disagree with?

Or if you're just trolling, don't bother to answer so we all know that this is a troll thread.

sigh...look let's just end this silliness.

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7JYIJPjpCFc&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7JYIJPjpCFc&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

darker skin pigmentation is benaficial because it reduces th chance of skin cancer, so its possible that all the lighter skin cunts died from cancer the ones that survived where naturally darker, that from breeding they became darker as a population

I highly doubt people were dropping dead of cancer before they could repopulate, but even so are you suggesting that skin color is a mutation and not a reaction to being in the sun all day?

Thats true about some athiests.

I guess thats true about religion having some positive potential though I feel like we'd be better off if we could take the positive values while abandoning the superstition and hatred it brings.

YAWWWN. Well its been nice but I gotta sleep now. Good night there blevie.

You seem to have a balanced so I'm content with your point of view.

god is a massive asshole , seriously commit 1 sin, and you will burn in hell for eturnity, dont you think thats a little bit harsh lol

Universal reconciliation makes God seem like a lot nicer individual.

the amount of sunlight taken in over several generations would lead to skin pigmentation being darker on some than others.

Say we take a white European family and place them in Africa. They stay there for many years and turn really brown due to being in the sun all day. If they have kids, their kids will be white, not brown. If you repeat this over several generations, the kids will still be white. In fact, look at South Africa. If what you say were true then white babies there would be born with a brownish tinge.

To make it even more obvious. Say you took a group of people and cut off their little fingers at birth. You do this every generation, but each baby will still be born with 5 fingers on each hand.

Say we take a white European family and place them in Africa. They stay there for many years and turn really brown due to being in the sun all day. If they have kids, their kids will be white, not brown. If you repeat this over several generations, the kids will still be white. In fact, look at South Africa. If what you say were true then white babies there would be born with a brownish tinge.

To make it even more obvious. Say you took a group of people and cut off their little fingers at birth. You do this every generation, but each baby will still be born with 5 fingers on each hand.

You're right I'm wrong. Wiki suggests that darker skin occured to prevent low folate levels.

Say we take a white European family and place them in Africa. They stay there for many years and turn really brown due to being in the sun all day. If they have kids, their kids will be white, not brown. If you repeat this over several generations, the kids will still be white. In fact, look at South Africa. If what you say were true then white babies there would be born with a brownish tinge.

To make it even more obvious. Say you took a group of people and cut off their little fingers at birth. You do this every generation, but each baby will still be born with 5 fingers on each hand.
Did you know that Inuits up in the Arctic have developed larger than average livers over many generations of eating their particular diet, which is high in animal fat?

Or that when a country or tribe suffers through famine their next generation is often shorter than they were? And the opposite is true of a poeple living with an abundance of healthy food.

So, I don't have the science on hand to repute your skin color always remaining consistant claim but I disagree with you mostly based on what I understand of human evolution from other circumstances like the two I named.

Based on my lifestyle, I expect any of my theoretical future sons to have the genetics to have a slightly stronger right arm than I have.

Did you know that Inuits up in the Arctic have developed larger than average livers

I hadn't heard of that before. Is this larger liver caused by genetics or environment? Do Inuit babies raised in other cultures also have large livers?

Or that when a country or tribe suffers through famine their next generation is often shorter than they were? And the opposite is true of a poeple living with an abundance of healthy food.

Animals grow larger with better quality nutrition. That's pretty obvious.

..I disagree with you mostly based on what I understand of human evolution from other circumstances like the two I named.

Based on my lifestyle, I expect any of my theoretical future sons to have the genetics to have a slightly stronger right arm than I have.

What you're arguing for is basically racial memory. Are you claiming that circumstances in our lives change the DNA in our eggs that are passed to our offspring? Or are you claiming that there is something else besides DNA that is passed on?

As to your specific example. If you were to have your right arm amputated, then your left arm would become very strong. If after many years you have a kid, would you expect that kid's left arm to be stronger?

