If God doesn't Exist Explain To Me How This Happened By Chance

[lordofcastamere]

 

[boris]

If someone was able to disprove the theory of evolution at this point they'd get a noble prize. It's not really a debate at this point, the evidence is there and it serves as a foundation for much of biology.

My bio professor at Amherst was a Christian and he said there is proof of horizontal variation (i.e. donkey and a horse mating) but not of vertical evolution (i.e. horse transitioning into a giraffe). He said evolution is a theory not a proof. Natural selection is different because it kills off existing species but does not create new ones .

I don't think anyone says that horses transitioned into giraffes. So he's right, there is no proof of that happening. 

 

[gp9rm7221]

how many times have you washed a homeless man's feet?

My church goes out every Friday night to one of the most popular spots in the city where lot of street people live and hang out. We bring food and clothing, toilet paper and other supplies depending on the time of year. 

We hang out and be a light into their lives. Make them feel loved. 

Literally washing someones feet was a cultural aspect of Jesus' time but what we do is exactly the same for the world we live in today.

So, if your comment there was meant to put me in my place, shame on you. 

 

[createdestroy]

how many times have you washed a homeless man's feet?

My church goes out every Friday night to one of the most popular spots in the city where lot of street people live and hang out. We bring food and clothing, toilet paper and other supplies depending on the time of year. 


We hang out and be a light into their lives. Make them feel loved. 


Literally washing someones feet was a cultural aspect of Jesus' time but what we do is exactly the same for the world we live in today.

So, if your comment there was meant to put me in my place, shame on you. 

View media item 276085

 

[girlslovewaffles]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."

If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

 

[solegit08til]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."

If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - Carlin

 

[girlslovewaffles]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."

If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that." - Carlin

Hah! I love bringing up that saying whenever I get a chance. Never knew it was from Carlin, although knowing his sense of humor, I can't say I'm surprised.

 

[premium3g]

I see people have brought out the creationist vs evolutionist argument out. I think a lot of folk bring darwing out when they're corned just can't prove anything else, so they try to knit pick at the very basis of the long research about evolution. They attack darwins theories the same way they were attacked in the 1800's... in the 2013 LOL. You guys say humans haven't gone through any more evolution or try to refute the evolution and constant adaptation of micro-organisms and diseases to our antibiotics because you lack the knowledge or any for that matter, of how hard it's becoming to come up with more antibiotics to fight off diseases that are adapting too quick to our solutions. Now, we should also take into account cultural effects on the human evolution i,e; turning our lifestyles from foraging to sedentary peoples, domestication of animals, living in close groups next other humans, etc... I think a lot of you are focused on visual evolution, you know? Stuff that we can see in the human body. Since you're putting so much emphasis on the physical attributes (why don't humans have 4 arms?! durr durr), I think you're dismissing other evolutionary ways that humans have evolved over time, or very recently. I'll point one out that should be a given. Humans were unable to digest milk, but guess what, now we can, that is called evolution. I think, correct me if I'm wrong, that once humans became sedentary and relied on domesticated plants and animals, they had to figure out ways to get more food and milk was one of these ways, thus our systems adapting to the digestion of lactose.

2 articles that shed some light on this...
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/02/science/02evo.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

http://onthehuman.org/2009/12/does-culture-prevent-or-drive-human-evolution/

So HUMANS  were never able to digest BREAST milk until "recently" ?  Or is that Cow milk??? 

 

[premium3g]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."

If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

not my words.. I just threw the bait to see which of the "smart sharks" would bite... The piece was used to get the attention off of myself which it worked.. 

I may not understand COMPLETELY on how EVOLUTION occurred but I never claimed to be a scientist like 90 percent of the EVOLUTIONIST in this thread... 

I DO 100 PERCENT UNDERSTAND HOW THE HUMAN MIND WORKS.. 

 

[createdestroy]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."


If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

not my words.. I just threw the bait to see which of the "smart sharks" would bite... The piece was used to get the attention off of myself which it worked.. 

I may not understand COMPLETELY on how EVOLUTION occurred but I never claimed to be a scientist like 90 percent of the EVOLUTIONIST in this thread... 

I DO 100 PERCENT UNDERSTAND HOW THE HUMAN MIND WORKS.. 

Link the source of the content you posted

 

[sea manup]

I stopped reading the garbage posted above after "Scientific Fact #1."


If you're going to argue, at least understand the subject. I feel like half of America is like this. Speaking on something that they aren't even remotely grasping.

not my words.. I just threw the bait to see which of the "smart sharks" would bite... The piece was used to get the attention off of myself which it worked.. 

I may not understand COMPLETELY on how EVOLUTION occurred but I never claimed to be a scientist like 90 percent of the EVOLUTIONIST in this thread... 

