100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
|
|
|
The creationist experts were at the hearings, they had been briefed about the chromose #2 months ahead, and yet, deliberately chose to present no counter argument.
Its because they dont have a counter argument. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Eljay wrote: "I know that science is not about the why, but science also tells us that we SHARE LOTS of things with other animals. Similarities are - two eyes, two arms, two legs, ears, a nose, a heart, lungs... the list goes on. I would be suprised to see that we don't have NUMEROUS similarities with everything that walks on the planet - including those that don't (those that crawl - plant's - single celled whatever's) Yet - it would seem that just a single difference is enough to indicate that every "like kind" is unique unto itself through the generations, and nothing is definitive in the reverse extrapolation into the past - unless it can be demonstrated by repeating it - something that the science of Evolution (and I use that term science loosley) has YET to demonstrate, and likely never will." Now..why can't we ALL use our noodle now.... and THINK ALSO...like Eljay? 
I mean.....God DID give us ALL INTELLIGENCE...YES? MS with all due respect to Eljay's intelligence, I’m sure he is a smart man. However I responded to the section that you quoted. You can’t just be so silly as to look at an animal and say gee, they have two eyes just like humans do, and a heart just like a human. That is because they are MAMMALS and give live birth just as we do. Don’t you understand this? I have not watched this video so I cant speak directly to it but there is no other animal that human shares this degree of similarity with on a genetic level. We are indeed bi-pedal primates. I showed a photo of a rat to prove this point. A rat's front paws are nearly identical to human phalanges in shape and structure. Rats adapted in this manner to be able to access their food which requires a great deal of diligence and coordination.Anyone who has ever owned a pet rat has seen this in action. Yet they do not share a direct genetic link with humans other than being mammals. A structural similarity or a specific adaptation is not the same thing nor can it be treated in the same manner. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Mon 02/09/09 06:08 PM
|
|
It really doesn’t hurt anything and each individual person can believe what they want of course. The issue and the problem really comes into play when evangelicals decide that they want to take the Theory of Evolution out of the public school system and science curriculum funded by state tax dollars. That’s where they are subjecting innocent children in school to their beliefs which have no scientific basis in reality. The theory of evolution is taught as theory.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Whats the deal ??
|
|
Ok, Seriously whats the deal? I really want to know why women are so damn stuck up on themselves. Your profile says your looking for new friends, a relationship, people to hang out with and on and on.... But you dont reply when someone writes? WTF!! Do you have to be phisically attracted to all of your friends and the people you talk to? Comments???? I'm trying to figure out why you are lumping all women into ONE.. You surely could not have written EVERY single woman on this site let alone in the world to have the justification to lump us all together... 
 I agree
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Do you think that POORLY of God? That he would look like a chimp? Why do you think that poorly of chimps? Is that why you are so afraid of the theory of evolution?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well what if god looks like a chimp? Maybe he used chimp to start with and decided to move onto something else. Or maybe he made the chimp but it continued to evolve. Thats no less crazy than the genesis story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Whats the deal ??
|
|
Ok, Seriously whats the deal? I really want to know why women are so damn stuck up on themselves. Your profile says your looking for new friends, a relationship, people to hang out with and on and on.... But you dont reply when someone writes? WTF!! Do you have to be phisically attracted to all of your friends and the people you talk to? Comments???? First, you shouldn't assume all women like that. Second.. what kind of emails are you sending? Perhaps you should try a different approach? Exactly. Grand, sweeping generalizations are NOT going to score you points on this forum. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Dating Virgin
|
|
Have you had sex?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Beautiful Jazz Sax.
|
|
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4TbrgIdm0E
Miles and Coltrane. Good stuff by the OP also. I was hoping someone would start a Jazz thread in here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Classical Music
|
|
Yeah I like it. Sergei Rachmaninoff is one of my favorites. He was a Russian pianist that emigrated to the states. Funeral March Sonata is one of his more famous ones. You would know it if you heard it. They play it in cartoons a lot when someone dies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
ok how do I rewire my brain
|
|
I am trying really I am...I hate this about myself..how can anyone find me worthy if I myself feel so inadequate.. Why do you feel inadequate? You look very attractive in your photo. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Whats the deal ??
|
|
Ok, Seriously whats the deal? I really want to know why women are so damn stuck up on themselves. Your profile says your looking for new friends, a relationship, people to hang out with and on and on.... But you dont reply when someone writes? WTF!! Do you have to be phisically attracted to all of your friends and the people you talk to? Comments???? Because sometimes women and probably men also get a lot of responses. This happens when you are active on the forums. People are looking for different things and there is no one size fits all. Just be patient and eventually a woman will respond or she will contact you first. Some women (myself included) prefer to initiate the contact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Mon 02/09/09 04:32 PM
|
|
I apologize. I cant even remember who brought up this contradiction but they did and then feral and Eljay jumped in. Someone needs to just start a separate biblical contradiction thread. I agree it has no place and this one in particular is stupid. All that happened was either whoever wrote this was drunk at the wheel or someone inserted a contradictory verse later because they didnt read John 3.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Mon 02/09/09 04:27 PM
|
|
He will NOT allow his creation called Man to go suddenly awry...and also produce chimps.
