Evidence of Evolution that was presented but never addressed

[McBell]

Your high view of your opinions makes it impossible to discuss anything with you.

Your arrogance also hinders you.

 

[sayak83]

I can't prove the Bible is right and you cna't prove it isn't.



Would the world be better if everyone followed the rules God has given us or not?

No it won't ..until one can definitively prove that his/her God is the real one and not a false God to everyone else. As far as I am concerned your God is a false God and my conscience does not allow me to follow the rules and morals of a false God that has no basis in the true commands of my own true God.

And of course since your God is false, following His guidelines will make the world worse. So its my ethical duty to stop you from making those strictures of a false God into the law of the land.

 

[McBell]

Would the world be better if everyone followed the rules God has given us or not?

Sure.
As long as you are not gay, or black, or have a vagina, or born out of wedlock, or...

 

[omega2xx]

No it won't ..until one can definitively prove that his/her God is the real one and not a false God to everyone else. As far as I am concerned your God is a false God and my conscience does not allow me to follow the rules and morals of a false God that has no basis in the true commands of my own true God.

This not about if God is real. It is about his rules making society better.

And of course since your God is false, following His guidelines will make the world worse. So its my ethical duty to stop you from making those strictures of a false God into the law of the land.

Which of his rules, not guidelines, would make society worse.

 

[sayak83]

This not about if God is real. It is about his rules making society better.

Argue for that in a separate thread if you wish, Of course stopping the eating of red meat (beef, pork, goats) also makes society better and may actually save the world from global warming.

Which of his rules, not guidelines, would make society worse.

Stopping abortion. Stopping divorce. Stopping homosexual sex and marraige.
Since they infringe in the rights and freedoms of people, they make people less free and hence society worse.
Also any policy that tries to officially promote deliberate falsehoods like the world is young, evolution does not happen etc. based on religious considerations.

 

[omega2xx]

Argue for that in a separate thread if you wish, Of course stopping the eating of red meat (beef, pork, goats) also makes society better and may actually save the world from global warming.

Haven't you heard, cow pies do more harm to the environment than man does.

Stopping abortion. Stopping divorce. Stopping homosexual sex and marraige.
Since they infringe in the rights and freedoms of people, they make people less free and hence society worse.
Also any policy that tries to officially promote deliberate falsehoods like the world is young, evolution does not happen etc. based on religious considerations.

Abortion infringes on the rights of the unborn.
Divorce infringes n the rights of children to have 2 parents---The real God's approved plan.
Stop;ping homosexual sex and marriages keeps people from doing that which is unnatural and an a bomination to the one True God.

 

[sayak83]

Haven't you heard, cow pies do more harm to the environment than man does.

There would not be as many cows being bred with industrial fervor if cows were only reared for milk in open pasture practices. And the immense harm of red meat fro both health and environment is well documented. And eating meat or treating cows as things rather than feeling beings with right to life etc. goes against my one true God's approved plan.

Abortion infringes on the rights of the unborn.

You cannot make a case outside of religion that early term unborn are persons with rights that exceed those of cows.

Divorce infringes n the rights of children to have 2 parents---The real God's approved plan.

See, I do not believe in your God. He is a false God. I have an ethical duty to oppose a false God's approved plans from becoming the law of the land, though you are free to follow it personally.

Stop;ping homosexual sex and marriages keeps people from doing that which is unnatural and an a bomination to the one True God.

See, I do not believe in your God. He is a false God. I have an ethical duty to oppose a false God's approved plans from becoming the law of the land, though you are free to follow it personally.

Trying to push your God's plans as the law of the land is theocracy. You want to institute Christian theocracy in the land, where your (false) God's law is the law and your (false) God is acknowledged as the lawgiver of the land. Admit it.

 

[omega2xx]

There would not be as many cows being bred with industrial fervor if cows were only reared for milk in open pasture practices. And the immense harm of red meat fro both health and environment is well documented. And eating meat or treating cows as things rather than feeling beings with right to life etc. goes against my one true God's approved plan.

Are you kidding , if cows were not killed we would be so over run with them the fields would have cow pies on top of cow pies. The according you we would have to feed them instead of children. That is a sick theology.

The harm of red meat harming the environment is only voiced by the tree-huggers. Also red meat does no harm the body if eaten in moderation. In fact it good to eat some. You don't have one true God, you have many gods.

You cannot make a case outside of religion that early term unborn are persons with rights that exceed those of cows.

.

Religion is where the decision should be made, however I don't need religion" a fetus is a living being, killing it is murder. Not only that most traditional Hindus are opposed to abortion. You are out of the mainstream.

]See, I do not believe in your God. He is a false God. I have an ethical duty to oppose a false God's approved plans from becoming the law of the land, though you are free to follow it personally.

