Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Exactly. The wingnuts don't get that, to introduce God into science, would require that they admit that there is not only a possibility that God doesn't exist, but that this could be proven by experiementation.
Who said we have to introduce God. But i think we can reason even in science no ?
Here are the choices either lifeless matter created life or there is a creator now which one seems to be more credible ?
You guys don't get it ,even if scientist were to create life in the lab it did not happen naturally and it was achieved through intelligence.
Well, even though you are presenting a false dichotomy, I'll go ahead and say that lifeless matter creating life is much more probable than a creator. We know lifeless matter actually exists, and all life forms are composed of lifeless matter. On the other hand, there is zero evidence of any supernatural catalyst for life (aka no evidence for a creator, sorry). Seems pretty obvious to me, but you have a different opinion, and you are entitled to it.
What is written:
"The modern theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago."
How bigred reads it:
"The modern theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from apes."
Well how else can it be viewed as? An ape is an apetheir is no such thing nor has there ever been an ape like man on earth. Everytime science turns up remains they always find out it's just the remains of an ape, an anmial not of any man.
Have you ever heard of the species homo erectus, neadertals, australopithecus, etc. They are all hominid fossils that have been discovered that are different species than homo sapiens (us). How would you explain these fossils, given that the differences between homo sapiens and many of the other hominid species are very subtle, yet clearly documented? I would advise you to head on over to google, type in "human evolution," and educate yourself. I know you won't though, because you are clearly willfully ignorant of the facts.
Well how else can it be viewed as? An ape is an apetheir is no such thing nor has there ever been an ape like man on earth. Everytime science turns up remains they always find out it's just the remains of an ape, an anmial not of any man.
Have you ever heard of the species homo erectus, neadertals, australopithecus, etc. They are all hominid fossils that have been discovered that are different species than homo sapiens (us). How would you explain these fossils, given that the differences between homo sapiens and many of the other hominid species are very subtle, yet clearly documented? I would advise you to head on over to google, type in "human evolution," and educate yourself. I know you won't though, because you are clearly willfully ignorant of the facts.
Yes I have, and I repeat thier as never been an ape like man on earth ever.
Science is mute on the existence of God. No peer reviewed or academic article has ever claimed God does not exist. Furthermore, if science can not disprove something, it can't formally study it and it is a "futile" effort.
You really are clueless about scientific thought and methodology, aren't you?
Not anymore since science got hijacked. Did you know at one time most scientist were creationist.
Science did not get hijacked.
Did you know at one time scientists believed the Earth was the center of the universe?
What is your point?
Nor is science convincing either. nothing that science says works it just does not add up. It's basicly magic. I had a lab professor once many years ago and we went head to toe on this subject. He wouldn't give me an A but he couldn't fail me either. asshole.
Heaven forbid your professor actually do his job and try and teach you, the student, something.
Hilariously, you have convinced yourself that your substandard grade was the result of some sort of bias and not your obvious refusal to learn the material.
Did it ever occur to you that the process of learning far exceeds your personal opinion on something?
Really common ancestor? Is that some new code word? Wouldn't something in common be from the same thing?
Only if you consider Darwin's work "new".
"The fact that human beings and monkeys have tailbones is evidence for common ancestry precisely because tailbones are useless in humans. Contrast this with the torpedo shape that sharks and dolphins share; this similarity is useful in both groups. One might expect natural selection to cause the torpedo shape to evolve in large aquatic predators whether or not they have a common ancestor. This is why the adaptive similarity is almost valueless to the systematist who is trying to reconstruct patterns of common ancestry."
- Charles Darwin "The Origin of Species"
Again, you would have to work to look more iditiotic on this subject.
Evolution Of Man - What is it?
The modern theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago.
Evolution Of Man
Yes. That would be the common ancestor that I previously mentioned. I see where you got tripped up though. They didn't use the exact term "common ancestor". You had to actually read and think about what they said.
According to most scientists the process took billions of years, how do you know it's still not going on? You're making the assessment that still isn't still forming from non-life, could I have scientific proof of this?
A few dust particals in space hit together and became what we have today
And just for the record, when you post childish things like this that no one has said anythign remotely similar to, it makes it really really hard to reply to you seriously.
Copout ! another thing you can't prove.
The way you post is cute, similar to a child talking about Santa Claus.
See let's analyze your sentence post here. You're acting like being able to prove something is most important in terms of science. But anyone who has the slightest respect for science knows you can't prove a god exists, yet (despite tons of proof and you covering your eyes and ears) you put a rule on science that they have to prove every little shred of everything and how everyone should just blindly believe every word of the Bible and ignore all the science that goes against it.
Nor is science convincing either. nothing that science says works it just does not add up. It's basicly magic. I had a lab professor once many years ago and we went head to toe on this subject. He wouldn't give me an A but he couldn't fail me either. asshole.
Heaven forbid your professor actually do his job and try and teach you, the student, something.
Hilariously, you have convinced yourself that your substandard grade was the result of some sort of bias and not your obvious refusal to learn the material.
Did it ever occur to you that the process of learning far exceeds your personal opinion on something?
