Evolution?

[Blake]

Just cause your athiest friends say so? not likely.

If I believed everything I read in scientific journals I would be running around like "chicken little" believing that we are headed towards climatic doom.

Science isn't as "pure" as you believe it to be.

If I believed everything I read in the Bible I would be running around like "chicken little" believing that we are headed towards climatic doom.

Real science is more pure than your baloney posts.

It's a shame that you have to admit that YOU can't handle defense of your own beliefs. Cut&Paste jobs are still lame, considering you can't back up what they're saying anymore than you'd allow yourself to believe that what I was saying was actually true or even plausible. Fact of the matter is that those glasses you're wearing predetermine and bias what you perceive as truth... that convenient filtration however, in no way invalidates absolute TRUTH. And what is that exactly? Reality as perceived by the Creator. You can't change that reality no matter how hard you scream and kick in the process.

Fact of the matter is you are all opinion with no links, no sources and no research of your own. You fail to prove what you are saying is actually true or even plausible. No amount of screaming and kicking on your part proves anything you have been saying.

Says you... but you can continue deluding yourself all you want.

For that matter, you can continue to believe that evidence for a cosmic origin has no philosophical impact. Even though the notion that energy/matter does not randomly appear from "nothing" has been constantly affirmed and never disproven.

we are talking evolution, not abiogenesis.

Lastly, you would have me believe that all such gaps in your beloved theories can one day be closed out to support your views. Much like the belief that coelacanths were a transitionary species even when the current renditions live in deep sea waters without exhibiting any desire to crawl on land... faux conclusions to support an evolutionary view??? Say it aint so!

I wouldn't have you believe anything you don't want to.

What it is is that I don't believe anything you say. I'll go ahead and take the word of a scientific journal's study over your opinion.

Keep wearing your Godless Goggles blake! No one's stopping you.

-Peace

Keep on taking the time to respond even though you continually complain that you really have no time to do so. No one's stopping you.

-Peace

[leemajors]

Fact of the matter is that those glasses you're wearing predetermine and bias what you perceive as truth... that convenient filtration however, in no way invalidates absolute TRUTH. And what is that exactly? Reality as perceived by the Creator. You can't change that reality no matter how hard you scream and kick in the process.

I think it's great you have faith. It's also convenient to claim your faith is the only possible reality and absolute unshakable truth/fact. Of course science isn't pure. Religion isn't either. But at least scientists are open to being proven wrong.

[Ignignokt]

Look dude, are you going to help me or not? If you are going to point out the mistakes then you have to know how to fix them. My hands are tied here. I don't know which way is up anymore and I am coming to you for the awnser

I'm sorry guy, but i've already helped you out by pointing out to you that you're a humorless boring idiot, there's nothing you can do 'bout it.

[Rappin' Raptor]

I exist!!! RAWR!

[MB20]

Here is my opinion. In the bible it says that he created everything in six days and rested on the seventh but it also says that a thousand years to us is like one day to God and that God "inhabits eternity". So our concept of time is not necessarily His concept of time.
That was my small thought on that and I will not discuss it any further since this thread has already been derailed enough.

So, if a day to God is like one thousand years for us, it is possible for the Earth to be 1 million years old (human years). Nobody knows how many thousand years (for humans) were the first 5 days when God created the Earth.
Or the 7th day, when God rested, could have lasted...say...2 million (human) years.
Since humans were created on the 6th day, then by the time the 7th day ended, humans could have possibly been around for 2 million (human) years...

[I. Hustle]

So, if a day to God is like one thousand years for us, it is possible for the Earth to be 1 million years old (human years). Nobody knows how many thousand years (for humans) were the first 5 days when God created the Earth.
Or the 7th day, when God rested, could have lasted...say...2 million (human) years.
Since humans were created on the 6th day, then by the time the 7th day ended, humans could have possibly been around for 2 million (human) years...