I do not believe in your gods, they are false gods. Thank you for allowing me to follow the only true God in the universe.

Trying to push your God's plans as the law of the land is theocracy. You want to institute Christian theocracy in the land, where your (false) God's law is the law and your (false) God is acknowledged as the lawgiver of the land. Admit it.

But its ok for you to push the teachings of your gods on society, right.

Also acceptance of homosexuality is not universally accepted in Hinduism.

 

[sayak83]

@omega2xx
You need to edit your post. The entire thing is under quotations. Making it impossible to read.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Haven't you heard, cow pies do more harm to the environment than man does.

I take it, then, that extinctions (mostly caused by our activity) are not something you'd consider environmental harm?

Abortion infringes on the rights of the unborn.

What "rights" do the unborn start, when do they begin, and how do you guarantee them? Consider this -- even without abortion, over two-thirds of all conceptions (where the "unborn" begin) abort naturally -- and thus, pretty apparently, by "God's plan." (That number includes conceptions that have not yet implanted -- after implantation, the number is closer to one-third.)

So apparently, God Himself abrogates the very "rights" you claim.

Divorce infringes n the rights of children to have 2 parents---The real God's approved plan.

A mother dying in childbirth (a pretty common occurrence through much of human history) also infringes those "rights," but once again, it would seem, "God's approved plan" includes it. And of course, even if the parents absolutely loathe each other, fight all the time scaring the children half to death and making their lives miserable, your comment says, "too bad -- the parents must stay together and the kids just have to get bloody used to it."

Great childhood. I've known several like it. Those kids would have been better off if the parents had divorced. But your God prefers their suffering. So be it.

Stop;ping homosexual sex and marriages keeps people from doing that which is unnatural and an a bomination to the one True God.

I'm not going to say anything about this, because I might end up being as insulting to you as you just were to me and my life-partner of decades by claiming that we are "unnatural" and "an abomination." (Though I admit, there are things I'd like to say to you about that. Perhaps you could just try guessing what those things are. Be creative.)

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Not true. I have ask you to cut and past what your link offered as evidence, not some 20 page disertation. That is a very simple request that could be done is 2 minuets. For some reason no one thinks I have studied evolution. It was pushed down my throat in high school and in college.

And what was pushed down my throat at school was likewise not evidence, but some philosophical speculation, accompanied by artistic impressions, many of which are debunked today, but mainly a heavy dose of overt disdain for any alternative belief. By a 'science' teacher who once asked me to move the projector closer to the screen to make the image bigger!

I don't think people who believe in evolution are stupid at all, it's a very intuitive theory, but one has to dig a little deeper, the devil is definitely in the details here.

 

[sayak83]

@omega2xx

Cows:- Do not be silly. Cows are not killed in India and they exist in far less number than in India than in US. Cows are not mice that breed whereever and whenever. Domesticated cows have a slow breeding cycle and any overpopulation can be simply controlled through birth control procedures used normally for cats and dogs. Further-more cow dung is an excellent source of organic and ecofriendly fertilizer for gardens and agriculture than all the artificial chemicals modern society uses to poison the land. It can also be used as an excellent ingredient for bio-derived gas for fuel and energy.
The Use of Cow Manure for Fertilizer
https://cleantechnica.com/2015/02/2...lant-switches-californias-san-joaquin-valley/

We have a true God who manifests as many gods. Your denial of the evils of killing mammals (which is murder according to the true God of Hinduism) and its well established climate and health implication (which is established according to true science) is irrelevant. If you claim for yourself the privilege of establishing the moral beliefs of your religion as law of the land, I claim for myself the same privilege.

Religion is where the decision should be made, however I don't need religion" a fetus is a living being, killing it is murder. Not only that most traditional Hindus are opposed to abortion. You are out of the mainstream.

An the worldviews of liberals, atheists and agnostics make preventing mother's from having abortion immoral. You are trampling on their freedom of conscience by forcing them to do an immoral deed by preventing mother's from choosing to abort.
Fetus and cows both are living being. The true God of Hinduism shows no preference, even if your mistaken beliefs do. Either protect all life capable of feeling and suffering (this includes most mammals and birds and for many Hindus all animals) or do not.
Meat eating, environment destroying, war-mongering modern nations states do not follow the principle of ahimsa. To suddenly put excessive burden on helpless mothers to idealistic values while everybody else goes on doing violence is not Hinduism. If ahimsa is to be instituted as the guiding principle, all have to share the burden. The true Hindu God shows no preference and has no time for hypocrites.

But its ok for you to push the teachings of your gods on society, right.

Its ok, if you and other Christians like you think its ok. I play by the rules of engagement you have gravitated towards.

