Evolution is a farce: Evidence

a reply to: WakeUpBeer

Your assumption that I didn't read your link pages ago is duly noted.

Are you seriously suggesting that reading the introduction, provides you with even an inkling of the subject that I have been studying for more than 18 months and still learning. I would suggest you may have a little difficulty understanding the depth of the subject, I know I did, and it took perseverance. There is a huge gap between comprehending and knowing.

originally posted by: boymonkey74
I blame the education system

Yeah, it's more than a little scary in my opinion. From my understanding there is a lot of contention over evolution being taught in schools in Texas and other "Bible belt" states.

Good to see the site owner discussing creation threads being thrown in the hoax bin seeing he understands the science and such.

It was amusing how that thread quickly turned into a discussion about the hoax bin or not. I don't think that's what the OPs intentions were lol.

a reply to: kennyb72

That's right, now assume how much I read from your link and how far I followed the content/other links within. Please continue to make assumptions about my level of comprehension.

Hilarious btw. Do you see what you did there?

In a previous post you said:

originally posted by: kennyb72
After all, why would I waste valuable time studying evolution when I already have the truth.

originally posted by: kennyb72
I understand evolution theory but I don't need to understand the technicalities to decided whether it is correct or not.

Now when it comes to your beliefs you say:

originally posted by: kennyb72
Are you seriously suggesting that reading the introduction, provides you with even an inkling of the subject

I would suggest you may have a little difficulty understanding the depth of the subject, I know I did, and it took perseverance. There is a huge gap between comprehending and knowing.

Your suggesting that once somebody honestly and objectively looks at the information they will realize it's the truth.

What I'm saying is you have double standards

originally posted by: WakeUpBeer
a reply to: kennyb72

That's right, now assume how much I read from your link and how far I followed the content/other links within. Please continue to make assumptions about my level of comprehension.

Hilarious btw. Do you see what you did there?

In a previous post you said:

originally posted by: kennyb72
After all, why would I waste valuable time studying evolution when I already have the truth.

originally posted by: kennyb72
I understand evolution theory but I don't need to understand the technicalities to decided whether it is correct or not.

Now when it comes to your beliefs you say:

I would suggest you may have a little difficulty understanding the depth of the subject, I know I did, and it took perseverance. There is a huge gap between comprehending and knowing.

Your suggesting that once somebody honestly and objectively looks at the information they will realize it's the truth.

What I'm saying is you have double standards

I have been exposed to the concepts of evolutionary theory all of my life, I comprehend it, I can play about with it in my mind, I don't know it in great scientific detail, nor would it make sense for me to do so as I disagree with it in principle. If you spoke to me in 6 months and then made that statement

That's right, now assume how much I read from your link and how far I followed the content/other links within. Please continue to make assumptions about my level of comprehension.

It might have some meaning.

ETA: Read the Philosophers Stone from cover to cover just once and you start to comprehend it but you will need to read it many times to understand it.

a reply to: kennyb72

I thought you knew everything about evolution?.
Lie much?.

a reply to: josehelps

Go look up the Lenski Affair, will you? You might just learn something about evolution.

a reply to: Maltese5Rhino

The first thing you need to realize is that you need to get everything you were taught, or thought you read correctly about the bible, out of your head. There is a per-curser to the events that took place in the bible, and you have to have an extensive background in studying the supernatural to catch it.

I will share with you the turning point in understanding what was really going on in the bible.

In the garden of Eden where Adam and Eve are told they are allowed to eat from any tree except the tree of knowledge, the serpent told them if they did eat from that tree, their eyes would be opened and they would be Gods.

Not any proof of anything yet, but keep this in mind.

They both eat from the tree of knowledge and just like they were told, their eyes were opened and all of a sudden they realized they were naked. Now mainstream religion has NO simple solid explanation for why this happened, but once again I'm here to tell you that this is because they ignored the pre-face of the bible warning us that it deals with supernatural events. Below is a scientifically studied list of the most common elements (in order) explaining what frequently happens when someone is abducted.



1* Capture. The abductee is somehow rendered incapable of resisting, and taken from terrestrial surroundings to an apparent alien spacecraft.

2* Examination and Procedures. Invasive physiological and psychological procedures, and on occasion simulated behavioral situations, training & testing, or sexual liaisons.

3* Conference. The abductors communicate with the abductee or direct them to interact with specific individuals for some purpose, typically telepathically but sometimes using the abductee's native language.

4* Tour. The abductees are given a tour of their captors' vessel, though this is disputed by some researchers who consider this definition a confabulation of intent when just apparently being taken around to multiple places inside the ship.

5* Loss of Time. Abductees often rapidly forget the majority of their experience, either as a result of fear, medical intervention, or both.

6* Return. The abductees are returned to earth, occasionally in a different location from where they were allegedly taken or with new injuries or disheveled clothing.

7* Theophany. Coinciding with their immediate return, abductees may have a profound sense of love, a "high" similar to those induced by certain drugs, or a "mystical experience", accompanied by a feeling of oneness with God, the universe, or their abductors. Whether this is the result of a metaphysical change, Stockholm syndrome, or prior medical tampering is often not scrutinized by the abductees at the time.

8* Aftermath. The abductee must cope with the psychological, physical, and social effects of the experience.