Right. Even people that that believe in the bible can believe that the earth is millions or billions of years old if they actually studied what it is that they believe. From my standpoint if you believe in God then you should know that His way of thinking is not necessarily your way of thinking. So His concept of time is completely different from ours.
For instance on average we live to be what like 80? Imagine if you lived to be 2,000 or even just 200. Your concept of days, months or years would be completely different.

[Blake]

Right. Even people that that believe in the bible can believe that the earth is millions or billions of years old if they actually studied what it is that they believe. From my standpoint if you believe in God then you should know that His way of thinking is not necessarily your way of thinking. So His concept of time is completely different from ours.
For instance on average we live to be what like 80? Imagine if you lived to be 2,000 or even just 200. Your concept of days, months or years would be completely different.

Methuselah was really 5 when he died.

[MB20]

Methuselah was really 5 when he died.

Human´s years or God´s years?

[I. Hustle]

Methuselah was really 5 when he died.

I was actually talking about the creation process.

[mouse]

So, if a day to God is like one thousand years for us, it is possible for the Earth to be 1 million years old (human years). Nobody knows how many thousand years (for humans) were the first 5 days when God created the Earth.
Or the 7th day, when God rested, could have lasted...say...2 million (human) years.
Since humans were created on the 6th day, then by the time the 7th day ended, humans could have possibly been around for 2 million (human) years...

That is actually a great point. when I used to post in these topics I had no problem pointing that out. If the Bible folks (I don't like to use bible thumpers it's a childish name) would have some flexibility on that issue and maybe not bring up Noah and the burning Bush they could be taken seriously but it's hard to quote the Bible 80% and try and leave out the other 20% of unrealistic folklore. That is why I had to leave the church I didn't want to be a half ass Christian so now I keep my religious views out of any debate that requires facts and logic.

Since I don't believe in Darwin and I don't use the bible on Evolution and age of the earth debates I am in a class by myself and I am free from ridicule from both sides when I show evidence that proves the age of the solar system .


The Intelligent design people had a good thing going they allowed another point of view on this subject but they embraced the Bible and got labeled Creationist and they ed up.

I on the other hand founded AD Alternative design where we don't use the Bible as a reason why man is here we use intelligence and common sense.

Something you rarely find at this website when talking about Evolution.

[Phenomanul]

I think it's great you have faith. It's also convenient to claim your faith is the only possible reality and absolute unshakable truth/fact. Of course science isn't pure. Religion isn't either. But at least scientists are open to being proven wrong.

Not when a majority of them are self-dependent and arrogantly believe to have it all figured out. Many scientists justify their work on the basis that they believe it crushes the spiritual aspect of our lives. That it justifies their own disbelief. They consider spirituality or matters of 'faith' as mere foolishness, as an intellectual crutch.

If one questions their motives... they become defiantly aggressive and condescending.

I'm not claiming faith is the only possible reality. The crux of my statement was that absolute TRUTH cannot be defined by the perspective of any one person. For that matter it cannot be defined by anyone on earth. It is inherently much larger than that. Larger than the Universe even. To suggest otherwise would be tantamount to proposing that no absolute TRUTH exists. But if that were the case, then that would mean that everyone is right; TRUTH is no longer absolute, but relative. That's why the posit of a cosmic origin, and the fact that we have scientific evidence for a cosmic origin... raises such intriguing questions.

The grandness of the scale involved is why neither 'religion' or 'science' or the 'perspective of truth' can be man-centered. It has to be centered outside of our own understanding. Yeah it's evident that I made my decision long ago to reconcile that conundrum. The problem is that people in the atheistic camp believe that they are above questioning. So back to your comment... sure, scientists will accept being proven wrong on matters of numbers, data-crunching, certain conclusions or anything that doesn't challenge their 'long-standing' belief that no GOD exists. Question that, and they become as stubborn as those they criticize. At that point, they aren't really open to change...

[Blake]

Human´s years or God´s years?

