i think evelution is parashly possable for some thigns but the therory that humans came from monkeys is BS in my mind
Who the hell would believe in evolution???
Started by
Guest_MichahSimmons
, Jan 09 2006 08:34 PM
1136 replies to this topic
#302
Guest_Dark Lord Vader
Guest_Dark Lord Vader
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:24 AM
Well I think that we did evolve. And we are still changing every day. Evoulution is for real.
#303
Guest_rockmiceter
Guest_rockmiceter
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:39 AM
humans were obversiously created be aliens...its true. there are about 228 unidentified human g-nomes that scientists can't explain how it got there.
#304
Guest_amateursuperhero
Guest_amateursuperhero
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:51 AM
He dodged my points earlier too, and on like two other threads. Zenna was pretty much winning against our side on the "God real or not" discussion as far as I'm concerned. He expressed interest in starting the thread over with some kind of restrictions on number of posts per day, so arguments could be more coherent. That whole debate will probably be starting up again real soon.Nah, he dodges the person who can put his faith away for good. You've seen it before on the other topics amateursuperhero. I lock arguments down like nobody else on this forum.Edit: Can we all agree that I've basically won this one in three posts? :gbasp:I think I also won it on the "God real or not" topic also with TWO posts, unless Zennalathas comes back and tries to make his case again. In "should gays have the right to marry?" my two posts remain uncontested as well. This pattern certainly chalks up a number of victories for me.
#305
Huang Fei Hong
-
- Member
-
- 227 posts
Serpent
Reputation: 4
Neutral
Posted 17 March 2007 - 01:57 AM
I don't see him breaking my cosmological argument and my point against the Big Bang being the prime cause.He dodged my points earlier too, and on like two other threads. Zenna was pretty much winning against our side on the "God real or not" discussion as far as I'm concerned. He expressed interest in starting the thread over with some kind of restrictions on number of posts per day, so arguments could be more coherent. That whole debate will probably be starting up again real soon.
Yet Another Guide To A Healthy PC (Windows) - FREE Cleaners, Security, Defraggers, & Other Free Software.
#306
Guest_amateursuperhero
Guest_amateursuperhero
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 02:50 AM
I made essentially the same argument a couple of pages before I think, referencing Aquinas. He brought up some business about recent developments in physics that challenge the necessity of causal chains. I'd find the post but I'm way too lazy. We do need to start that discussion up again, though.I don't see him breaking my cosmological argument and my point against the Big Bang being the prime cause.
#307
Guest_Davidxes
Guest_Davidxes
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 03:07 AM
There actualy more than 2 or 3 examples that show dat some species and people used to be a different looking creature's in da past but there looks changedhere are some examples: Gorilas some scientist's believe dat people used to be gorila's but we grow up and became smarter and our shape and looks changed bit by bit.Also it's said dat people were biggger in ancient Egypt 4000 years ago people were bigger the building's dey built were humangous dey didn't have any machine's at dose times it's said dat it's imposible for a normal person or even a huge built person to carry it not even 10 people dat are well built can pick up the rocks dey used to carry at dat time dey didn't only carry dey used dem build building's in dis time with no machine's it impossible for u build a building with a 1 tone rock.Dey didn't onl use a 1 tone rock dey used thousand's and thousand's of rocks.One great example is the pyramids that huge enormus it would take 1 month in our technology and Modern Brains to build 1 huge pyramid like dat dey didn't just build it dey Made it look good too and dats only 1 example of how people have developed.dere's a a theary that some reptiles have evolved from dem huge rex's and stuff to a rino.i can keep going all day but i don't have all day to do dat !!!?
#308
Guest_Spottswoode
Guest_Spottswoode
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 07:07 AM
The more I think about evolution the harder it is for me to grasp. I mean, how can a single-celled bacterium end up as a mammal with a four-chambered heart, keratinized hair and nail cells, a retina with pigments that allow us to see, blood platelets to clot wounds, and muscles that contract for movement? This isn't just gene recombination. Entirely new genes would have to be created. Someone please explain it in a way I can understand without taking some college course (still in high school).
If time travel is ever going to exist, shouldn't there be people from the future that come to visit every now and then? Since none have showed up, doesn't that pretty much disprove time travel?The past is the past, and people cannot go back in time to observe what really happened (yet).
#309
Huang Fei Hong
-
- Member
-
- 227 posts
Serpent
Reputation: 4
Neutral
Posted 17 March 2007 - 07:18 AM
I did crush that thing against the necessity of causal chains already with my point about how causes are sooner or later to be found for every single event, even within the quantum level. I still hold true to my belief that there's no such thing as a truly random event (and thus no actual break in a causal chain) and thus with math applied, the logic for causal chains still remains infallible.I made essentially the same argument a couple of pages before I think, referencing Aquinas. He brought up some business about recent developments in physics that challenge the necessity of causal chains. I'd find the post but I'm way too lazy. We do need to start that discussion up again, though.
Edited by Huang Fei Hong, 17 March 2007 - 07:39 AM.
Yet Another Guide To A Healthy PC (Windows) - FREE Cleaners, Security, Defraggers, & Other Free Software.
#310
Guest_alzyon14
Guest_alzyon14
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 07:36 AM
*blinks* uummm...... I think humans evolved from primates and you would too if you every saw my little sister eather dinner
#311
Guest_الِش
Guest_الِش
-
- Guest
Posted 17 March 2007 - 07:43 AM
I believe in evolution. And seeing as Darwin was a Christian when he wrote Origin of Species, I don't see that the two terms are mutually exclusive.
