If your a MAN, YOUR A MONKEY... if your a woman, YOUR A FEMALE MONKEY

I'm tired of hearing religions unacceptance of science. It is a constant battle and most directly against evolution.

Let me fix some issues here.

Catholics, Mormons, Baptists, Muslims, and all religions that have any outspeak seem to be anti-evolution. I pose the concept (and STRONGLY believe) this is due entirely to its confliction with the idea that god (whichever it may be) created the earth and all the animals and people. Not on the merits of its scientific fact.

Evolution is scientifically sound
Evolution has followed the same scientific method that the rest of the teaches it brings have, in fact it has been examined under Exponentially greater scrutiny because of its confliction with creationism.

It's not some "Theory"
stop telling yourself that its just "a theory" as if its something one guy just thought could explain things and thus you can excuse from thought because its just some idea. In science a theory is something that has been tested over ridiculously, if there were to be scientific inconsistencies the hypothesis would be dropped.


You have issues because your not a monkey
Your right, your not a monkey. Your not some monkey that evolved to the point you are today. We were likely a species that became geographically isolated from eachother and evolved to the two points we are today as differen.... Thus THERE IS NO THING AS A MISSING LINK...

we did not evolve from apes, we evolved alongside apes. There is no dumb missing link to be found..


THERE IS PROOF
its called cavemen

-or do you think they were cleanly shaven just like us?-



I hope this clears some things up for you. You cant keep going on thinking that you can dismiss evolution because it challenges your beliefs. I am not challenging your beliefs now even though I oppose your ideology. I am simply telling you that opposition to your belief does not mean something is wrong.

Evolution is REAL

 

"Science now knows that many of the pillars of Darwinian theory are either false or misleading. Yet biology texts continue to present them as factual evidence of evolution. What does this imply about their scientific standards?" — Jonathan Wells (Recipient of two Ph.D.s, one in Molecular and Cell Biology from the University of California at Berkeley, and one in Religious Studies from Yale University. Has worked as a postdoctoral research biologist at the University of California at Berkeley and the supervisor of a medical laboratory in Fairfield, California. Has taught biology at California State University in Hayward.)

Sir Fred Hoyle, of Cambridge University stated that statistically the chances of one cell evolving was the same as a tornado passing through a junkyard and giving you a fully functional Boeing 747.

Professor Edwin Conklin observed, "The probability of life originating from accident is comparable to the probability of the Unabridged Dictionary resulting from an explosion in a printing shop."

According to the theory of evolution, at some time in the distant past there was no life in the universe -- just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals combined and came to life. However, scientists don't really know how life came to be. Even Stanley Miller, whose experiments are cited in most biology text books, says that the origin of life is still unknown. The idea that dead material can come to life all by itself is not consistent with scientific observation.

"The number of intermediate varieties which have formerly existed on earth must be truly enormous. Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and gravest objection which can be urged against my theory." - Charles Darwin 1902 edition.

“…I am quite conscious that my speculations run beyond the bounds of true science….It is a mere rag of an hypothesis with as many flaw & holes as sound parts.” Charles Darwin to Asa Gray, cited by Adrian Desmond and James Moore, Darwin, (New York: W.W. Norton and Company, 1991) pp. 456, 475.

“Nowhere was Darwin able to point to one bona fide case of natural selection having actually generated evolutionary change in nature….Ultimately, the Darwinian theory of evolution is no more nor less than the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.” Michael Denton, Evolution: A Theory in Crises (Bethesda, Maryland: Adler & Adler, 1986) pp. 62, 358.

“Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever. In explaining evolution, we do not have one iota of fact.” Dr. T. N. Tahmisian Evolution and the Emperor's New Clothes by N.J. Mitchell (United Kingdom: Roydon Publications, 1983), title page.

"If complex organisms ever did evolve from simpler ones, the process took place contrary to the laws of nature, and must have involved what may rightly be termed the miraculous." R.E.D. Clark, Victoria Institute (1943),

"What is at stake is not the validity of the Darwinian theory itself, but of the approach to science that it has come to represent. The peculiar form of consensus the theory wields has produced a premature closure of inquiry in several branches of biology, and even if this is to be expected in `normal science,' such a dogmatic approach does not appear healthy." R. Brady, "Dogma and Doubt," Biological Journal of the Linnean Society

Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research stated: “Evolution is a fairy tail for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless.”

“Scientists concede that their most cherished theories are based on embarrassingly few fossil fragments and that huge gaps exist in the fossil record.” (Time, November 7, 1977).

“There are not enough fossil records to answer when, where, and how Homo sapiens emerged.” (Takahata, molecular anthropology, annual review of ecology & systamatics 1995, p 355).

“All those trees of life with their branches of our ancestors, that’s a lot of nonsense.” (Mary Leakey, Associated Press, December 10, 1996).

“The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils.” (Stephen Jay Gould, Harvard University. “Evolution’s Erratic Pace”, Natural History Vol. 5, May 1977).