I have it backwards....

If one day might be a million years to God, and Methuselah was said to be 969 years old when he died.....

then 365 million x 969 = Methuselah really being 35.4 billion years old when he died.

[Blake]

I was actually talking about the creation process.

I know. I was shifting to a different point about concepts of time in the Bible.

[Blake]

That is actually a great point. when I used to post in these topics I had no problem pointing that out.

Luckily you never post in these topics any more except for today.

Since I don't believe in Darwin and I don't use the bible on Evolution and age of the earth debates I am in a class by myself and I am free from ridicule from both sides when I show evidence that proves the age of the solar system .

Actually you are still ridiculed from the side that understands that evolution exists.

The Intelligent design people had a good thing going they allowed another point of view on this subject but they embraced the Bible and got labeled Creationist and they ed up.

Intelligent design on it's own merit without using Biblical reference got shot down in a court of law as not being science.

Even ID founder Behe admitted it on the stand.

I on the other hand founded AD Alternative design where we don't use the Bible as a reason why man is here

How did man get here by AD?

intelligence and common sense.

Something you rarely find at this website when talking about Evolution.

so true.

[Blake]

Not when a majority of them are self-dependent and arrogantly believe to have it all figured out. Many scientists justify their work on the basis that they believe it crushes the spiritual aspect of our lives. That it justifies their own disbelief. They consider spirituality or matters of 'faith' as mere foolishness, as an intellectual crutch.

If one questions their motives... they become defiantly aggressive and condescending.

I'm not claiming faith is the only possible reality. The crux of my statement was that absolute TRUTH cannot be defined by the perspective of any one person. For that matter it cannot be defined by anyone on earth. It is inherently much larger than that. Larger than the Universe even. To suggest otherwise would be tantamount to proposing that no absolute TRUTH exists. But if that were the case, then that would mean that everyone is right; TRUTH is no longer absolute, but relative. That's why the posit of a cosmic origin, and the fact that we have scientific evidence for a cosmic origin... raises such intriguing questions.

The grandness of the scale involved is why neither 'religion' or 'science' or the 'perspective of truth' can be man-centered. It has to be centered outside of our own understanding. Yeah it's evident that I made my decision long ago to reconcile that conundrum. The problem is that people in the atheistic camp believe that they are above questioning. So back to your comment... sure, scientists will accept being proven wrong on matters of numbers, data-crunching, certain conclusions or anything that doesn't challenge their 'long-standing' belief that no GOD exists. Question that, and they become as stubborn as those they criticize. At that point, they aren't really open to change...

If anyone's motives are to have been questioned over the years, it's been the creationists' motives.

The majority of them like you are self dependent and arrogantly believe you have it all figured out using phrases like "keep looking through your godless goggles".

When I question your sources, you become defiantly aggressive and condescending.

You aren't really open to change.

[I. Hustle]

I have it backwards....

If one day might be a million years to God, and Methuselah was said to be 969 years old when he died.....

then 365 million x 969 = Methuselah really being 35.4 billion years old when he died.

OK but thing that I was trying to stress was that the concept of time differs from ours. 969 years could have really been 97 years. I don't think it was until later that it started to shift into the time we use now.

I think the thing that both sides get too caught up in is trying to understand things that are impossible to grasp. No creationist can truly understand the mind of God and no evolutionist can really grasp the complexities of what makes us up. There is always a WHY and as long as that WHY is there faith will have it's place on both sides.

[mouse]

OK but thing that I was trying to stress was that the concept of time differs from ours. 969 years could have really been 97 years. I don't think it was until later that it started to shift into the time we use now.

I think the thing that both sides get too caught up in is trying to understand things that are impossible to grasp. No creationist can truly understand the mind of God and no evolutionist can really grasp the complexities of what makes us up. There is always a WHY and as long as that WHY is there faith will have it's place on both sides.

most of that may be true, but we do know how long it takes a hot cup of coffee to finally cool off, we do know you need water to grow plants, and we do know a mans sperm mixed with a woman's egg can produce a child.