Firstly, Darker skin and brown eyes were likely a more original starting point for man. Blue eyes are actually a degenerative effect, as is blonde hair. What Christians believe according to this is whatever happened to people at the Tower of Babel when people were spread abroad. Their languages were confounded and people spread out. Which was the original commandment by God after the landing of the ark upon dry land.

As far as the liver... Yeah ducks are bred to have 2 to 3 times larger livers by being fed a strict diet, in french cuisine in order to make pate out of their livers, but the next generation of ducks aren't born with larger livers. So that's false as well.


Dark skin didn't "occur". There are plenty of studies online concerning this.

Also the supposed contradictions that have been posted concerning the Bible, are merely your lack of understanding of the context of it. Sure taken out of context, the Bible can be made to say about anything. I'm sure you agree here.

Speciation is well noted in the Bible in Gen 30 with the variation of cattle. Much like Darwin's finches. Different sized beaks doesn't constitute different kind of animals or that it could be taken outside of family or order.

well I will keep up with you guys in here and reply when necessary. I hope you guys find something really tangible to present in here. I'd love to see it.

ok, when u take anti biotics and dont finish the course , 0.1% will survive(because of a natural immunity) , than they will breed and become the new population of whatever is infecting you immune to that antibiotic or the same can be said when cunts tried to poison fruitflies , some fly's survived and became the new population immune to that poison

They already had the information encoded in their DNA for such. No new data has ever been added. Evolution requires new information. That hasn't ever happened in anything observed. It's just as assumed as the evolution of stars, planets, galaxies and everything else, including the assumtion that life evolved from non-life.

Okay xcept68. You disagree with Darwin's theory of evolution. In non scientific terms, that would be you disagree with Darwin's explanation of the fact of evolution. Afterall, a theory in science is just an explanation of factual observations.

Which part of Darwin's theory do you disagree with?

Or if you're just trolling, don't bother to answer so we all know that this is a troll thread.

Thanks for confirming that this is a troll thread.

What is your guys' take on the little bugs that are found in caves that have their eyelids closed permanently over their eyes?

The scientist I saw on T.V. said that over the many generation of living in the dark and not needing to use their eyes to see in complete darkness they evolved to not even be able to see at all if ever let out of that cave.

Did God make the original bug with its eyelids covering its eyes? Did the animal evolve like explained by the guy I saw on T.V.? Or is there another explanaition or reason to have eyes that don't even work?

What is your guys' take on the little bugs that are found in caves that have their eyelids closed permanently over their eyes?

The scientist I saw on T.V. said that over the many generation of living in the dark and not needing to use their eyes to see in complete darkness they evolved to not even be able to see at all if ever let out of that cave.

Did God make the original bug with its eyelids covering its eyes? Did the animal evolve like explained by the guy I saw on T.V.? Or is there another explanaition or reason to have eyes that don't even work?

people are being born without wisdom teeth, and some without tonsils. I think this is a sign of evolution, since these are unnecessary.

people are being born without wisdom teeth, and some without tonsils. I think this is a sign of evolution, since these are unnecessary.

Are their children also born without tonsils and wisdom teeth? To be evolution it has to be inheritable change.

Are their children also born without tonsils and wisdom teeth? To be evolution it has to be inheritable change.

Good question, I don't know. But I'd like to find out.

Thanks for confirming that this is a troll thread.

You're quite predictable, I really couldn't resist the temotation of not answering you and seeing you fume about me trolling.

So with that behind us now... I disagree with everypart of Darwin's views and theory that isn't observed.

Good question, I don't know. But I'd like to find out.

Yes they are born with tonsils and teeth. Hmmm... there goes that theory out the window.

Hey Judoka... what are you doing in dallas? Care to meet up sometime?

No, not keep a closed mind. Just know that arguing this topic has been debated forever, and we are not closer to any answers what so ever. Just more arguments and WARS. If people would respect others beliefs then the world would be a better place.

Fuck others' beliefs. Some I and another have a disagreement with something, presumably one of us either holds a false premise or has made an improper inference. In any case, such flaws should arise in the course of the argument.

