Creation vs evolution

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

Anyone can draw things, but that doesn't make it absolute.

Anyone can write a story about a dirt guy, but that doesn't make it absolute.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I have presented in the links actual fossil bones of these intermediate forms (more than 10-15 stages) that were discovered embedded in the rocks. These are not drawings, they are photos of actual bones of these intermediate forms explicitly showing the multiple stages by which evolutionary transformation happened.These are not random bones, they are actual skeletons. We do have the skeletons of these stages, whose photos and description were presented in my posts in the linked thread.

You know after giving it some deep thought, and close examination.

Anyone can write a story about a dirt guy, but that doesn't make it absolute.

That's what I am saying, just because someone dig up some skeleton of dirt guy,man, and written about it, doesn't make it absolute.

 

[sayak83]

You know after giving it some deep thought, and close examination.


That's what I am saying, just because someone dig up some skeleton of dirt guy,man, and written about it, doesn't make it absolute.

You wanted evidence of intermediate skeletons between ancient apes and humans. I have given the evidence. I can explicitly show you the stage by stage transformation of the various anatomical features from ancestral apes to modern humans. These include the transformation of the hand to our grasping hand, the formation of the rigid arch of the feet for bipedal walking, the change in the position of the spinal column to better support two legged walking, the decrease in the incisor size and increase in the size of molar teeth as adaptation to more seedy and nutty fruits, and of course the increase in brain size. Each I can document in a graded manner with real fossils. For example here is a small snippet capturing the intermediate anatomy of the hand in a hominid fossil that shows increasing power and precision in the grip.
Gripping Tale: Hominin Hands Hold Clues to Tool Use

But if you close your eyes and disregard the evidence you yourself asked for then why have a discussion at all? Please don't waste our time.

 

[Darkstorn]

That's what I am saying, just because someone dig up some skeleton of dirt guy,man, and written about it, doesn't make it absolute.

Apply this logic to your bible. Just because someone wrote it, doesn't make it absolute.

Oh right, forgot your OP. The one where you gave yourself a special pass. This is literally like arguing with a child.

I don't think you have even a high school education. Your level of knowledge is almost comparable to a parody of a creationist.

 

[Milton Platt]

Charles Darwin in his theory of evolution, went about to show animals, plants, how they could have evolved. But yet found no evidence to prove that man himself came from apes.
There has been no evidence to prove man came from apes.
You haven't looked at the evidence, then.
But yet some people will go about saying man evolved from the apes, but have no evidence to prove this.
That's why it's called The missing Link, to connect man to the apes.
There is no single point in the chian of evolution where you can say that everything before that point was not a human and everything after that point was a human.
Charles Darwin showed how he could connect all other species together, but when it came to man found nothing there to connect man to the apes.
But it has been done in the 200 years since then.
So if your trying to say that man evolved from the apes, where's your proof to connect man to the apes. Which of yet hasn't been found. So all we have is people going around saying things without the proof to back them up to what they say.
Liar, liar, pants on fire.......What specific evidence do you want?
If such a thing was found, to connect man to the apes, don't you think it would be brought up in every debate. But people don't bring it up all because there's been no proof that has been found to prove that man evolved from apes.
It is certain that man evolved, because all other animals evolved. There is no evidence otherwise.
That even here, in a Thread someone posted "Evolution vs Creation" but in the whole comments section, nothing mentioned about man evolved from apes. Why is that, because to say such a thing, without proof to show man evolved from the ape, it would be useless to bring it up.
Or they were not specifically speaking about the evolution of the Human race........hence, there was no reason to bring it up.
Many people have tried to connect man to the apes, but found the bones to be fake.
There has been one or two attempts to fake a find, yes. Do you know why we know it was faked? Because other scientists in that very field called them on it, that's why. Those same scientists you are trying to call liars.
When people produce fake things, all it does it make it that much harder to believe.
Yes, like the stuff in religion.
But still nothing been found to connect man to the app.
Untrue. There may not be a finely graded progression of fossils, but there are other indicators.
That's why it's always been called The missing link.to connect man to the app.
You are repeating yourself.
Why do you suppose scientist keep quiet, about such things any more, because they know they would be made to look silly, when there's has not been anything found yet to connect man to the ape.
There are numereous papers published each year on the subject....you are now making up fake things.
There's been many attempts to connect ape bones to human bones, but all was found to be fakes.
You are repeating yourself again. "all was found to be fake" is another lie from someone who is fond of calling others liars.
Now if something was found to connect man to apes, it would be heard around the world and on the news. Then there would be no questions about man and ape.
But yet as far as I know or heard of nothing yet that has been found to connect man to apes.