Evolutionist have no proof other than some old bones and dusty fossils that man evolved from a fish so who is really trying to grasp the complexities
of life?

[I. Hustle]

most of that may be true, but we do know how long it takes a hot cup of coffee to finally cool off, we do know you need water to grow plants, and we do know a mans sperm mixed with a woman's egg can produce a child.

Evolutionist have no proof other than some old bones and dusty fossils that man evolved from a fish so who is really trying to grasp the complexities
of life?

Both. When you think that you fully understand God and His way of thinking then you fail. Life is so complex that you always have to study and there is always more to learn.
I will say this for evolutionist. I don't agree with the way they think but as long as they keep searching and don't just say this is the way it is and that is that then I respect them.

[mouse]

Both. When you think that you fully understand God and His way of thinking then you fail.

I didn't mention God.

[I. Hustle]

I didn't mention God.

Ok so leaving God and evolution out of it you are still left with WHY. Sure we know that when a sperm and egg meet they produce a baby but why? What is it that gives the two the power to do so? To tell me that it is simple and easy to understand and not complex whatsoever would mean that you know every detail. The reality is we don't know exactly what that spark is that gives us life. If you could answer that then death wouldn't be a problem overpopulation would.
Every aspect of life is complex when you continue to break it down. As soon as you explain one you can dig deeper and find another why.

[MiamiHeat]

No man can try to understand the Lord.

We are arrogant by nature, and must humble ourselves. Evolution, dinosaur bones, all of this fits within His plan.

[Blake]

OK but thing that I was trying to stress was that the concept of time differs from ours. 969 years could have really been 97 years. I don't think it was until later that it started to shift into the time we use now.

Seeing as how we live longer now than ever, it could really also have been 47 years.

I think the thing that both sides get too caught up in is trying to understand things that are impossible to grasp. No creationist can truly understand the mind of God and no evolutionist can really grasp the complexities of what makes us up. There is always a WHY and as long as that WHY is there faith will have it's place on both sides.

there is faith in God and then there are other beliefs at how we arrived here including abiogenesis.

there is no need for faith in evolution. It has been pretty well established.

[Blake]

Evolutionist have no proof other than some old bones and dusty fossils that man evolved from a fish so who is really trying to grasp the complexities
of life?

so what do you think happened?

[Blake]

Ok so leaving God and evolution out of it you are still left with WHY.

you are assuming purpose over randomness.

that falls into the philosophical arena.

[Phenomanul]

If anyone's motives are to have been questioned over the years, it's been the creationists' motives.

The majority of them like you are self dependent and arrogantly believe you have it all figured out using phrases like "keep looking through your godless goggles".

When I question your sources, you become defiantly aggressive and condescending.

You aren't really open to change.

Since you never offer any real counterpoint other than taking my quotes and throwing them back (oh yeah! Blake is real witty... ) ... I take it you aren't capable of doing so for yourself.

Now hurry... Go find some more copy&paste articles that you can find atheistic reassurance in...

Rinse and repeat... rinse and repeat...

Fact is 'science' is not the catch all, be all, end all tool you claim it is. Just as you accuse 'religion' of being flawed by man... so too has 'science' become a religion. Keep living in denial about it though. Keep thinking your side is governed solely by logic and data and incapable of pushing agendas... Keep believing that 'faith' amounts to nothing more than stupid fairy tales... and that its proponents are devoid of any intellectual ap udes...

Run away from undesired questions by suggesting that you don't want to discuss them ("we were talking evolution... not abiogenesis") <--- Even though I was talking about cosmic origins in that particular point.... Then again, you conveniently glossed over the entire section...

Oh and keep monitoring my time management... We all need someone to let us know when it's OK/ not OK to post on SpursTalk... I guess you're good for that...