NON-BIBLICAL Evidence for the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ

Incredible how bad behavior of a small group of people can so badly damage the reputation of an entire community. That said, I don't suspect you are going to try and defy gravity, or any other field of science we know quite a bit about, just because a few climate scientists tried to exaggerate their findings, are you? As I pointed out, this particular field of science (Evolution) already has practical implications to our day to day life, not to mention an ever growing fossil record that continues to flesh out our understanding of what happened and when.

Skepticism is healthy, even a requirement of the scientific process. Even things that are "settled science" are always open to scrutiny and refinement based on new findings, such as the Theory of Relativity. We recently may have observed particles moving faster than the speed of light, and if that proves to be true, we will have to reconsider and refine what we know about it. In the mean time, we have enough facts in hand to know for a certainty that evolution has happened and continues to happen.

Answer my questions, and I'll answer yours.

 

Is that not true for nearly all groups? A few ruin it for the many?

That was just one recent example I came up with. Piltdown man... a hoax. There are plenty of intentional falsifications of evidence in science. But here is something that is ironic : Einstein refutes Newton, but now, with the link you mentioned, even Einstein could be wrong... ayai yai... Imagine being a person who has lived for around 1800 years, following science faithfully... you would not know what to believe. Obamanation, this is science we are talking about. They use to be proud that they were on a "fact finding" mission.. to discover the TRUTH. Now it is a sideshow.


They hand out peace prizes to people who perpetuate war. ??

No, some things are just downright obvious. But did you see the video about "How long is a piece of string?".
What a crock from the land of "science", eh? Science is flawed in that it is limited to the human senses. They
can say all they want about nanotech, quantum this and that. This type of science only has credibility with people who just
have to accept what they say on blind faith, because the every day person is dumbed down to the point to where
they say, "Oh, thats nice.", and they could care less. As I said, the climategate thing was just the first thing I
thought of. There is more.

I have seen some of this fossil record. Trees, about a foot in diameter, meaning they were around 20 or so years old,
vertically spanning "billions" of years of strata. What? The Sun is shrinking at a set rate, and has been
since man has been measuring it. If you go back "billions" of years ( that evolution requires to work ) at the same rate,
the Sun would have been touching the Earth. The Earth would not have existed. Evolution is settled for those
who either refuse to look at all the evidence or want to remain ignorant of all the facts. Evolution is unscientific,
but so is Creationism. One of the first steps in the scientific method is to "gather data". No one was alive back
then so they can not do that, but they can "gather data" today and make a hypothesis. They then begin to analyze
the data based on their world view. This is NOT science, either from an evolutionist or creationist. Both are
working out of the realm of FAITH.

 

Had you appeared in the 16th century with a flashlight, they would have killed you for witchcraft, for lack of better information. Come to think of it, nobody was all that thrilled to find out the earth was not the center of the universe, but center it was not. Failure of any person, even an expert, to understand how quantum mechanics, nanotech, or climate science, does not make it junk science. At this point, denying evolution is not too far off from denying electricity.

I tend to cap on climate change a lot because some liberal asshat decided he was going to make an international business out of it at the expense of jobs in the first world. That doesn't mean climate change isn't happening, or even that mankind isn't impacting it, perhaps even as much as those idiots claim we are. I'm simply more pragmatic. I'm not going to stop breathing to do my part to keep CO2 out of the air. There has to be a better way.

Skepticism is healthy. Abject denial is not. When you say science's fatal flaw is that it is limited to what we can measure (sense, in your words), I certainly hope your proposed alternative is not to close your eyes and believe in only what you feel. That would be simply ridiculous.

 

They lie because most of them are atheists and have an agenda to get rid of religion; you can't trust an atheist scientist to tell the truth especially when it comes to the creation of the universe.

Do you (as an immortal soul) believe that you evolved from an animal (chimpanzee) about 5 million years ago as scientists say? And if yes, who made this 500 million years old hammer: LINK ?

 

Thanks for your reasonable answers.

The difference in electricity is that it has gotten past the realm of theory into proven, demonstrable, repeatable evidence. That is science. True science. Believing in things as facts before they are proven is in the realm of faith, which is religion.

Climate change is happening. The ones you called "idiots" are trying to pin the cause of the change on human action. No evidence for that. In fact it can be more firmly connected to the sun's actions, not ours. The cycles in world temperature are clear... believe it or not we may be headed for cooler weather, worldwide. Methane is the more dangerous greenhouse gas, rather than C02. At the moment there are some powerful sunspots being pointed at us from our sun. It may do some destructive stuff, as it does every 100 or so years.

Since modern science does not know if a few degrees upward in temperatures worldwide would be a good or a bad thing, it can not be discerned yet. Some say the extra heat and C02 will cause the trees to be more healthy, bringing forth more oxygen for the world, a good thing. But there are the others with famine, superstorms and the like. No evidence, no facts...either side. One famous guy stole a section of computer graphics to present ice falling from glaciers... in the name of "human-caused global warming". Ugh.