Why do you think the search for evidence stopped with Charles Darwin?
It has not stopped, you idiot. You yourself refer in your own postings to other work that has been done in the field.
Read up on the past 200 years of accumulated evidence, then you can have a discussion about evolution. If Darwin never existed, it would probably not much matter now because of the huge accumulation of evidence from numerous scientific fields.

By the way, I rebutted the claims in your opening post. I have since asked you several times to counter if you have valid arguments. You have not. I will assume you do not have valid counters, and that you accept that your original post has been properly shown to be fallacious.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Apply this logic to your bible. Just because someone wrote it, doesn't make it absolute.

Oh right, forgot your OP. The one where you gave yourself a special pass. This is literally like arguing with a child.

I don't think you have even a high school education. Your level of knowledge is almost comparable to a parody of a creationist.

That all depends who was the author that dictated to those to what they were to write down in the Bible.

You look at those men who written the bible as ordinary men.unto which they were not just ordinary men.

But then you have no clue,as to who those men were. But then you criticize what you don't understand.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

No you came from the ape

It not just that you think that man didn't evolve from a non-human ancestor and are objecting on that basis. You seem to be offended by man being called an ape. Is that correct?

Incidentally, you keep forgetting what you have been told repeatedly: You are an ape. So am I. So were our parents. As others have told you, you are also a vertebrate because you possess the characteristics that define a vertebrate, most notably, a bony spine protecting a spinal cord..

Human beings are also mammals, because they have the qualities that define mammals such as hair rather than scales or feathers.

And they are apes because they possess the qualities that all apes and only apes have, namely, being larger, tailless simiforms (monkey-shaped primates) with bigger brains with more convoluted cerebral cortices, characteristic teeth and noses, etc..

There has been many people who haved falsified human bones with ape bones.

A lot of priests have had sex with children. Does that make Jesus nonexistent?

If not, how does fraud perpetrated by some people invalidate evolutionary theory?

Therefore there is and never will be proven that you came from the ape.

It's already been proven.

Proof is that which convinces,correct? When you ask for proof, you're asking to be convinced, right. Like millions of other people, the evidence convinces me. In each case, that's an example of proof.

So from the very first ape that thru a gradually slow progress from the very first ape to connect to modern man. So where's all those ape like beings in between to connect to modern man.

Have you been to a museum of natural history?

If you're honest with yourself, you'll admit that even if we had every one of your ancestors skeletons for the last several million years - perhaps the last 400,00 generations of the Faithofchristian lineage ,you'd still reject the theory because it conflicts with your faith. Asking for evidence when you don't use it to arrive at some of your beliefs, most especially this one.

Sorry, but nobody's waiting for faith based thinkers that reject evolution on faith to agree.

 

[Darkstorn]

That all depends who was the author that dictated to those to what they were to write down in the Bible.

Just like i was talking about, you get a special pass because you think you're special. This isn't how it works in a debate. This isn't a kindergarten.

You look at those men who written the bible as ordinary men.unto which they were not just ordinary men.

So you say. But your knowledge and information could be suspect. In fact, judging from the thread, you haven't even bothered to think of a rational argument to support your nonsensical view. This is literally like arguing with a child.

But then you have no clue,as to who those men were. But then you criticize what you don't understand.

You have no idea who those men were, and you are criticizing evolution, which you do not understand as this thread shows. You could not have passed high school with your level of knowledge. Either you are too young to have taken part, or you failed. Those are the only options.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Just like i was talking about, you get a special pass because you think you're special. This isn't how it works in a debate. This isn't a kindergarten.



So you say. But your knowledge and information could be suspect. In fact, judging from the thread, you haven't even bothered to think of a rational argument to support your nonsensical view. This is literally like arguing with a child.



You have no idea who those men were, and you are criticizing evolution, which you do not understand as this thread shows. You could not have passed high school with your level of knowledge. Either you are too young to have taken part, or you failed. Those are the only options.

Let's see, evolution is, when one species evolves from another over a period of time.

Like people believe that humans evolved from apes over a period of time.

Therefore I do know about evolution and what it thinks to support.

Little do you know or understand anything about the bible, that the bible does support dinosaurs as having lived upon the earth. Way before we came.

And for your information the bible does support that man was here at the time of the dinosaurs.
But then you have no knowledge or understanding as to what man I'm referring to.
But then this just shows your lack of knowledge and understanding, what the Bible Support's and what the Bible doesn't support.

Had you gone to Junior High School and High school its self, you would been taught not to criticize something, that you may have no knowledge or understanding about.

That's the first the first step in the learning process.

You see as a Christian, when I first heard about the dinosaurs back in junior high school. I didn't criticize it, and never did even to this day.
But I knew that the dinosaurs didn't fit into the earth as being 6000 years old.

That you can not take something as the dinosaurs as being millions to billions of years old and get them to fit into a 6000 year old earth.
But however you can fit 6000 into a million to billions of years old.