Only if you consider Darwin's work "new".
"The fact that human beings and monkeys have tailbones is evidence for common ancestry precisely because tailbones are useless in humans. Contrast this with the torpedo shape that sharks and dolphins share; this similarity is useful in both groups. One might expect natural selection to cause the torpedo shape to evolve in large aquatic predators whether or not they have a common ancestor. This is why the adaptive similarity is almost valueless to the systematist who is trying to reconstruct patterns of common ancestry."
- Charles Darwin "The Origin of Species"
Again, you would have to work to look more iditiotic on this subject.
Evolution Of Man - What is it?
The modern theory concerning the evolution of man proposes that humans and apes derive from an apelike ancestor that lived on earth a few million years ago.
Evolution Of Man
Yes. That would be the common ancestor that I previously mentioned. I see where you got tripped up though. They didn't use the exact term "common ancestor". You had to actually read and think about what they said.
Was the common ancestor due to cross breeding or mutations ?
Heaven forbid your professor actually do his job and try and teach you, the student, something.
Hilariously, you have convinced yourself that your substandard grade was the result of some sort of bias and not your obvious refusal to learn the material.
Did it ever occur to you that the process of learning far exceeds your personal opinion on something?
Only if you consider Darwin's work "new".
"The fact that human beings and monkeys have tailbones is evidence for common ancestry precisely because tailbones are useless in humans. Contrast this with the torpedo shape that sharks and dolphins share; this similarity is useful in both groups. One might expect natural selection to cause the torpedo shape to evolve in large aquatic predators whether or not they have a common ancestor. This is why the adaptive similarity is almost valueless to the systematist who is trying to reconstruct patterns of common ancestry."
- Charles Darwin "The Origin of Species"
Again, you would have to work to look more iditiotic on this subject.
Yes. That would be the common ancestor that I previously mentioned. I see where you got tripped up though. They didn't use the exact term "common ancestor". You had to actually read and think about what they said.
Was the common ancestor due to cross breeding or mutations ?
They want answer, but if they do they'll dance around the question like fred astaire and ginger rogers
Hey doc there is no scietific evidence that goes agains't what is stated in the bible do you want to post that evidence then let me shred it like i have in the past.
Was the common ancestor due to cross breeding or mutations ?
They want answer, but if they do they'll dance around the question like fred astaire and ginger rogers
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
Hey doc there is no scietific evidence that goes agains't what is stated in the bible do you want to post that evidence then let me shred it like i have in the past.
Only in your own mind have you shredded it, you couldn't shred cheese.
Although I was very entertained when you were telling me T-Rex was a vegetarian and how 2 of every dinosaur could fit on a boat with the measurements the Bible gave Noah's Ark
You could post that stuff again, that's entertainment I should be charged for.
Even though all the evidence we see is that life creates life.They want answer, but if they do they'll dance around the question like fred astaire and ginger rogers
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
According to creation man was made from soil of the earth. with all the minerals in the body I can that to be true.
They want answer, but if they do they'll dance around the question like fred astaire and ginger rogers
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
According to creation man was made from soil of the earth. with all the minerals in the body I can that to be true.
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
According to creation man was made from soil of the earth. with all the minerals in the body I can that to be true.
Yes and they know that we are a product of the ingredients of the earth, but they say it just happened by chance that all these things by chance came together to form life and then that life evolved in to everything alive today funny isn't it.
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
According to creation man was made from soil of the earth. with all the minerals in the body I can that to be true.
Yes and at the time of the writings could man know such a thing ? According to doc they were a bunch of ignorant goat herders
Hey doc there is no scietific evidence that goes agains't what is stated in the bible do you want to post that evidence then let me shred it like i have in the past.
Only in your own mind have you shredded it, you couldn't shred cheese.
Although I was very entertained when you were telling me T-Rex was a vegetarian and how 2 of every dinosaur could fit on a boat with the measurements the Bible gave Noah's Ark
You could post that stuff again, that's entertainment I should be charged for.
You can't believe many things from the bible because there is a supernatural force behind it. But you can believe non-living matter can create life
Yeah they already know the problems of mutations being the engine that drives macro-evolution,and they know humans can't cross breed with any animal even though they claim our DNA are similar and close.
The creator was able create diversity with similar ingredients.
According to creation man was made from soil of the earth. with all the minerals in the body I can that to be true.
Yes and at the time of the writings could man know such a thing ? According to doc they were a bunch of ignorant goat herders
Only in your own mind have you shredded it, you couldn't shred cheese.
Although I was very entertained when you were telling me T-Rex was a vegetarian and how 2 of every dinosaur could fit on a boat with the measurements the Bible gave Noah's Ark
You could post that stuff again, that's entertainment I should be charged for.
You can't believe many things from the bible because there is a supernatural force behind it. But you can believe non-living matter can create life
Awww I don't get entertained today? You won't tell me about how T-Rex roamed the plains eating grass like a cow?
Or how Noah caught 2 lions with his bare hands and put them in a ship with zebras on it and kept them from getting eaten?
C'mon, this isn't near as fun!!!!