Do you accept that one of your goal is to push the laws and moral strictures of your Christianity as the law of the land no matter what non-Christians think? Do you accept that you believe all true Christians should be doing this as well?

 

[omega2xx]

@omega2xx
You need to edit your post. The entire thing is under quotations. Making it impossible to read.

Sorry about that. I am in 3 forums and sometime I use the format of the one I have been the longest.


Human beings must be known to be loved; but Divine beings must be loved to be known. Blaise Pascal

 

[omega2xx]

I take it, then, that extinctions (mostly caused by our activity) are not something you'd consider environmental harm?

Some are, most are not. Clean air and water are things humans can contaminate and they need to be regulated. Bugs need to be turned over to nature. If they survive, fine, if the become extinct, better.

What "rights" do the unborn start, when do they begin, and how do you guarantee them? Consider this -- even without abortion, over two-thirds of all conceptions (where the "unborn" begin) abort naturally -- and thus, pretty apparently, by "God's plan." (That number includes conceptions that have not yet implanted -- after implantation, the number is closer to one-third.)

Unless you have evidence to the contrary, life begins at conception. Life is in the blood(Lev 17:11) and the fetus has blood. 2/3 of all conceptions do not end in a miscarriage. So apparently, God Himself abrogates the very "rights" you claim.[/QUOTE]

It was not God's plans that there be miscarriages or abortions.

A mother dying in childbirth (a pretty common occurrence through much of human history) also infringes those "rights," but once again, it would seem, "God's approved plan" includes it. And of course, even if the parents absolutely loathe each other, fight all the time scaring the children half to death and making their lives miserable, your comment says, "too bad -- the parents must stay together and the kids just have to get bloody used to it."

You need to get your so called facts together. Women dying in child birth has never been common. And God allows divorce.

Great childhood. I've known several like it. Those kids would have been better off if the parents had divorced. But your God prefers their suffering. So be it.

Thanks for exposing your ignorance of the Bible.

I'm not going to say anything about this, because I might end up being as insulting to you as you just were to me and my life-partner of decades by claiming that we are "unnatural" and "an abomination." (Though I admit, there are things I'd like to say to you about that. Perhaps you could just try guessing what those things are. Be creative.)

They are God's words, not mine. I enjoy the insults of non-believers, they say more about the one giving them than the one being insulted. They are rude and show It show a lack of civility, which all intelligent beings should exhibit.

Give me your best shot(s).


Human beings must be known to be loved; but Divine beings must be loved to be known. Blaise Pascal

 

[omega2xx]

And what was pushed down my throat at school was likewise not evidence, but some philosophical speculation, accompanied by artistic impressions, many of which are debunked today, but mainly a heavy dose of overt disdain for any alternative belief. By a 'science' teacher who once asked me to move the projector closer to the screen to make the image bigger!

I don't think people who believe in evolution are stupid at all, it's a very intuitive theory, but one has to dig a little deeper, the devil is definitely in the details here.

I have never said those who believe in evolution are stupid. Many, maybe even most are well educated. He is a good example of my usual complaint---you say many have been debunked, but fail to give even one example.

What I find in most forums, rejecting a philosophy is called disdain. Yet you reject my philosophy, are you disdaining what I believe? This is not a one-way street.


Human beings must be known to be loved; but Divine beings must be loved to be known.
Blaise Pascal

 

[omega2xx]

@omega2xx

Cows:- Do not be silly. Cows are not killed in India and they exist in far less number than in India than in US. Cows are not mice that breed whereever and whenever. Domesticated cows have a slow breeding cycle and any overpopulation can be simply controlled through birth control procedures used normally for cats and dogs. Further-more cow dung is an excellent source of organic and ecofriendly fertilizer for gardens and agriculture than all the artificial chemicals modern society uses to poison the land. It can also be used as an excellent ingredient for bio-derived gas for fuel and energy.
The Use of Cow Manure for Fertilizer
https://cleantechnica.com/2015/02/24/cow-manure-ethanol-plant-switches-californias-san-joaquin-valley/

The problem is you need to convince the rest of the world that killing cows is wrong. When I was in Korea they advised us not to ear food grown locally because it was fertlized with animal mature and that made it unsafe.

We have a true God who manifests as many gods. Your denial of the evils of killing mammals (which is murder according to the true God of Hinduism) and its well established climate and health implication (which is established according to true science) is irrelevant. If you claim for yourself the privilege of establishing the moral beliefs of your religion as law of the land, I claim for myself the same privilege.

All of that depends on if your god is a God and if what it says is better than wha the one true God say.

An the worldviews of liberals, atheists and agnostics make preventing mother's from having abortion immoral. You are trampling on their freedom of conscience by forcing them to do an immoral deed by preventing mother's from choosing to abort.