This is where scientist have a problem with, All because they go by what the young earth creationists will say, that the earth as being only 6000 years old.

Which causes scientist to start condemning the bible, had the scientific world of scientist knew, that there is no where in the Bible that claims the earth as being only 6000 years old, As the young earth creationists claim it is.
But Billions of years old.

Ask those young earth creationists, if they can give you as to where in the Bible that states the earth as being only 6000 years old.

All they got is back to Adam and Eve, but even that doesn't support the earth as being only 6000 years old.

That's only shows the start of humans being of flesh and blood. The earth was already here.
All Genesis chapter 1 Verse 1 said is, In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
But it doesn't say when God created the heaven and the earth. Only in the beginning. When ever that was.

The young earth creationists, will try, Notice I said ( try ) to fit it into the 6 days of creation.
All because it says in the ( beginning) so the young earth creationists, takes this and try and reply it to the 6 days of creation.

All because they have been taught that everything started with Adam and Eve. That there was nothing before Adam and Eve.
But the bible does not support this teaching of man's.
But you like the young earth creationists,
The young earth creationists, condemns what the bible supports and people condemns the very bible that supports them.
But not realizing it's not the bible that's at fault, But those who have no knowledge or understanding what the Bible Support's and what the Bible doesn't support.

Therefore it's the people who are at fault and not the Bible.

Look, is evolution that's at fault, or is it people who misrepresents evolution that's at fault ?

So is the bible that's at fault or is it people who misrepresents the bible that's at
fault ?

 

[Darkstorn]

Had you gone to Junior High School and High school its self, you would been taught not to criticize something, that you may have no knowledge or understanding about.

Rofl. And yet here you are.

No offence but this thread is over. And it should have been over after / before the OP. You should stick to interfaith discussion because this is getting plain delusional.

When i make note of your lack of knowledge regarding the subject, i have support for it. When YOU do it, it just makes you look like someone who doesn't even understand the reality around them.

Question: Are you a native English speaker? I'm going to guess yes, just a very poor one.

 

[`mud]

We'll have to stick to `creative` here, won't we ?

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

evolution is, when one species evolves from another over a period of time.

That is not an adequate definition of biological evolution. The essential process that defines evolution is the change in gene pools over time. The theory of evolution explains how this happens - genetic variation between generations subjected to natural selection.

Little do you know or understand anything about the bible

The thing about books is that each reader decides for himself what the book means. One should be wary of those that claim that there is a special way of reading this one book, that they know it but others don't, and therefore they have special understanding.

There's nothing difficult about the Bible. The vague passages mean nothing specific - like poetry or song lyrics. They're a verbal Rorschach test, What does this line from Dylan's Desolation Row mean? "Cinderella, she seems so easy, "It takes one to know one, " she smiles. and puts her hands in her back pockets Bette Davis style" Much of the Bible is written that way.

Frankly, I have more confidence in the interpretations of people with no stake in how the book is read, meaning non-Christians.

A Christian is much less likely to tell you that a passage is vague and therefore has no specific meaning. He'll tell you exactly what it means, even though his answer will be different from what the next Christian will tell you it means.

The nonbeliever is free to write what I just did - it means nothing specific, like the Dylan lyrics above, which I presume you would agree are vague and nonspecific in meaning.

Why? Because you have no stake in those lyrics, and no sense of needing to make them something they're not.

An unbeliever is also free to note that the Bible contains contradictory passages that make mutually exclusive claims. The believer needs to rectify that - change the apparent meaning of one of the two contradictory scriptures. The Bible tells us that God is perfect, but it also tells us that this god looked down on its creation, was dissatisfied, and brought a great flood onto the earth to try to rectify his error and start over.

How does that believer reconcile that contradiction? Many different ways, in my experience. The last time, somebody told me that the word perfect was mistranslated, and didn't mean what it says, The unbeliever has no need to do that. He can just tell you that there is a contradiction and leave it at that.

And when we do, that's when the believer tells us that we're not qualified to understand his book.

This is where scientist have a problem with, All because they go by what the young earth creationists will say, that the earth as being only 6000 years old.

Scientists have no problem there, because they have no interest in what people outside their professional circles think about their areas of expertise.

Which causes scientist to start condemning the bible

Scientists have no opinion on the Bible.

And I don't recall anybody condemning the Bible. Like all non-Christians, they do not consider it correct or authoritative.

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

That all depends who was the author that dictated to those to what they were to write down in the Bible.

Nobody, apparently, because ...

You look at those men who written the bible as ordinary men.unto which they were not just ordinary men.

And yet God apparently has the emotional maturity and intelligence of just some regular idiots. 99% of the bible's plot could be resolved had God any real sense. The majority of the plots happen because God is too stupid and too petty to do the right things.