I DO 100 PERCENT UNDERSTAND HOW THE HUMAN MIND WORKS.. 

Link the source of the content you posted

it was on some message board (just google one of the headings). after the first post every post after it tore apart every single one of the points he made

 

[sir charles]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread163678/pg1

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1967714/pg1

 

[ajiiiplatinum]

Yes and no. Natural Selection doesn't "kill off" existing species, it makes them stronger. Or weaker, depending on the environment.

Looking back on my white fox example.

Brown foxes live in a snow plain. They have trouble catching prey due to their color against the snow. A gene mutation causes a fox to be born albino. This fox has no trouble catching prey due to it's camouflage. This albino fox mates, and it's gene gets passed on. Creating more albino foxes, and removing the brown gene over time due to them starving from a lack of food. Thus, no species has been killed off, but it's been improved and more adapted to its situation.

Understood no one is arguing that. The fox is still a fox. The fact that some here believe that one mammal or one fish became monkeys and eventually human is what is unproven. People be acting like evolution is a proven hypotheses.


"Some Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants."
Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia)

"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. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)

''We're not just evolving slowly,'' Gould says, ''for all practical purposes we're not evolving. There's no reason to think we're going to get bigger brains or smaller toes or whatever - we are what we are.''
Stephen Jay Gould ( Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University )

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species

"The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less can we believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer."
- Dr. Richard Dawkins (Department of Zoology, Oxford University, UK

"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein".' 
Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University)



Believe what you want.
I believe in a higher power.

 

[boris]

You can believe in a higher power and accept reality. The two are not mutually exclusive. There are people that accept the facts of evolution and believe in a higher power.

It's a select group of people that refuse to accept evolution and they seem to rely on false information to fight it. Is that not odd to you?

 

[miketysonthekiller]

So HUMANS  were never able to digest BREAST milk until "recently" ?  Or is that Cow milk??? 

did you bother clicking the links? They explain it much more thoroughly. Humans are able to digest our own milk, it's cow milks that contains lactose that humans have evolved to digest. We weren't able to digest it, and some people still can't, but a large majority are able to digest milk thanks to the evolution of our digestive systems.

 

[createdestroy]

People be acting like evolution is a proven hypotheses.

evolution has been proven...it's been witnessed with virus, bacteria etc.

What you are talking about is not the concept of evolution, but the specific evolutionary path of species. That has not been completely mapped out.

An analogy would be the laws of physics that we know, and can prove exist. And then people hypothesizing how the earth came to be. Through the application of these laws we can estimate the approximate age, composition and events that may have lead to earths origin.... but the technology is not advanced enough to completely map out the specific sequence of events and exact time frame that directly lead to the creation of earth.

The laws are not flawed per se. just the application on past events leads to a situation we don't have 100% accuracy in predicting. But we can predict the pull of earths gravity/orbital velocity/time dilation etc. at 100% accuracy through the use of the same laws.

 

[miketysonthekiller]

Understood no one is arguing that. The fox is still a fox. The fact that some here believe that one mammal or one fish became monkeys and eventually human is what is unproven. People be acting like evolution is a proven hypotheses.


"Some Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants."
Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia)

"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. Newton Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission.)

''We're not just evolving slowly,'' Gould says, ''for all practical purposes we're not evolving. There's no reason to think we're going to get bigger brains or smaller toes or whatever - we are what we are.''
Stephen Jay Gould ( Professor of Geology and Paleontology, Harvard University )

To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.
Charles Darwin in The Origin of Species

"The more statistically improbable a thing is, the less can we believe that it just happened by blind chance. Superficially the obvious alternative to chance is an intelligent Designer."
- Dr. Richard Dawkins (Department of Zoology, Oxford University, UK

"The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way is comparable with the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junk-yard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein".' 
Sir Fred Hoyle (English astronomer, Professor of Astronomy at Cambridge University)



Believe what you want.
I believe in a higher power.

Wow, I am speechless. Theory of evolution has been proven right and there is serious lack of any other evidence countering the theory wrong. If you have any, please post it because I can't find it. Just because you lack the knowledge doesn't mean the theory is wrong, what is google? It's funny you pull stupidity like this out your behind like a prophet. Yea, noah's arc sounds real and not ficatitious at all. inb4 DURR DURR I NEVER SAID THAT DURR DURR DURR DURR HURR HURR IM SO DUMB DURR DURR

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
Hit me with the "jokes on you, I was just trolling"

Humans are still evolving, fact! Go back and look at the other 2 articles I posted about the influence of agriculture in the human biology.

