Have you ever wonder about the existent of GOD?

Aha!!! You haven't found it YET. STILL you persist with your belief despite the lack of evidence (we haven't found it YET).

You know what summed it up for me that the "scientists" are more twisted than anyone when their beliefs are challenged by anyone with any logic?? I'll tell you anyway: according to science the moon was at some stage fully covered in water. This is despite no one ever finding one drop of water on the moon.

At the same time you have Earth currently covered 70% in water. YET, scientists do not believe that there ever was a worldwide flood such as the one mentioned in the Bible in the time of Noah.

So not a drop of water ever found on the moon YET scientists believe it was fully covered in water at some stage.

The Earth is 70% covered in water YET scientists don't think it was ever fully covered in water.

This is why as a logic loving individual I cannot accept "scientific" proof.

 

If your angry brilliance is the alternative, then I prefer it

 

So go on and ignore the body of my post. I'm done arguing with the brick wall. Just, beware, one day many walls come a crumbling down with the realization of "Like wow, there were humans all the way back to 3-5 million years ago".

We have yet to find a skeleton I said. A full skeleton. We have jaws, skulls, crushed fragments, but no full skeleton. For all we know it is found.

Also, have some nice nightmares my little blind ones... http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/05/17/AR2006051702158.html

 

The title of the link/article is: "Human Ancestors May Have Interbred With Chimpanzees"

So where is the solid proof again??? Because unlike the Bible, the evolutionist books keep changing every day. Maybe I should buy shares in a printing company that prints "scientific/evolutionist" books.

 

Read it. Oh wait, you don't read.

 

I'm not trying to revisit Lenny Bruce but if what we'll [expletive deleted] determines when we began then it must have been sometime around the seventies, nigh forty years ago, when the Cubans occupied the Congo.

Thanks for the aids, C.

 

Ok, more quotes from the "scientific" article you wanted me to read:

When the ancestors of human beings and the ancestors of chimpanzees parted ways 6.3 million years ago, it was probably a very long goodbye. Some of their descendants may even have gone back for a final tryst.


According to the new theory, chimps and humans shared a common apelike ancestor much more recently than was thought. Furthermore, when the two emerging species split from each other, it was not a clean break. Some members of the two groups seem to have interbred about 1.2 million years after they first diverged -- before going their separate ways for good.

If this theory proves correct, it will mean modern people are descended from something akin to chimp-human hybrids. That is a new idea, and it challenges the prevailing view that hybrids tend to die out.

It also strongly suggests that some of the oldest bones of "proto-humans" -- including the 7 million-year-old Toumai skull unearthed in Chad in 2001 -- may have belonged to a line of non-hybrids that died out, and were not human ancestors at all.

This narrative, by a team of geneticists and biostatisticians from the Broad Institute of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Harvard, not only casts new light on the origin of humans, but also raises questions about how all new species arise

I'll just stop here but I hope you may get the point. And hopefully you may see the new light or perhaps I should read some other articles that refute or come up with new claims based on new studies that may prove, or may disprove beliefs previously held.

Sorry dude, but there are too many theories for me.

 

Go ahead...mock my beliefs and embrace your own.

 

What difference would it make protiendude. You have been given rock solid evidence of other things and you still chose to be ignorant. So don't start talking like if the article gave you evidence that you would accept it. You only have one goal; To drag humanity and every person you come in contact with down to your own level of ignorance.

I take it you still don't accept the rock solid evidence that we shared a common ancestor with the other great apes?

 

You're all pathetic for getting info from a bible, internet source, etc. No proof = no god.

 

Yes there is plenty of evidence, but evidence has a significantly different meaning than proof. How can evidence be "rock solid"? By it's very nature evidence is only a hint or a clue. And all this evidence can be interpreted to mean different things depending upon which book, TV show, or website you see.

And for anyone to state with such confidence that something is not true simply because it has not been proven is not logical. This goes for the question about the existence of God or the various theories of evolution.

Even College prefessors and scientist recognize that evolutionary concepts are theory and hence not facts. If any particular theory could be proven then it would no longer be a theory but instead a scientific law.

To anyone that reads this you have your own decision to make about what to believe and what not to. If anyone could prove that God does not exist then I would be sure to believe he does not. Until then I will continue to believe in God. I have had it personally proven to me during my life. I suppose that is what it would take for anyone.

As for you - believe whatever you feel to, but don't tell me I am wrong for my belief because it cannot be proven when you believe in other things that cannot be proven.

 

This thread makes me wanna murder a god.