Again that depends on if my God is right. You are trampling on the rights of the unborn and to believe in slaughtering babies and not cows is a sick religion IMO.

Fetus and cows both are living being. The true God of Hinduism shows no preference, even if your mistaken beliefs do. Either protect all life capable of feeling and suffering (this includes most mammals and birds and for many Hindus all animals) or do not.

If you are going to protect all life, and you just said a fetus was life, to kill it would be murder and you also said killing a cow could be murder, why choose the life of a cow over a human being who might contribute somethng very useful to society. IMO, even if killing a cow is a sin, you still have your priorities backwards.

Meat eating, environment destroying, war-mongering modern nations states do not follow the principle of ahimsa. To suddenly put excessive burden on helpless mothers to idealistic values while everybody else goes on doing violence is not Hinduism. If ahimsa is to be instituted as the guiding principle, all have to share the burden. The true Hindu God shows no preference and has no time for hypocrites.

According to you your god does show a preference. It is better to kill a human being than to kill a cow.

Do you accept that one of your goal is to push the laws and moral strictures of your Christianity as the law of the land no matter what non-Christians think? Do you accept that you believe all true Christians should be doing this as well?

Christians do not have such an agenda. There is not group pushing laws to make Christianity a national religion. WE just believe the laws of the only true God are better than man's laws.


Human beings must be known to be loved; but Divine beings must be loved to be known. Blaise Pascal

 

[sayak83]

@omega2xx
The problem is that you have to convince the rest of US population that abortion is wrong. Only once they are convinced can you create such a law banning abortion.

All of what you say depends on if your God is a true God. I know its not. Its a false God and my God is the true one. You are trampling on the rights of mothers and cows in order to protect undeveloped fetuses that do not yet have a soul. A very sick and deluded religion IMO.

All life is not to be protected. Otherwise trees cannot be eaten as well. All sentient life is to be protected. Fetus is not sentient life, but cows are. Hence cows are to be protected and not an early stage fetus. Your priorities, based on strictures of a false God, are all backwards.

My one true God's priorities are are quite all right. He asks us to protect sentient life first and tells us not to put undue burdens on women and mothers.

Any group or person pushing laws based on Christianity as the law of the land is pushing Christianity as a national religion. If one cannot live his/her life according to what is moral and immoral in accordance to one's worldview, then there is no freedom of conscience.
We too just believe that the one true God, ie. Hindu God's laws are better than laws of other false Gods. If you push your religion's law and try to force it on everyone, so will I.

Pascal- Just another deluded follower of a false God.

 

[omega2xx]

@omega2xx
The problem is that you have to convince the rest of US population that abortion is wrong. Only once they are convinced can you create such a law banning abortion.

All of what you say depends on if your God is a true God. I know its not. Its a false God and my God is the true one. You are trampling on the rights of mothers and cows in order to protect undeveloped fetuses that do not yet have a soul. A very sick and deluded religion IMO.

All life is not to be protected. Otherwise trees cannot be eaten as well. All sentient life is to be protected. Fetus is not sentient life, but cows are. Hence cows are to be protected and not an early stage fetus. Your priorities, based on strictures of a false God, are all backwards.

My one true God's priorities are are quite all right. He asks us to protect sentient life first and tells us not to put undue burdens on women and mothers.

Any group or person pushing laws based on Christianity as the law of the land is pushing Christianity as a national religion. If one cannot live his/her life according to what is moral and immoral in accordance to one's worldview, then there is no freedom of conscience.
We too just believe that the one true God, ie. Hindu God's laws are better than laws of other false Gods. If you push your religion's law and try to force it on everyone, so will I.

Only if your god is a God.

Pascal- Just another deluded follower of a false God.

Only if you can prove your god is a God. He was a lot more intelligent than anyone in this forum.

 

[sayak83]

Only if your god is a God.



Only if you can prove your god is a God. He was a lot more intelligent than anyone in this forum.

And all that you are pushing are good and moral only if your God is the true God. I know its not. So there.

Buddha is more intelligent than Pascal. He warned about false Gods like the one you and Pascal believe.

 

[omega2xx]

And all that you are pushing are good and moral only if your God is the true God. I know its not. So there.

If you know it, the prove i. So there

Buddha is more intelligent than Pascal. He warned about false Gods like the one you and Pascal believe.

Buddha wasn't even a god. All he did was confucius people. Watchman Nee was smarter than he was.


For the time will come when they will not endure sound teaching, but wanting to have their ears tickle, they will accumulate for themselves teachers in accordance with their own desires and will turn away their ears from the truth and will turn aside to myths----God(2 Tim 2:3-4).