Are their children also born without tonsils and wisdom teeth? To be evolution it has to be inheritable change.

Such physical features would necessarily be genetic and as such be heritable traits.

Fuck others' beliefs. Some I and another have a disagreement with something, presumably one of us either holds a false premise or has made an improper inference. In any case, such flaws should arise in the course of the argument.

I'm pretty sure he was talking about issues like which is truth God creating man or man evolving from nonliving matter. In which case there is no point in arguing as the evidence for both is equal.

What is your guys' take on the little bugs that are found in caves that have their eyelids closed permanently over their eyes?

The scientist I saw on T.V. said that over the many generation of living in the dark and not needing to use their eyes to see in complete darkness they evolved to not even be able to see at all if ever let out of that cave.

Did God make the original bug with its eyelids covering its eyes? Did the animal evolve like explained by the guy I saw on T.V.? Or is there another explanaition or reason to have eyes that don't even work?

Simple, god first designed the bug and then told it to live in dark cave.

I'm pretty sure he was talking about issues like which is truth God creating man or man evolving from nonliving matter. In which case there is no point in arguing as the evidence for both is equal.

How is the evidence equal? And what is this "God" you speak of?

Such physical features would necessarily be genetic and as such be heritable traits.

Not necessarily. I know a guys whose 2nd and 3rd toes on both feet are stuck together. His kids feet are normal.

How is the evidence equal? And what is this "God" you speak of?

Well they are both equally probable. Take the constants for example and how unlikely it would be for them to be the exact way they are, because if they were even a little off life wouldn't be possible. That alone makes the atheistic explanation fairly improbable, it could happen but it's very unlikely. An explanantion for this would be the multiverse as with a multiverse the probability of the correct constants all coming together is greatly increased, problem is the multiverse has as much evidence for it as a creator. And as for God or a creator well there isn't any evidence for it so it is equally improbable but it is still a possibility.

Take the constants for example and how unlikely it would be for them to be the exact way they are, because if they were even a little off life wouldn't be possible.

That's bad mathematics. Say it is extremely improbable for the constants to be the way they are. But given that they are that exact way means the probability is 1. Their improbability adds nothing either way to the discussion of whether God designed them, or that they just randomly occurred.

I think we need to invite more smart people to this site. Where's Cooncat when you need him?

All the smart people I know have better things to do than post all day :P

That's bad mathematics. Say it is extremely improbable for the constants to be the way they are. But given that they are that exact way means the probability is 1. Their improbability adds nothing either way to the discussion of whether God designed them, or that they just randomly occurred.

Let's take a look at the math.

I'll be generous and say that there are only 100 different ways that the constants could've formed. Again I'll only use the 6 constants instead of the 42 or so things that we depend on daily for life. So thats 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 = 1000000000000

Or 1 in 1,000,000,000,000 odds of them being correct, if they varied even a little life wouldn't be possible. That's pretty bad odds for this randomly happening.

All the smart people I know have better things to do than post all day :P
Ouch! That one hurt, bro. Right through the heart :-(

Ouch! That one hurt, bro. Right through the heart :-(

Hey, I have 2000+ posts in 2 months, I kinda stepped on my own toes..

This thread confuses me even more. I didn't know that there were intelligent people who didn't believe in gradual evolution of a species to adapt to its environment.

This thread confuses me even more. I didn't know that there were intelligent people who didn't believe in gradual evolution of a species to adapt to its environment.

rofl, no I think you had it right to start with. If they don't share the same view as you they obviously lack intelligence. Jeez man!

rofl, no I think you had it right to start with. If they don't share the same view as you they obviously lack intelligence. Jeez man!
I wasn't being sarcastic. I meant that literally.

If seemingly smart people have a view I haven't put much thought into then I try to look at it from that view for a while and see how it feels. So that's what I'm doing here.

And I find your expectation of my lack of consideration disappointing.

I wasn't being sarcastic. I meant that literally.