 That is by far the oddest statement ever uttered on this forum. Someone has been partaking of the holly wine I think. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 I have this feeling that this thread is not going to be a free exchange of ideas.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Mon 02/09/09 03:57 PM
|
|
Morning Song you are a bi-pedal primate. That means you are classified in the same family as chimp and gorilla. They can walk on their back legs but not for extended periods. Haven't you ever seen chimps do that? The great apes are the members of the biological family Hominidae which includes humans, chimpanzees, gorillas, and orangutans.
This is an artist rendition of "Lucy". She is the remnant Australopithecus. This is the "In between link." This is what would evolve into us about 3 million years ago. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
wait people still believe that god created the universe that is funny as hell i perfer science but im not close minded You are too young to be smoking!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Whats exevuting ? Ive never heard that word. Jesus used water to baptize in many circumstances. That is my understanding. Can you explain why it says that he did baptize and then it says that he did not? Here are the versus in question. John 3:22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. John 4:2 Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples. It is this one that is understood to be a later addition, thus creating the contradiction in the bible today. In verse 3 it says Jesus and his disciples... baptised. Later it says, Jesus himself deas not the one baptizing - but the disciples. What's the problem here? It is not explicit in chapter 3 that Jesus baptised. Interpreting it this way is contradicted by chapter 4 - meaning, it is the reader who is wrong, not the account. The problem is it clearly states that "he (Jesus) tarried with them and baptized And then Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples. So later on for whatever reason they added in this verse. Im not sure who added it or why but then they decided that Jesus was not baptizing but instead only disciples were. Maybe he was such a rock star by then and he was too hot and heavy with MM. Who knows. Im not going to lose any sleep over it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Creatures That
|
|
The evolution/creation argument will go on forever. God works in mysterious ways.
Only in laymen's circles. In science there is no argument. Evolution is scientific fact. The masses always take their good old time before accepting scientific fact. There are still a lot of people who don't like the idea that they evolved from monkeys. But they'll get over it eventually. 
When you say that "Evolutiob is cientific fact" - are you refering to Macro, micro, or both? You cant state that micro evolution exists and then reject macro entirely. If I told you to walk across the street could you do that? What about if I asked you to walk to the next town over? Is that impossible?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Topic:
Creatures That
|
|
A Look at the Past and Present of Darwin's Theory In 1800, over 99 percent of all people believed in some sort of creationism theory to explain life on this planet. In 1930, the scientific basis for Darwin's Theory began to take hold and show some support in favor of it. In 2005, A Research Center looked at American beliefs and found that 50 percent of Americans still favored Creationism as the most acceptable explanation for life, while the other roughly 50 percent, preferred some form of the evolutionary theory instead. Thats 50% not 2% Wrong......A British poll featuring the viewpoints of some 2,060 folks of multiple ages who were asked to express their beliefs on the subject of the evolution of the world. Once again the results were quite shocking. Only 25 percent of all participants believed Darwin's Evolutionary Theory was without a doubt the most logical explanation to life on this earth, while the other 75 percent either said they were either unsure if the theory was acceptable, outright rejected it in favor of creation or intelligent design, or had beliefs which consisted of a combination of popular/unpopular theories. so 2% please......get a grip I said EVANGELICALS. This number is from 2003 4,984,925 Those were the "Loose Canons" I mentioned that take the bible literally. Now would you like me to list all of the denominations of Christianity that do accept the Theory of Evolution like the Roman Catholics? Religions do not believe in evolution - individuals do. Just because someone who is a Catholic believes that Evoluiton exists - does not mean it represets christendom. Your premise also presumes that Catholicism is equated with christainity. This is only so on an individualistic level - not the group as a whole. I did not say "believe". You did. Krimsa said: Now would you like me to list all of the denominations of Christianity that do accept the Theory of Evolution like the Roman Catholics?
Catholics do "believe" in Jesus, the virgin Mary and the same god that you do. |
|
|
|
|
Previous
