Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So were Cain and Abel just having sex with their mother, or their sisters they didn't list? What euphemism was listed there?
Its a stupid, metaphorical study that has nothing to do with reality. Ancient biblical figures didn't understand DNA anymore then they understood atomic theory. Just like the story of the exodus, can be explained scientifically and by knowing that there were misinterpretation of the language and the story over time. Same thing with Noah.
There is no theory that adequately explains how life began, how the first amino acid formed into a single celled organism. There are scientific theories to explain this, including asteroids and comets bringing the material here. We may all be evolved from creatures that evolved somewhere else.
But teaching creationsim, or banning evolution as saying this is how humans came to being, because of a religious story is silly.
Anyone who equates the Theory of Evolution to attempts at explaining the origin of life is really just saying "I don't understand basic English or Science, nor do I have the capacity or willingness to use Google".
Just look at where all the debates are happening on this forum. It's not if a bacterium can evolve to be resistant to antibiotics it's if a specie can evolve into a different specie but more generally, the origin of life.
Why does the origin of life need to be taught in schools when it's basically a pure, just-so story?
The theory of relativity has nothing to do with the A-bomb. The theory of relativity depending on how it's used is about how one can go about and "add" velocities (when light is supposedly the fastest speed, in vacuum) or a more general description of gravity (acceleration and gravity are the same). You're thinking of E = mC^2 or better yet E^2 = m^2C^4 + p^2C^2 but even that only gives the theoretical maximum energy that can be released from breaking on atomic bond, not the mechanism. The mechanism is a study in quantum physics and chemistry which Einstein was not a part of.
Anyways, to answer your question, I'm fully aware of something I choose to believe and something I "know." You choose to believe evolution. be honest, you couldn't (without google) even properly articulate the theory, you just believe it.
Actually the equation of Energy = Mass x the speed of light squared is the very basis for the atomic bomb.
No it's not. That's lazy physics. The idea for the atom bomb existed long before that equation. All that equation does is a shorthand maximum limit on the amount of energy released. It's napkin calculating in other words.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