If seemingly smart people have a view I haven't put much thought into then I try to look at it from that view for a while and see how it feels. So that's what I'm doing here.

And I find your expectation of my lack of consideration disappointing.

I'm just used to taking cheap shots on this forum, think I'm going to start wearing a cup..

I meant no disrespect, you just made it sound like in the past if they didn't share your outlook they weren't intelligent individuals.

Well they are both equally probable. Take the constants for example and how unlikely it would be for them to be the exact way they are, because if they were even a little off life wouldn't be possible. That alone makes the atheistic explanation fairly improbable, it could happen but it's very unlikely. An explanantion for this would be the multiverse as with a multiverse the probability of the correct constants all coming together is greatly increased, problem is the multiverse has as much evidence for it as a creator.

I don't see this as an alternative to man's origins, but rather the universe's.

And as for God or a creator well there isn't any evidence for it so it is equally improbable but it is still a possibility.

I'm still not sure what you mean when you say "God". Could you elaborate on this term and what it entails?

I don't see this as an alternative to man's origins, but rather the universe's.

It is because before man came the universe happened without the universe there is no man, it's relevant to the discussion wouldn't you agree?

I'm still not sure what you mean when you say "God". Could you elaborate on this term and what it entails?

An intelligent being that had the capability of creating the universe. Does that work?

BTW just so we're clear when I said nonliving matter I was referring to the original matter.

I'm just used to taking cheap shots on this forum, think I'm going to start wearing a cup..

I meant no disrespect, you just made it sound like in the past if they didn't share your outlook they weren't intelligent individuals.
Nope. Misunderstood my intended expression.

I am in a learning mood today so I thought I'd venture to this section and ask questions and think about your guys' point of views and beliefs. Just wish we had more geneticists or biologists frequenting our forum.

I am still mentally young enough to question what I have been taught and have accepted.

Let's take a look at the math.

So thats 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 x 100 = 1000000000000

You could add a million zeros on the end of that number and it wouldn't make any difference. We live in a universe that has the magic constants that support life. The probability of our universe existing is 1.

We can't use the improbability of its existence for any side of the argument.

how can you stand there and prove religion to be true...i read a book the other day it was a fiction book..this book said somethings and told some stories about people and life during the times. there were allot of teachings and things that sounded real nice. I soon spread the word of this book and those people read it and if they didn't believe i forced them to believe upon threat of death. i then instituted a great church system upon witch i shall pay no tax for i spread the word of the book of stories and teachings. The people shall pay me to listen to my teachings. I shall be given rich lands and property's. the teachings of the book spread through out the land and soon others went out to other countries and FORCED others to believe in this great book. Over the ages people just accepted this book to be truth because over the past if you did not accept the book as truth i would kill you or turn you into a heretic or strip you of your station. as such people followed the book and followed its teachings and did as the book said. Then from the back of the darkness came a great light upon witch the book had no answers. the book only created stories from the teachings for the people to believe. some believed in the book while others FOR no reason besides the pure logic of the idea of evolution they followed this ideal with out the threat of death for not following or having your station striped of you. this idea of evolution had no darkness upon which you must follow or you do not belong no it simply states scientific fact and logic to support its self. It does not need a chapel or a book of stories or a hoard of brainwashed creatons to push its doctrine upon you. it has simply been thought and people just believe it because it makes way more sense if you are to open your eyes. and so the book has finally come to a great challenge, and no longer can force and threat be made to pass the story of the book. there was a time when the book made people safe and feel happy but now that something so truthful and logical as evolution has come about there is only a baser need for the book to help guide people on a path of for a lack of a better word goodness. To say how has evolution has been proven is folly its been supported over a shorter more educated period of time and has used no violence to support its views through out history. If something is so fake why is it that it does not need a church to be thought or an army to protect it.

You could add a million zeros on the end of that number and it wouldn't make any difference. We live in a universe that has the magic constants that support life. The probability of our universe existing is 1.

We can't use the improbability of its existence for any side of the argument.

