The "simple cell" is more complex than mankinds most complex factories (translation, Harry Potter)
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.
by the way, the scientific evidences/findings is not always what it seems.
For example. We all know the earth is round, we seen pics of it. but we appear to be standing on flat surfaces. the sun and moon seem to rise and fall when in fact the earth,sun and moon are stationary and the earth is just revolving in its own axis.
sooooooo how do u know, those scientific observations of evolution of man is what it really is? riddle me that.
You have it back to front, sunshine. Human limited perception coupled with 'common sense' conclusions first supposed that the earth was flat and the sun, planets and stars revolved around it. And that lightning was thrown by gods.
It was science that first showed that matters were otherwise and, because it needed understanding of science rather than common - sense conclusions (which are very prone to error) it took some time to be accepted. The Flat earth wasn't finally put to bed until the first pictures from space and the last flat - earthist expired still denying the evidence as Fakes.
well my argument is that you atheist 'logicals' also believe in something you have not seen. true or false?
Evolution isn't atheistic and atheists aren't the only one who "believe" in it. Most theists and in fact most Christians accept the fact of evolution.
Quote:
and yet you declare yourselves smart and thinking for yourselves and the ones on the either side are fools and puppets. WTF. really? what is the difference? the evidences? that are based on what? science books, isn't it? the 'evidences' that your sole source is what the science books tells you as facts. who wrote the science books? humans. so what's the difference?
And the source of all your "facts" are a collection of scribblings from bronze age ignorants.
Sorry, but science books are an infinitely more reliable source of information on this world and the universe in which we live.
Evolution is like watching the robbery. We may not have every single second of the robbery on tape but we've got the guy's face in clear view. We've got him holding the gun. We've got him in the store at the right time. It's nailed down. Anybody who denies it is either completely lacking common sense or refuses to admit that the robber could commit the crime - no matter what evidence is shown.
And then we'll see what we can do with the entire universe...all 13 billion light years of it. Dabbling with something that is already here is no different than making something out of something that already exists.
And how do you know that "God" didn't do just that...
so my point is - as unbelievable as what science DISCOVERED that the earth is indeed round. i believe it because i SEE IT!!! same as the sun moon earth discoveries.
have i seen an evolution of man? NO! so i dont believe it. plain and simple. i have to SEE what science is telling me it has discovered for me to believe it.
The evidence for evolution is infinitely better than the evidence for creation, which is zero.
by the way, the scientific evidences/findings is not always what it seems.
For example. We all know the earth is round, we seen pics of it. but we appear to be standing on flat surfaces. the sun and moon seem to rise and fall when in fact the earth,sun and moon are stationary and the earth is just revolving in its own axis.
sooooooo how do u know, those scientific observations of evolution of man is what it really is? riddle me that.
You are correct. Things are not always as they seem to be. The thing is, scientific theory and conclusions are susceptible to change in light of new information whereas the dogma of your religion is not.
Quote:
Originally Posted by QuixoticHobbit
Evolution isn't atheistic and atheists aren't the only one who "believe" in it. Most theists and in fact most Christians accept the fact of evolution.
.
You need to stop this blanket categorizing of Christians. You are not the one who determines who is or is not a Christian. Your persistent arrogance about this is irritating.
It is presumably the Bible that lays down the parameters and I believe that theist posters have claimed that Jesus accepted the OT as authoritative. Therefore... ?
It is presumably the Bible that lays down the parameters and I believe that theist posters have claimed that Jesus accepted the OT as authoritative. Therefore... ?
Everything involving human BELIEFS about Christ are irrelevant to who is or is not a Christian . . . God is the ONLY arbiter. We do not get to self-select our status with God, period . . . especially those who do not even believe God exists.
Everything involving human BELIEFS about Christ are irrelevant to whom is or is not a Christian . . . God is the ONLY arbiter. We do not get to self-select our status with God, period . . . especially those who do not even believe God exists.
This is evasive. If one does not believe that Jesus was what the Bible claims then to say that only God can decide whether that person is a Christian is simply abusing our mental faculties. The Bible is supposedly inspired (at least) by God to tell us what we should believe. If we do not believe it, then to refuse to draw the obvious conclusion is absurdly evasive.
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.
Dabbling with something that is already here is no different than making something out of something that already exists.
?
