A few question's for atheists ?

[nitroz]

Why do most atheists defend Neo-darwinism when Neo-darwinism can't give a logical explanation supported by evidence as to the origins of life ?

Why do they reject the possibility of creation ?

1. what?

2. I think I rather believe science since Religion was the earliest form of government and there is lots of religions, some with different beliefs.
As for how everything started, nobody knows...yet.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Why do most atheists defend Neo-darwinism when Neo-darwinism can't give a logical explanation supported by evidence as to the origins of life ?

Why do they reject the possibility of creation ?

Present your proof of creationism.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters.


Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth tender sprouts (the herb seeding seed and the fruit tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself) upon the earth; and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth tender sprouts, the herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed was in itself. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarmers having a living soul; and let birds fly over the earth on the face of the expanse of the heavens.
Gen 1:21 And God created great sea-animals, and every living soul that creeps with which the waters swarmed after their kind; and every winged fowl after its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas and let the fowl multiply in the earth.


Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth after its kind; and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth after its kind, and cattle after their kind, and all creepers upon the earth after their kind. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.
Gen 1:27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply and fill the earth, and subdue it. And have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens, and all animals that move upon the earth.

Is this not so today ?
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold! I have given you every herb seeding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree seeding seed; to you it shall be for food.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeper on the earth which has in it a living soul every green plant is for food; and it was so.

So God created all living things according to their kind,the proof is Genetics.

The bible is not scientific proof.

 

[Youwerecreated]

That is a strange question. I have been quite clear not only in this thread but many others. You know the answer…

Except that your bible quotes are crap. They don’t say anything, just extremely vague statements that can be construed to mean anything whatsoever. They are so much so that not one single scientific discovery has EVER come from reading the bible. What you are doing is taking current knowledge and forcing the biblical statements to fit around reality. It proves nothing and shows nothing. Here is a simple example:
2 Peter 3:5 But they deliberately forget that long ago by God’s word the heavens came into being and the earth was formed out of water and by water

The earth is clearly not formed out of water. I am sure you can come up with some roundabout way to explain this as I can come up with a way to make each of those statements you laid out false in a scientific sense. That does not show proof; it shows that you can read too far into words that are not meant to be read into that far.


Here, again, you fail to understand current biology. There is no “kind” or distinction that you can point out scientifically. It does not exist. Those are terms from biology before we understood genetics. Not all things reproduce in their kind either. A horse and a donkey do not produce a creature of either but instead create a mule; another creature altogether that is neither parent and not able to produce on its own. The issue here is that there is not enough drift from the 2 species that they have completely lost the ability to reproduce but they have drifted far enough so that they are not the same thing. With the discovery of genetics, we now understand this process much more than we did when terms like kind, species and family were created. Now we know those terms are little more than distinctions crated to satisfy our need to categorize things and they have no scientific value.

There is no such thing as ‘macro evolution’ and ‘micro evolution.’ Those terms were created by creationists so they could argue against something.

No, they don’t. It makes evolving difficult. Hence, the MILLIONS of years that have passed to get here. You have been handed all this before by smaterthanhick when he destroyed your asinine argument before. The interesting part is that NONE of your argument has changed; you just moved somewhere else where you hope the facts do not show up again.

A dog is a dog a horse is a horse no ?

Wake up and smell what you're shoveling.

Smarterthanhick can't hold a candle to Professor greycloud and he punted on these very issues dreamer.

So you doge the entire point with…. Nothing. Try again.

Horse IS NOT donkey.

Now, if all things must reproduce in kind then how come a horse and a donkey can reproduce. How can they produce something that is neither…
How about Lions and Tigers?
Bison and Cattle/Yak?

Clearly, each can reproduce in kind and not in kind..

My meaning of "kind is more broader I guess.

Horse and donkey are of the same kind and can produce offspring through cross breeding.

Lion and tiger are of the same kind and can cross breed and produce offspring.

Same can be said for monkeys and apes they're of the same kind and can cross breed and produce offspring.

For more crossings within the same kind ,kinds produce after their own kind as the bible say's 10 times in genesis.

Interspecies breeding

 

[Youwerecreated]

Present your proof of creationism.

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters.


Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth tender sprouts (the herb seeding seed and the fruit tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself) upon the earth; and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth tender sprouts, the herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed was in itself. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarmers having a living soul; and let birds fly over the earth on the face of the expanse of the heavens.
Gen 1:21 And God created great sea-animals, and every living soul that creeps with which the waters swarmed after their kind; and every winged fowl after its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas and let the fowl multiply in the earth.


Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth after its kind; and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth after its kind, and cattle after their kind, and all creepers upon the earth after their kind. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.
Gen 1:27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply and fill the earth, and subdue it. And have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens, and all animals that move upon the earth.

Is this not so today ?
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold! I have given you every herb seeding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree seeding seed; to you it shall be for food.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeper on the earth which has in it a living soul every green plant is for food; and it was so.

So God created all living things according to their kind,the proof is Genetics.

The bible is not scientific proof.

Evidently theories were formed in the scriptures and proven through technology later in history is that not scientific ?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Gen 1:1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
Gen 1:2 And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters.


Gen 1:11 And God said, Let the earth bring forth tender sprouts (the herb seeding seed and the fruit tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed is in itself) upon the earth; and it was so.
Gen 1:12 And the earth brought forth tender sprouts, the herb yielding seed after its kind, and the tree producing fruit after its kind, whose seed was in itself. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:19 And the evening and the morning were the fourth day.
Gen 1:20 And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarmers having a living soul; and let birds fly over the earth on the face of the expanse of the heavens.
Gen 1:21 And God created great sea-animals, and every living soul that creeps with which the waters swarmed after their kind; and every winged fowl after its kind. And God saw that it was good.
Gen 1:22 And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the waters of the seas and let the fowl multiply in the earth.


Gen 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after its kind, cattle, and creepers, and its beasts of the earth after its kind; and it was so.
Gen 1:25 And God made the beasts of the earth after its kind, and cattle after their kind, and all creepers upon the earth after their kind. And God saw that it was good.


Gen 1:26 And God said, Let Us make man in Our image, after Our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the heavens, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the creepers creeping on the earth.
Gen 1:27 And God created man in His image; in the image of God He created him. He created them male and female.
Gen 1:28 And God blessed them. And God said to them, Be fruitful, and multiply and fill the earth, and subdue it. And have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the fowl of the heavens, and all animals that move upon the earth.

Is this not so today ?
Gen 1:29 And God said, Behold! I have given you every herb seeding seed which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree seeding seed; to you it shall be for food.
Gen 1:30 And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the heavens, and to every creeper on the earth which has in it a living soul every green plant is for food; and it was so.

So God created all living things according to their kind,the proof is Genetics.

The bible is not scientific proof.

Evidently theories were formed in the scriptures and proven through technology later in history is that not scientific ?

What scientific process has proven that a god exists? For one claim creation as a scientific fact then one must first prove the existence of god

Show me the data (the bible doesn't count).

 

[oracle]

Why do most atheists defend Neo-darwinism when Neo-darwinism can't give a logical explanation supported by evidence as to the origins of life ?

Why do they reject the possibility of creation ?

I don't think most of us do (reject the possibility of creation). It's just that we don't find biblical creation myths particularly useful for a scientific understanding of how life works. They might very well reflect some deep truth about the origins of man, but science is looking for different kinds of understanding. The two aren't necessarily in conflict, and I suspect you'll find a good many Christians involved in this kind of research who would agree.

That's not atheism, that's agnostic.

 

[Youwerecreated]

YouTube - ‪Checkmate, Atheists!‬‏

YouTube - ‪The Atheist Delusion‬‏

They're so wrong with their sarcasm, real science has it so right, but it's the atheistic evoluitionist that has it all wrong.We know that Neo Darwinism is built on faith it is a religion.

Video time.

7-Refute Darwinism In 7-Seconds Flat

Here, so you can understand what we're talking about, a short concise video on evolution- [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ksdV9HPwBY]YouTube - ‪The Theory of Evolution in 2 Minutes‬‏[/ame]

He said over time two different populations that are separated can no longer mate and i agree to a point and thats why you can call them different breeds but not different species. They're of the same kind and in some cases they can cross breed and produce fertile offspring or nonfertile offspring or in otherwords hybrids.

And this just goes to show dog's will produce dog's cat's will produce cat's and so on and so on.

Come on, it's really not this difficult. Just look around you there are mountains of evidence proving that is the case.

 

[oracle]

1st no one was around in the beginning of evolution to document the sop called evidence your asking for. On part there is no proof for any single religion or belief either. Atheist's have their own reasons for not believing but defend others because we feel they are correct. There is no god and as science grows the ground for gods to hide on will diminish.

What literature have you read on evolution?

It is a very credible explanation to life and how we have come to be.

If there is no god, then why do you spend so much time trying to disprove him? There's no santa, but you don't put that kind of energy into him, or the easter bunny, or jack frost, or sarah palin's brain...well, maybe the brain part. Anyway, if you don't believe in god, then don't, but for fvck's sake, quit bothering the one's who do.