You're just gonna say that the theory of evolution is unproven and then close your argument with the good ole cop out huh? The well known, oh Ima do me and you do you? Nah son, nah, don't start the fire if you can't handle the heat. There is no scientific, lab tested and researched, concrete, evidence to counter the theory of evolution. Like I said, if you got some post it, because I can't find any.

No worries bro, I got my fedora on right meow, im ready to go with this argument. I'm on an astronomic level of euphoria!

 

[3am scholar]

Science is a well-defined process marked by utilizing empirical evidence from the physical world to construct and develop testable, falsifiable explanations of natural phenomenal, in terms of natural laws and processes. The process of peer review has been an essential part of scientific research for centuries. It requires a huge amount of time and effort on the part of scientific researchers, both to prepare manuscripts for peer review and also to review manuscripts written by other scientists. But the resulting peer-reviewed journals and conference proceedings are of significantly higher quality as a result. While the process is certainly not foolproof, and lapses have occurred of both types (accepting bad papers and rejecting good papers), it has demonstrated itself to be a highly effective means of uncovering truth about the physical world.

With regards to creationism and intelligent design, it is very significant and telling to note that, as far as anyone can determine, these writers have not even seriously attempted, much less succeeded, in publishing their work in reputable peer-reviewed scientific journals. So this fact by itself is a persuasive reason to reject these writings. This literature is often cast in scientific terminology, and may be persuasive to those who lack professional training in the particular fields of science in question, but it is not real science.

Also, The Science Channel program, Through the Wormhole had an episode called Recreating Evolution with Robots that was quite thought provoking. Scientists are building robots to simulate some of the creatures found on the ancient earth to see how they moved and studying the changes as time progressed.

http://science.discovery.com/tv-shows/through-the-wormhole

 

[premium3g]

there are many people who believe in Evolution because its the right thing to do..

then there are people who question everything presented to them.

I believe small children have the best minds, always questioning information even though the presenter believes he or she has explained it throughly.

for those who believe we evolved from primative ape like creatures wandering this blue green rock to the top of the food chain, my hat goes off to you, as you believe in someone elses work which has been spoon fed to you since elementary.

for those who do not believe outside of religous beliefs I commend you as you are still able to think freely.

 

[3am scholar]

What if I told you it's not whether you "believe" in evolution or not. It's whether you admit that evolution is fact or not.

/Morpheus

 

[teamjordan79]

What if I told you it's not whether you "believe" in evolution or not. It's whether you admit that evolution is fact or not.

/Morpheus

what if god created science and evolution to test our faith tho?

 

[216301baller]

That's somethin to think about

 

[sea manup]

What if I told you it's not whether you "believe" in evolution or not. It's whether you admit that evolution is fact or not.

/Morpheus

what if god created science and evolution to test our faith tho?

what if science created god to test our intelligence? 

 

[miketysonthekiller]

there are many people who believe in Evolution because its the right thing to do..

then there are people who question everything presented to them.

I believe small children have the best minds, always questioning information even though the presenter believes he or she has explained it throughly.

for those who believe we evolved from primative ape like creatures wandering this blue green rock to the top of the food chain, my hat goes off to you, as you believe in someone elses work which has been spoon fed to you since elementary.

for those who do not believe outside of religious beliefs I commend you as you are still able to think freely.

you're kidding right? Spoon fed my dude? That is something religious fanatics are. No need to question your religion because god has the absolute answer and there is no need to present any evidence either. Do you not see the irony here? That you're calling religious people free thinkers and those who follow scientific thought and the process to have substatial data to prove theories right sheep. You're in serious denial if you say that religion makes you a free thinker. Religion makes you complacent for it doesn't have to work hard to have evidence to prove your beliefs wrong, it has the absolute truth attached to it and that is God. Religion is a cop out for being a free thinker.

I seriously think this is troll....

 

[00david00]

If someone was able to disprove the theory of evolution at this point they'd get a noble prize. It's not really a debate at this point, the evidence is there and it serves as a foundation for much of biology.

My bio professor at Amherst was a Christian and he said there is proof of horizontal variation (i.e. donkey and a horse mating) but not of vertical evolution (i.e. horse transitioning into a giraffe). He said evolution is a theory not a proof. Natural selection is different because it kills off existing species but does not create new ones .

A theory in science isn't a theory in everyday terms, it is a theory because it has tremendous evidence. Theories are tested over and over again, and they stand until proven wrong.

Nothing has disproven Darwinian theory of evolution, and many branches of science have gone on to support the theory. At this point scientists aren't arguing whether evolution takes place, but how it took place.

There is no proof of a horse transitioning into a giraffe because that isn't what evolution states. The idea is that you can trace the horse and the giraffe to a common ancestor if you go back far enough in their phylogenetic tree.