 

"I've found Him, I have Jesus in the trunk" - George Carlin always cracked me up...

 

haha... What a weak attempt to get someone benned. I believe the topic was:

\\I do, and you replied that He made me less intelligent. You come off all brash and confrontational but you're really just afraid.

 

Oh shut up. Nobody wants to hear your whining about how you're right all the time. I hope that a god strikes you down with lightning for even creating a pathetic person, like you on this planet.

 

Firstly kentuckyslone, Go guy a dictionary, Or at least bookmark an online one. Evidence is something used as part of a proof, It's something that supports an assertion. The assertion is that humans share an ancestor with the great apes, The evidence of the assertion is chimp chromosome number 2.

Secondly, Evolution isn't a theory as you understand a theory. it's a scientific theory. Read up on scientific theories.

Your theories are speculation, Sciences theories are testable models that explain a set of phenomena.

Thirdly, I don't know if you believe in creation, Though if you are a christian you should. The video proved beyond all doubt what science has been saying for a long time and which creation disputes. it proves that we evolved from lower primates and share a common ancestor with the other great apes (chimps, gorillas and orangutans). it proves that the biblical account of creation is nothing more than a fairy story. It proves it beyond all doubt.

 

I know full well that evidence is what is used to arrive at proof. I'm not stupid. Just because evidence is used to get to proof does not mean that all evidence (or any evidence whatsoever) constitutes proof.

I know exactly what a scientific theory is - I still say that if something is proven beyond all doubt then it is NOT a theory.

I studied zoology, evolution and advanced biology in college. There are many different theories that deal with evolution and each one has 'evidence' to 'prove' that the other theories are incorrect.

Yes, I do believe that evolution occurs in living things. The fact that animals and plants adapt and change is well proven. The idea that we evolved from single celled critters and just what steps took place from there to here has not been proven.

 

Maybe not, But it certainly does in this case. Watch the video.

Yes it is. case in point; The theory of gravity. You aren't going to say it's possible that gravity doesn't exist are you? Read the wikipedia article on theories, Again. this time read it with the understanding that reality doesn't care what you "say". This "theory" was solely responsible for the prediction of the existence, and position of Neptune. The "theory" was so mathematically accurate that it could be used to find a celestial body that we couldn't see simply by looking at it's gravitational effect on other planets. How did it do this? it done it because a scientific theory is NOT speculation. it's a mathematical model.

They all agree on the fundamental point of evolution. That is that mutations and natural selection change species. If enough changes take place a new species is formed.

All you have to do is apply the rule of "mutations and natural selection" to a single cell life form and it becomes apparent that given enough time and enough varied environments this single celled life would have mutated and adapted to become the plethora of species we see in the world today.

 

Nor did I say that evolution does not exist - in fact I said the opposite.

I already said that I believed evolution occurs and accept the process as a fact so why do you continue to argue that point?

Quite a big leap of faith there in my opinion. But it brings us right back to the beginning - some people put others down for believing in something that cannot be be proven while they themself believe in things that cannot be proven.

Why do some people find it so important to try to argue that there is no God? If you do not believe then that is fine, but why try to push your beliefs on others?

A forum member starts a thread asking if people have ever questioned the existence of God, but when people reply with their thoughts on the matter they are attacked. Why is that?

 

So your point that not all evidence constitutes proof is meaningless then. you only said it in an attempt to argue semantics. Because i never said all evidence is proof, But i did say the evidence i was talking about was proof.

The trouble with you is that you seem to have a need to be right about something, No matter what it is. Even if someone says something you agree with you are compelled to say they are wrong to some degree. If you were just a little less pedantic you might learn something.

because you were trying to derail the thread by talking about different theories that deal with evolution that contradict each other. If you accept that evolution takes place then don't try to prove it's nonsense by claiming not all evolutionists agree, When the reality is, On the fundamentals, They all agree completely. Again, You are being pedantic.

How is it a leap of faith? I don't see how you can agree that mutations and adaptation takes place in animals and plants today but deny that it happened to the first ever single cell life form. That doesn't make any sense. And if you do concede that mutation and adaptation occurred in single cell life what reason do you have to believe it didn't go on to create all the different species?

because i am right and they are wrong, And they need to know it. Every time someone claims science is lying and that their fairy story is the truth i owe it to science, rational thought and education to challenge these liars who are intent on dragging me, society and our children's education back to the bronze age.

I don't know, I guess the religious just don't like people disagreeing with them.
Oh wait, You were talking about the religious attacking nonbelievers right? probably not, it's always their "beliefs" that deserve the "respect", right?