#312
Guest_dekaiden
Guest_dekaiden
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:13 AM
Everyone has heard the old joke: "What came first: The chicken or the egg?" This is actually a religous joke. Those that believe in evolution usually pick the egg and those that believe in creation usually pick the chicken. Try it sometime. Ask a friend that you know pretty well what they think came first and ask them what they believe.
#313
Guest_Tool17
Guest_Tool17
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:22 AM
umm i would... it's obvious theres no god theres like a 99% chance there isn't.theres an equation for that % and i don't remember it but eh why would you believe in god when theres proof of evolution.
#314
Guest_bobthebuilder1234
Guest_bobthebuilder1234
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:28 AM
who doesnt believe in evolution??theres proof everywhere that there is but that doesnt mean there is no God.
#315
Guest_amateursuperhero
Guest_amateursuperhero
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:31 AM
God and evolution have nothing to do with each other. An equation showing how probable the existance of God is? You're an idiot man.umm i would... it's obvious theres no god theres like a 99% chance there isn't.theres an equation for that % and i don't remember it but eh why would you believe in god when theres proof of evolution.
#316
Guest_the noodle
Guest_the noodle
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:39 AM
finally someone believe's in the same god as meI don't believe in evolution. We are all created by her greatness, the IPU, the Invisible Pink Unicorn!
(Peace Be Unto Her) (May Her Holy Hooves Never Be Shod)
#317
Guest_Domebuddy
Guest_Domebuddy
-
- Guest
Posted 19 March 2007 - 03:44 AM
Pft... All hail the giant spaghetti monster!All I'm saying is that although there is what evolutionists (in general, mind you) would like to present as substantial evidence in support of evolution, there is also an even greater amount of evidence (though oftenly suppressed or ignored) which has arisen from or been taken as a sample from those same evolutionist's findings!! Ex) the "fossil" record? evolutionists would present that from the fossil record can be found many examples of creatures "evolving" into some state we witness today. However, if a person were to use common sense, taking into account that on the basis of the evolutionists' statements every creature here today is evolved from some previous form, shouldn't we be able to find MILLIONS of such examples, and not just the few we see today???? Just one example of many. Topic open to opinions...
#318
Guest_yoshiodoom
Guest_yoshiodoom
-
- Guest
Posted 20 March 2007 - 11:30 AM
It isnt based off of sedment levels It is based upon the radioactive decay of carbon 14. Carbon 14 in felsic lava degrades at a much faster rate due to the high heat and pressure that occurs within the cauldera of a felsic (contenental crust) volcano. Its something you learn in historical geology like day three.First, this topic has absolutely nothing to do with God, and, though this is an off-topic discussion forum, it would be great if you could remain on the same subject for the duration of this conversation... This is simply a topic which questions the validity of evolution (a theory which I hold no respect for). If you want to talk about God, go to another forum. If you are interested in evolution, please, don't hold back to post evidence supporting it... Me, I just can't stop finding evidence to refute it. For example, carbon dating, one of the most pivotal tools used in proving evolution (or its length, anyways) has been disproven on many accounts, most memorably when it was used to test lava from Mt. St. Helens and found it to be 100,000 yrs old. Pretty accurate if you ask me...
Another correlating point is that the dating of fossils is based upon sedimentary levels, which are formed by water and dirt over the years. The problem with this is that the number of levels depends upon the amount of water. You could have alot of layers from either what evolutionists believe, little water and lots of time, OR you could have the same number of layers with LOTS of water, maybe from a WORLDWIDE FLOOD??, and little time.
#319
Guest_Jarvis
Guest_Jarvis
-
- Guest
Posted 20 March 2007 - 12:08 PM
This is just how scientific method works. Take a theory that, by and large, fits and bears results until it can be falsified. Then the whole paradigm shifts and we have a new method. Until that happens...got any suggestions?Hey, wow, looks like I actually learned something in all those Philosophy of Science lectures.
#320
Guest_killahtz87
Guest_killahtz87
-
- Guest
Posted 20 March 2007 - 05:38 PM
i believe in evolution its a scienctific why to explain some stuff
Edited by killahtz87, 20 March 2007 - 05:39 PM.
#321
KM.
-
- Dragon's Elite
-
- 1,536 posts
The Drug-Induced Manlove Hunter
Reputation: 7
Neutral
Posted 20 March 2007 - 11:45 PM
It's proven that many people talk to themselves. Anyone who says "Why God?", or "Oh My God". Do you know why this is true? Because there is no God. I don't give a damn about anyone who says I'm condemned or something. I'm not athiest, but God is certainly less realistic than evolution.
cheya brah i like it soo much guys that is whi litds las
#322
Guest_الِش
Guest_الِش
-
- Guest
Posted 20 March 2007 - 11:58 PM
^http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/AtheistYou're an atheist...And anyone who want to think there's a God, be my guest. So long as you don't bring me into it.
#323
Guest_roboman157@hotmail.com
Guest_roboman157@hotmail.com
-
- Guest
Posted 21 March 2007 - 12:37 AM
personaly its common sence to beleve in evolution every thing else is pretty hokey
#324
Coatrackofsatan
-
- Member
-
- 171 posts
Serpent
Reputation: 0
Neutral
Posted 21 March 2007 - 12:45 AM
There is only one thing going for religion/Intelligent Design:The chances of the Big Bang were like 1 in a Googolbut evolution still seems more realistic
#325
Guest_الِش
Guest_الِش
-
- Guest
Posted 21 March 2007 - 01:04 AM
Evolution is not exclusive to religion.For example, there's a Catholic on the forum I post who says that God created the theory of evolution (seeing as he created it), but Darwin discovered it. In fact, he eventually placed another Catholic on his ignore list for denying this (the exact post was: "Then it's settled. I refuse communion with you, Commando [other user].