I like to call it balanced. Machines can augment our ability to discern what is around us, but very few have access to those machines. No, I do not close my eyes. I study as time allows, listening to those whose character is hopefully worthy of their work.

 

My question had two parts:

1. What would be the motive for lying
Your answer: Because they are mostly atheists

Mostly? Many of our greatest scientists throughout history have been Christians. Many still are. What would be the motive for a Christian to lie about scientific findings? There is something called The Scientific Method which allow the results to be confirmed by any Christian, Muslim, or Jew, in the same way one can confirm that 2-1=1 based on knowing that 1+1=2.

Try again.


2. How would you explain the practical use of evolutionary science in our day to day lives, if evolution is a lie
Your answer:




Still waiting.



In answer to your question, no neither myself nor any other human evolved from Chimpanzees.

 

So was Newton selling religion because Einstein augmented and modified what we know about Newtons laws by studying Newton's research? Is Monsanto practicing religion because we don't have a complete fossil history for man?

Regarding climate change, here are a few facts that we know.

• Greenhouse gases exist and have the warming effect scientists say they do.
• CO2 is a greenhouse gas
• Humans produce CO2 in many many ways
• Glacier ice is retreating (and no, just because Al Gore stole an unrelated photo does not make this less factual)
• Atmospheric levels of greenhouse gasses are rising

I've not seen any research on coincidence of solar activity, but if it exists, it should obviously be considered.

Fair enough. Very few people have access to CERN, yet I am going to tend to lend credence of the scientific findings it produces. Evolution shouldn't take any machines at all. Just look at the regular practice of selective breeding and genetic engineering in our lives today, and the undeniably sound science behind evolution should be obvious.

 

I don't understand what this has to do with human evolution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution

Do you believe this?

 

then you don't believe in evolution

 

You'll find this link more informative, and more directly tied to my question, which you have yet to answer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Also still waiting on an to the first question, regarding why a Scientist who is a Christian would perpetuate a lie.

[Edit] More reading you might find informative.

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/01/080130170343.htm

 

Newton's were settled, that is, things like "every action produces an equal and opposite reaction" could be demonstrated, repeated... ( I sound like a broken record ) and tested over and over again. Until... Einstein came along and said gravity can change, light bends, and so forth. There is a set of titanium weights in Europe, set up as a worldwide standard of weight to be measured against, and scientists (?) found that some are changing their weight. Sorry, no link for that. I am still stumped as to why, but I can not figure everything out.


What does Monsanto have to do with the fossil record?

• arctic ice is growing, antarctic as well
• Methane is a more potent greenhouse gas than C02
• Humans and animals produce methane, but it is not proven they are causing global warming and some now say that the Earth is now cooling.
• ICE is expanding in much of Antarctica LINK

It is "new science" so the scientific world is just getting their "feet wet" in this area.


You will want to listen to this guy

[video=youtube;kLIFxXlj2g8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kLIFxXlj2g8[/video]​

I look at it. Dogs become dogs, lions remain lions, so on and so forth. What "sound science" ? But we are drifting OT with this, right? The scientists that are mixing DNA with animals are debasing humanity, in my opinion. Thanks for the debate, back to work.

 

No difference.

which means the animals of today (monkeys, apes, donkeys...) share the same ancestors as us.
Religion says: God created man (immortal soul) AND animals; we don't share the same ancestors.

a single, common HUMAN ancestor

 

Monsanto is in the business of Genetically engineering food products, demonstrating in a very real way how mutation is a fact. Of course one could look at some six toed kid in Alabama whose dad is also his grand daddy to know Mutation is a fact, but Monsanto nicely demonstrates how a mutation can be used to generate an organism that might survive where its weaker species might die off, with their drought resistant strains of food. There is fear among many that this mutant food might actually take over the food our grand parents ate, with unknown side effects on the other forms of life that eat it.

Mutation, survival of the strongest, these are all the building blocks of Evolution that are demonstrable in a very scientific, repeatable, and provable way.

Regardless of what you might say about the dating process of the fossil record, it undeniably proves that man like creatures walked the earth and no longer do. It undeniably proves the existence and extinction of various species of creatures. I'm not intimately familiar with the dating process, but it too is based on a variety of sound, repeatable, sciences.

Arctic ice is shrinking, unless you have some data to provide to back this claim

Beatings are less deadly than shootings.

Note that I am not making the claim that man is the sole, a principal, or even a major contributor to global warming. I think the lack of those particular studies are why anthropological global warming is still far from settled science. I believe there is a general consensus in the scientific community that the earth is warming, though, I am well aware there are still skeptics, and I think that is healthy.

I like that guy. Not sure what solar flares, earth meteor strikes, or any other type of naturally occurring phenomenon have to do with trending data that covers a century.

Mutation happens, both naturally and unnaturally. Its a fact. Sometimes mutations are small, sometimes they are large. A series of small mutations, has the same effect of a single large one. With billions of years of with the fittest continuing to survive and thrive in the competition for life against their own species, other species, solar flares, climate change, and meteor strikes, evolution is guaranteed.