Little do you know or understand anything about the bible, that the bible does support dinosaurs as having lived upon the earth. Way before we came.

And for your information the bible does support that man was here at the time of the dinosaurs.

How can we trust your take on things when you can't even keep two consecutive sentences consistent? Dinosaurs lived way before we came AND were here at the same time as us?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Nobody, apparently, because ...


And yet God apparently has the emotional maturity and intelligence of just some regular idiots. 99% of the bible's plot could be resolved had God any real sense. The majority of the plots happen because God is too stupid and too petty to do the right things.


How can we trust your take on things when you can't even keep two consecutive sentences consistent? Dinosaurs lived way before we came AND were here at the same time as us?

I never said we were there at the same time with the dinosaurs. I said man was there with the dinosaurs.

Now do you know the difference in what man I am in reference to.

I know when you hear man in a sentence, you automatically jump to the human man of flesh and blood. But this is not the man that I'm in reference to.

 

[`mud]

I am 79 years old and I never read any text in the bible about dinosaurs, maybe I didn't read enough ?

 

[JustWondering]

Scholars can say whatever they may want to say, but will it line up to what the Spirit of the word will say ?

A person may say whatever they may want, and what stops them, showing themselves that whatever they may say, doesn't line up to what the bible will say. But then that will hardly stop them.

But then people who don't have no knowledge or understanding of the bible will say anything. And people who listens to them, they to having no knowledge or understanding of the Bible, will think their correct.
So what you have is, The blind leading the blind.

The bible isn't a science book, it was written by ancient bronze age men whose lives were ruled by superstition. The bible is not flawless. There were books that were not chosen to go into the bible and become "canon". The whole thing is a fabrication of men from ancient times. Why should anyone put anymore faith in the stories of the bible than stories about Ra and Odin? We live in the 21st century, if humanity is ever to truly become a rational and enlightened species we need to let go of these ancient superstitious beliefs.

 

[JustWondering]

Two thousand years ago God stepped out of eternity and into time in the form of the Son Jesus Christ, and after having defeted death and hell reign over mankind he stepped out of time and back into eternity...

So his a time traveller too

We do not got 36.000.000 year memory... so who could tell such things?

I like science fiction too but I remember to recognize the fiction part.

 

[JustWondering]

Faithofchristian,
There are many, many things that I could say to refute the Theory of evolution, but a scientist, a mathematician that deals in exact science, calculated the chances that the Universe could be as it is without an Extremely wise and powerful creator, would be; all the atoms in the known Universe to 1. Slight chance, when it is also calculated that anything is impossible, if the chances are more than 40,000 to one.
Look at our natural world, everything you see is a miracle to us, but some claim that an unknowing Mother Nature Created what mankind cannot even understand, in its simplest!!!

If complex things NEED a creator then creators NEED a creator. If creators can JUST exist, then anything can JUST exist. The "logic" you use to support creationism goes both ways but since theists have trouble with logic or honesty when it comes to these arguments, theists ignore it. When pressed to explain why their precious god doesn't need a creator but the universe does, they have nothing. Except mindless superstitious belief.

 

[JustWondering]

This is what creation, and a literal interpretation of it is good for -it will grant you the authority to do like wise as the creator.

God didn't make the world by hire a construction company. Nor did he dig a pit, to find early lifeforms, dead indeed, the fossilrecord available to the hearers of science, with shovels. He didn't create the world with brick and stone.

He said, "let there be..."

He used is word...

That is literacy and the ability to read and write.

But you need faith.

John reads "...through him all things were made" addressing the word and it's function.

So for all i know, someone might have used this gift, to produce computers (They are not handmade, imagine that), cars, ovens, and televisions. All things were created through him, for him, and to him.

But you need faith... that's the Ph D. and his diciples. He need people to make his ideas work.

Not through handicraft, for all i know only some wooden knives are made through handiwork, but through designing with paper and pen.

I do not wish you to be ignorant, and i speak to the scientist, to proclaim the authority of religion.

"Let there be..."
1. light,
2. a firmament
3. land
4. fish and creatures in the sea
5 cattle, beast of the feild and vagitation
6. humans
7. Sabbath

"let there be..."
an invention created by paper and pen "...a unicorn".

So were is my unicorn???

I don't need faith. Faith is the conscious abandonment of critical thinking and reason. So, no thanks.

 

[JustWondering]

Well you are silly, to think you have to test something to know if it's true.

If you hold evolution as being true, then why do you have to test it.

That's why Christians do not have to test the bible, because we know it's true.

Brilliant! Wish I had thought of this when I was a kid. I'd tell my teachers that I didn't have to do homework or take tests because I simply believed I knew everything already. I could just sit back while they gave me A's.