 

[oracle]

It all boils down to believable vs. unbelievable.

And it boils down to minding your own business and not worrying about what others do or don’t believe.

It's very hard to "mind one's own business" when religious types want to dilute science with myth and magic. They have places to worship..and should do their worshipping there.

So you believe in oppression?

 

[Youwerecreated]

The bible is not scientific proof.

Evidently theories were formed in the scriptures and proven through technology later in history is that not scientific ?

What scientific process has proven that a god exists? For one claim creation as a scientific fact then one must first prove the existence of god

Show me the data (the bible doesn't count).

Look if you really need hard evidence that God exists i guess you will have to wait till he shows up.

But there is plenty of evidence to show us his work.

The scriptures has given me no reason to doubt that life is the product of the creator.

 

[oracle]

And it boils down to minding your own business and not worrying about what others do or don’t believe.

It's very hard to "mind one's own business" when religious types want to dilute science with myth and magic. They have places to worship..and should do their worshipping there.

Excellent, and gays have bedrooms to butt fuck in , they should keep their theory of gayativity there. Glad we agree.

I know I do. This brings me to another point. Why is it that, those who believe in free speech, only believe in it when they are talking? Case in point. If you discuss why homosexuality, atheism, etc. is wrong, then you should be shunned. However, if you complain when they speak their platitudes about how religion is wrong...we should respect your opinion. Basically, the only way to respect your belief's is to violate our right to speak about our own.

 

[oracle]

It's very hard to "mind one's own business" when religious types want to dilute science with myth and magic. They have places to worship..and should do their worshipping there.

Excellent, and gays have bedrooms to butt fuck in , they should keep their theory of gayativity there. Glad we agree.

Heterosexuals "Butt Fuck" too. Do you disapprove?

Ass is ass. No condom will kill you, boy OR girl.

 

[oracle]

Why do most atheists defend Neo-darwinism when Neo-darwinism can't give a logical explanation supported by evidence as to the origins of life ?

Why do they reject the possibility of creation ?

I think "most atheists" would agree that darwinism makes more sense than creationism. Thats about the extent of our agreement as a group. Personally, I don't say evolution is the truth but I say its more likely than creation.

I reject the idea (not the possibility) of creation because there is no evidence to support it as true. I do allow for the possibility of it being true, but I would need some evidence before I accept it.

There is overwhelming evidence that shows that creationism did not happen and that life evolved over time.

In your not so humble opinion. Evolution could be the result of that creation.

 

[Dr.Drock]

1st no one was around in the beginning of evolution to document the sop called evidence your asking for. On part there is no proof for any single religion or belief either. Atheist's have their own reasons for not believing but defend others because we feel they are correct. There is no god and as science grows the ground for gods to hide on will diminish.

What literature have you read on evolution?

It is a very credible explanation to life and how we have come to be.

If there is no god, then why do you spend so much time trying to disprove him? There's no santa, but you don't put that kind of energy into him, or the easter bunny, or jack frost, or sarah palin's brain...well, maybe the brain part. Anyway, if you don't believe in god, then don't, but for fvck's sake, quit bothering the one's who do.

We're on a religious discussion board, if you don't want to discuss aspects of religion my advice would be not to come to this particular board.

 

[oracle]

1st no one was around in the beginning of evolution to document the sop called evidence your asking for. On part there is no proof for any single religion or belief either. Atheist's have their own reasons for not believing but defend others because we feel they are correct. There is no god and as science grows the ground for gods to hide on will diminish.

What literature have you read on evolution?

It is a very credible explanation to life and how we have come to be.

If there is no god, then why do you spend so much time trying to disprove him? There's no santa, but you don't put that kind of energy into him, or the easter bunny, or jack frost, or sarah palin's brain...well, maybe the brain part. Anyway, if you don't believe in god, then don't, but for fvck's sake, quit bothering the one's who do.

We're on a religious discussion board, if you don't want to discuss aspects of religion my advice would be not to come to this particular board.

well why not discuss the reasons that one faction antagonizes the other? That seems to be the foundation for this useless rhetoric to begin with. You people seem to like the problem more than the solution, which seems odd to me because, for all of the threads that I see like this, all I hear is the inane chatter of a bunch of self righteous asses that make no headway whatsoever because you spend little to no time considering your own flaws and all of theirs. You ever win an argument with your spouse that way?

 

[k2skier]

Christianity is a bottom up faith...educate yourself...man created God.