@Angelic: You seem to be very focused on common ancestors. Not sure what your point is there, but let me assure you that genetically modified corn has the same common ancestor that non GM corn has. Let me know when you want to answer the questions.

 

because that's what evolution is all about: A UNIVERSAL COMMON ANCESTOR, which is a blasphemy against God and the holy books including your Quran.

 

Ah, I get it. You aren't disputing the scientific nature or truth of a common ancestor, you are just concerned that someone might call you a blasphemer for saying it.

If that is the concern, lets get right to the brass tacks. Do you think the universe was created in seven 24 hour days?

 

I believe we evolved from an animal, not a chimpanzee though, we just share a common ancestor with them. Saying we evolved from a chimpanzee is like saying a brother evolved from his sister. And what's more, i believe we ARE an animal. We are in the class of mammals and a member of the primate order. Some of us demonstrate that more than others, though i'm yet to see any of the lower great apes humiliate themselves as spectacularly as you routinely do, even when they are flinging their shit around.

Humans, as we know them, have only existed for between 150,000 and 250,000 years. Before that there were a wide range of bipedal hominids sharing common ancestors, of which we are the only remaining species.

Simple. It's not a 500 million year old hammer, it's just a rock made of 500 million year old minerals, with a modern hammer in it. J.R. Cole explains that "The stone concretion is real, and it looks impressive to someone unfamiliar with geological processes. How could a modern artifact be stuck in Ordovician rock? The answer is that the concretion itself is not Ordovician. Minerals in solution can harden around an intrusive object dropped in a crack or simply left on the ground if the source rock (in this case, reportedly Ordovician) is chemically soluble."

If it's blasphemy then that's unfortunate, for you. Your gods precious feelings don't determine if something is true of not and you don't get to deny reality because of it. Your god will just have to either man up and have a little cry about it.

 

The problem isn't that he doesn't believe it, it's that you don't understand it. At no point does evolution claim we evolved FROM chimps. It says we share a relatively close ancestor with them. Just like a brother and sister are related, but one didn't come FROM the other.

Maybe you should make sure you at least have a partial understanding of the thing youre attempting to refute, because to be honest with you, we know our shit when it comes to evolution and you dont stand a chance.

 

That is something done in a test tube and is not an honest example. Did you know they want to patent those seeds, (if they are still called seeds)? Did you know there were many farmers who committed suicide in India over Monsanto's practices?

ONation, Human DNA is deteriorating, not getting better. On the genetic level, man is not getting better.

Have you ever seen the picture of the human footprint inside the footprint of the dinosaur? It came from Texas. (Where's Rob? )

I will confess, I think I was wrong. Here is why :

No date on this one :

​

Duly noted

Solar flares are being credited with the up and down cycles in the temperature of the Earth. LINK

Hardly, see above. Humans are deteriorating (genetic entropy). Plus, remember the sun shrinkage? The sun would have burnt up the Earth if this Earth was billions of years old. Lastly, look up John Sanford. He use to believe like you. He is an expert on DNA at Cornell University. LINK

 

[video=youtube;svKiusYOsNw]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=svKiusYOsNw[/video]

 

Who the fuck is John Sanford? besides being yet another dishonest christian. You don't have to lie for jesus, but it helps.

Can you explain exactly what they video does to evolution? Because all i heard was his vapid assurances that he can falsify evolution, without actually saying how. If you want i can give you a massive list of things that could falsify evolution, and you can get to work trying to find them. But as it stands, every new piece of evidence and experiment that has the potential to falsify evolution ends up supporting it fully. Strange that, isn't it. that something which is supposedly false is time and time again found in the evidence in exactly the way we would expect should it be a fact. It has been used in everything from vaccinating your children to proving them food. Yet it's untrue, right?

In genetics, in vestigial limbs and organs, in the fossil record and in the lab. Time and time again, it has been shown that through selection, natural or artificial, the genetic atributes of a species can be altered and, given enough generations, speciation will occur.

By the way, for evolution to not happen one or more of the following statements has to be false. So which one is it. And, if they're all true, how can evolution not happen?
1. Offspring genomes contain mutations. That's to say, their genome contains DNA sequences not found in their parents.
2. Some mutations are beneficial. Thicker coat in cold climates, larger pupils in dark environments, a beak shaped in a way to make abundant food accesible.
3. Organisms better suited to their environment will, on average, live longer and have more offspring.
4. Genetics are hereditary.
5. A sufficient number of small changes will invariably result in a large change. i.e enough paces of 2 foot will result in a walked distance of ten miles

I'm going to continue to press for an answer to the above, so you may as well have a go at answering it, if only to save yourself the humiliation of exposing yourself as an intelectual coward in the future. For future reference, whenever i put something in bold it means you're required to answer it. I know how much you christians like to chicken out. For people who supposedly have go on their side you certainly lack courage.