“The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages has been a persistent and nagging problem for evolution.” (Dr. Stephen J. Gould, Evolution Now, p. 140, Professor at Harvard University in Boston).

“In the years after Darwin, his advocates hoped to find predictable progressions. In general, these have not been found – yet the optimism has died hard, and some pure fantasy has crept into the textbooks.” (David M. Raup, “Evolution and the Fossil Record”, Science, Vol. 213, July 17, 1981, p. 289).

Luther Sunderland asked evolutionists what evidence they had for their theory. The British Museum of Natural History has the largest fossil collection in the world. When the senior paleontologist (Colin Paterson) was asked why he did not show the missing links in his book he said: “I fully agree with your comments on the lack of evolutionary transitions in my book. If I knew of any, fossil or living, I would certainly have included them. I will lay it on the line – there is not one such fossil.” (Dr. Colin Paterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History in correspondence to Luther Sunderland quoted in Darwin’s Enigma 1988, p. 89).

“The universe and the laws of physics seem to have been specifically designed for us. If any one of about 40 physical qualities had more than slightly different values, life as we know it could not exist: Either atoms would not be stable, or the wouldn’t combine into molecules, or the stars wouldn’t form the heavier elements, or the universe would collapse before life could develop, and so on…” (Stephen Hawking, Austin American Statesman, October 19, 1997).

“The likelihood of the formation of life from inanimate matter is one out of 10 to the power of 40,000…It is big enough to bury Darwin and the whole theory of evolution. There was no primeval soup, neither on this planet nor on any other, and if the beginnings of life were not random, they must therefore have been the product of purposeful intelligence.” (Sir Fredrick Hoyle, professor of astronomy, Cambridge University).

“I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything; and to my astonishment the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion out of them!” (Charles Darwin on this Theory of Evolution).

Even the guy who gave this "THEORY" had more brains than you.......

 

Christianism fought against many major scientific discoveries throughout history and this is just another case of being on the wrong side of progress. Funny how it never happened that they were actually right about anything.

Seven Evolutionary Leftovers in the Human Body

 

Good post arkueckelhan, i agree with most of what you say, however, i feel i should point out a rather large flaw in you logic.

You have committed what religion may refer to as a sin, you used the P word, i can't say it as i may be branded an evil sinner, but its starts with P and ends in F and has ROO in the middle. This word has no basis in religion as the whole concept of religion require there to be no actual P***F of anything, think about it.

Just look at the Christian religion, its all based on the interpretation of the bible, if a non Christian applies logic and challenges the bible in anyway, he is simply told its a mis-interpretation of the scripture. Its a self propelling vicious circle, that poor christians are stuck in. They cannot Prove anything in their religion is for real, therefore they must rely on faith, and ofc faith is based on nothing resembling fact or reality, this makes even the wildest of claims perfectly acceptable so long as you "have faith"

If you find this sort of topic interesting, you might want to visit http://forum.vladd44.com/

 

Oh No Someone throw some holy water at him!! he said Proof!!! arghhg

regrds,

B.

I Totally agree with evolution im not religious at all.

 

I have just find out a website Science Against Evolution.org

 

OMG, this is actual proof evolution does not exist, that site has not evolved since it was put up back in 1998.


Anyways, here's some fun for all you monkies: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zJM4EBuL82o

 

i didnt say it is the proof , but it maybe source for whom are intersted( dont claim that the source is right or not )

 

such a long and good post.
but pity that only a few atheist will read and think about it. they will only read the sciences that fit with their goals.

 

Oh the hypocrisy... all you guys are doing is nitpicking and yet provide nothing in return. The christian right is the group with the biggest agenda on the planet yet they accuse everyone of having one. The intellectual dishonesty is so obvious, I don't know whether you guys are evil or just plain thick.

 

Agreed. The christian movement is potentially the most dangerous group known to man.

 

American Taliban.

--Ann Coulter

Ahh the irony.

 

Beautiful quotes Rub3x...

"Everyone who isnt christian should die"
...
....
"Christians are the nicest people in the world"

LOL

Sorry about not getting back on here. had trouble logging on.
But I do have more to say:
Aam_aam: I love how you quote a guy with two phds "one in Religious Studies"... thats a VERY unbiased person. And btw, any dumby can get a phd, all you have to do is sit through school for a while, it doesnt make you an expert on the truth.

Thanks for the support all my intelligent friends that understand that a few quotes don't act as proof (either way) in themselves.

 

ha ha ha... do you have phd?

now i believe there are two origins of man,
-a group of monkey which magically turn into man or woman
-children of adam and eve.

now i know where you came from.

EDIT:
and stop blaming christian for something that i wrote, because i'm not a christian.

 

what are you?

 

The dark ages called, they want their ignorance back.

 

Yu were looking at the vistors' counter.

 

you called people that do not believe if a monkey can turn into a man ignorance?
now who is the ignorance?

 

A monkey cannot turn into a man, read up on evolution before making such comments.

 

I just followed the subject of the first post in this thread.