What believers think of their own religion, compared to other faiths

The two basic types of religions:
One way to view world religions is to divide them into two groups: "top-down" and "bottom-up" faiths:

A top-down religion is one in which God has revealed himself to humanity. Typically, this type of religion teaches that God created humanity, the world, the solar system, and the rest of the universe. He gave humans a moral and legal code, and has communicated his expectations of humanity to us. God is normally considered all powerful, all knowing and all good (omnipotent, omniscient and omnibeneficient), and without error. Many top-down religions teach that God either dictated their holy book, or communicated its contents through an intermediary, or inspired its writers to write error-free text.

A bottom-up religion is one created solely by humans. The founders attempt to describe their best impression of what God might be like. Their descriptions of the origins of animal species, the Earth itself and the rest of the universe reflect their level of scientific knowledge. In the case of ancient religions, this might be quite limited. Their moral and legal codes tend to follow the values of their own culture, which is often tribal in nature. They attribute these laws to God in order to pressure their fellow believers in to accepting them. The authors invent some form of life after death, which may take the form of eternal life in a Heaven, Paradise, Purgatory, Hell, Limbo, etc. Alternatively, it might involve reincarnation -- returning to Earth after death to experience additional lifetimes. Holy texts of bottom-up religions show a gradual evolution of religious and spiritual thought when their oldest writings are compared to the newest texts.

 

[Dr.Drock]

If there is no god, then why do you spend so much time trying to disprove him? There's no santa, but you don't put that kind of energy into him, or the easter bunny, or jack frost, or sarah palin's brain...well, maybe the brain part. Anyway, if you don't believe in god, then don't, but for fvck's sake, quit bothering the one's who do.

We're on a religious discussion board, if you don't want to discuss aspects of religion my advice would be not to come to this particular board.

well why not discuss the reasons that one faction antagonizes the other? That seems to be the foundation for this useless rhetoric to begin with. You people seem to like the problem more than the solution, which seems odd to me because, for all of the threads that I see like this, all I hear is the inane chatter of a bunch of self righteous asses that make no headway whatsoever because you spend little to no time considering your own flaws and all of theirs. You ever win an argument with your spouse that way?

You want people to admit flaws in their religion or flaws in their God?

Man I would love nothing more than that.

 

[Youwerecreated]

Christianity is a bottom up faith...educate yourself...man created God.

What believers think of their own religion, compared to other faiths

The two basic types of religions:
One way to view world religions is to divide them into two groups: "top-down" and "bottom-up" faiths:

A top-down religion is one in which God has revealed himself to humanity. Typically, this type of religion teaches that God created humanity, the world, the solar system, and the rest of the universe. He gave humans a moral and legal code, and has communicated his expectations of humanity to us. God is normally considered all powerful, all knowing and all good (omnipotent, omniscient and omnibeneficient), and without error. Many top-down religions teach that God either dictated their holy book, or communicated its contents through an intermediary, or inspired its writers to write error-free text.

A bottom-up religion is one created solely by humans. The founders attempt to describe their best impression of what God might be like. Their descriptions of the origins of animal species, the Earth itself and the rest of the universe reflect their level of scientific knowledge. In the case of ancient religions, this might be quite limited. Their moral and legal codes tend to follow the values of their own culture, which is often tribal in nature. They attribute these laws to God in order to pressure their fellow believers in to accepting them. The authors invent some form of life after death, which may take the form of eternal life in a Heaven, Paradise, Purgatory, Hell, Limbo, etc. Alternatively, it might involve reincarnation -- returning to Earth after death to experience additional lifetimes. Holy texts of bottom-up religions show a gradual evolution of religious and spiritual thought when their oldest writings are compared to the newest texts.

My religion is the bible.

I have no views concerning God outside whats written in the scriptures.

 

[Youwerecreated]

We're on a religious discussion board, if you don't want to discuss aspects of religion my advice would be not to come to this particular board.

well why not discuss the reasons that one faction antagonizes the other? That seems to be the foundation for this useless rhetoric to begin with. You people seem to like the problem more than the solution, which seems odd to me because, for all of the threads that I see like this, all I hear is the inane chatter of a bunch of self righteous asses that make no headway whatsoever because you spend little to no time considering your own flaws and all of theirs. You ever win an argument with your spouse that way?

You want people to admit flaws in their religion or flaws in their God?

Man I would love nothing more than that.

There are many flaws in religion, religion was a creation of man not God.

My religion is the bible.

There are no flaws in my God.

I put very little faith in man to lead and govern in any form.

 

[Warrior102]

I don't believe in Atheists....