The probability of it existing is 1 out of 1 because it does exist, but that doesn't mean it randomly happened. All that means is that it does exist which could easily be a product of an inteligent designer. The probability of a universe coming into existence like ours did without a design is extremely improbable.

how can you stand there and prove religion to be true...i read a book the other day it was a fiction book..this book said somethings and told some stories about people and life during the times. there were allot of teachings and things that sounded real nice. I soon spread the word of this book and those people read it and if they didn't believe i forced them to believe upon threat of death. i then instituted a great church system upon witch i shall pay no tax for i spread the word of the book of stories and teachings. The people shall pay me to listen to my teachings. I shall be given rich lands and property's. the teachings of the book spread through out the land and soon others went out to other countries and FORCED others to believe in this great book. Over the ages people just accepted this book to be truth because over the past if you did not accept the book as truth i would kill you or turn you into a heretic or strip you of your station. as such people followed the book and followed its teachings and did as the book said. Then from the back of the darkness came a great light upon witch the book had no answers. the book only created stories from the teachings for the people to believe. some believed in the book while others FOR no reason besides the pure logic of the idea of evolution they followed this ideal with out the threat of death for not following or having your station striped of you. this idea of evolution had no darkness upon which you must follow or you do not belong no it simply states scientific fact and logic to support its self. It does not need a chapel or a book of stories or a hoard of brainwashed creatons to push its doctrine upon you. it has simply been thought and people just believe it because it makes way more sense if you are to open your eyes. and so the book has finally come to a great challenge, and no longer can force and threat be made to pass the story of the book. there was a time when the book made people safe and feel happy but now that something so truthful and logical as evolution has come about there is only a baser need for the book to help guide people on a path of for a lack of a better word goodness. To say how has evolution has been proven is folly its been supported over a shorter more educated period of time and has used no violence to support its views through out history. If something is so fake why is it that it does not need a church to be thought or an army to protect it.

You know in the true sense of the word theory it requires observation which macro evolution fails to provide. So technically speaking macro evolution wouldn't be a theory.

now it's getting good

To say how has evolution has been proven is folly its been supported over a shorter more educated period of time and has used no violence to support its views through out history. If something is so fake why is it that it does not need a church to be thought or an army to protect it.

Good points. The trouble that most Creationists have with evolution is that they don't understand that there are two evolutions - the theory of evolution and the fact of evolution.

I'll use the fact and theory of Gravity as a simpler way to explain it.

Newton came up with a theory that explained how gravity worked. Einstein later came up with an improved theory that superceded Newton's. What changed is our understanding (theory) of how gravity works, not the fact of gravity. Apples didn't stop falling out of trees just because Einstein's theory replaced Newton's.

Similarly with evolution. Before Darwin, there were other theories about the processes behind how we evolved. Darwin came up with a better theory. Others have improved upon Darwin. If the theory of evolution were proven false, it would be because a better theory was found that described how we evolved.

The fact of evolution isn't in question. Lifeforms evolve. We share a common ancestor with other apes. The question the scientist wants to answer is how. The question the philosopher wants to answer is why. The Creationist doesn't want to answer any questions, he just wants to close his eyes and pretend that apples don't fall out of trees.

Nope. Misunderstood my intended expression.

I am in a learning mood today so I thought I'd venture to this section and ask questions and think about your guys' point of views and beliefs. Just wish we had more geneticists or biologists frequenting our forum.

I am still mentally young enough to question what I have been taught and have accepted.

my apologies.

The probability of it existing is 1 out of 1 because it does exist, but that doesn't mean it randomly happened. All that means is that it does exist which could easily be a product of an inteligent designer. The probability of a universe coming into existence like ours did without a design is extremely improbable.

Say I flip a coin a 100 times and each time it comes up heads. This is an extremely unlikely occurance. Does it mean that God made it happen? Does it mean that God didn't make it happen? No, it is completely independent. Flipping 100 heads in a row says nothing either way about God's existence.

Our universe having the necessary constants for life says nothing about God's existence.

Finding a potato chip that looks like George Bush says nothing about God's existence.