The fact that Adam and Eve had what appeared to be recovered memory, tells us that they were experiencing #5 and #6 of this list. It's evident from this that today's religion has clearly dropped the ball and made up their own understanding when they are clearly not qualified to even be reading the bible. Sad to say there are dozens upon dozens of these findings in what little work I have studied.

A Roper poll was taken in 1991 that ESTIMATED that back then, up to as many as 3.7 million Americans may have been abducted at that point

Another area in wiki also tells us that out of all reported abductions around half are always from the same Gray aliens we most commonly know and hear about.

I understand what you mean by the comparison about Caesar. The problem is you are comparing two VERY different amount of people involved. Remember, people don't lie, the person lies. If I'm wrong than it's not a lie, it's called a conspiracy.

I think as far as Jesus, you need to understand that Jesus is how we are SUPPOSE to be. After God dealt all of his damage to us and made us sick and sicker, the difference tells you just how bad of a situation we are in.

There is tons of evidence in the bible, at least in regards to what I'm presenting, as it's the only thing I have looked at. This all came to me as I started an Etiology back in 2009. It was concluded just three weeks ago, and I now know who it is that played God, and how we got here, and possibly why we were placed here. If I ever get the chance to delve into that section you will want to have a box of Kleenex next to you, it's not good.

I totally understand all that about Evolution, in addition to the fact that if you separate them for a period of time, they no longer recognize their original offspring. Evolutionists have simply confused causation with correlation. It's seriously a far reach.

a reply to: josehelps

I do hope you realize that the link you provided me, and the quote contained in it which you posted, do not AT ALL state that the bible is a historical fact. It would help if you had actually posted the entire quote, and not just a selected part of it. The entire quote was : "One extreme example of this view is the Codex Gigas (nicknamed Devil's Bible) completed 1229 which is the world's largest medieval manuscript. As documented in National Geographic: Devil's Bible the work looks to that of one man over 20 years and addition to the entire Latin Bible the work contains many historical documents. Some Christ mythers have used the fact there are no original copies of most documents to claim that what little there is about Jesus are forgeries and-or interpolation some to the point of claiming that Paul himself was a fictional creation."

In case you have trouble fully understanding, this quote is saying that there was a work entitled Codex Gigas which was completed in the year 1229, and in addition to containing the Latin Bible, it ALSO contained historical documents. This was a medieval manuscript written in the 13th century, and is widely recognized as one of the more strange manuscripts ever written. So, you have again failed to demonstrate your point.

THEN, you say "Genetic variation has no hold in science." What exactly do you mean by this? Genetic variation is one of the more widely studied scientific topics in existence, and the discoveries in genetics have led us to a more complete understanding of biological systems. The very concept of genetic variation is almost unanimously recognized as a fact, so again, I'm having quite a difficult time even understanding what exactly it is that you are trying to say. You claim that you have "DOZENS" of reasons why evolution isn't possible, yet you have failed to even tell me one. Please, go ahead and tell me these reasons.

Lastly, you make this claim: "My claims about what is found in the bible in terms of it's supernatural origin is ALL redundantly backed up by other facts, also found in the bible, AS WELL as being found with matching facts in science today." This sentence is not only one giant circular statement, it also happens to make very little sense. What *facts" backs up your claims? Which facts in science today match with your theories about the supernatural and the bible. And just to stop you ahead of time, you cannot claim that this is all founded within your "34 years of supernatural research." You have to move on from that thought, and give actual, credible claims of evidence. You have shown absolutely nothing so far to suggest that anything you're saying is based on reality. Additionally, you have shown absolutely nothing so far to suggest that you have even the most basic understanding of biology and the theory of evolution. You cannot claim something is true because you say so. That is not how the world works once you graduate from the 2nd grade. I do have one personal question, josehelps, if you don't mind me asking. What is your profession?

a reply to: josehelps

None of this is based on fact. These are stories. This is no different from me repeating the stories from ancient greek mythology and treating them as fact. This is what you seem to not grasp. Have you ever considered that these stories in the bible were just that...stories?? They are not supposed to be taken literally, they are tales, AKA not real--they never happened. There was no serpent that told anybody to eat an apple. Do you know why, because snakes cannot talk, and this, my friend, is a "scientific fact." And as for your absurd claims about alien abduction, those listed numbered point are NOT "scientifically studied." These are people accounts of events, and in many instances, it turns out that these are either hoaxes or visual hallucinations. You really do not understand what constitutes something as being fact and proven, and I'm not sure why I'm even bothering with you, because it's clear that the fundamental misunderstanding on your part is too great to ever have any sort of reconciliation.

This thread is about evolution. You claim that "evolutionists have simply mixed up causation and correlation." Would you care to expand upon this view?

originally posted by: kennyb72
You are describing my very first bout of cognitive dissonance, but I personally decided to move on from that and attempted to discover the truth of reality for myself. I had to work very hard to sort the wheat from the BS and discovered the answers in a multidimensional universe.

It was with much gratitude for research done in Quantum Physics that created the link between spirituality and physical science for me, I can see it clearly now. Most scientists do not study our spiritual nature to the degree that they can make a connection.

The pendulum has swung to the opposite view for now, but as more is revealed about the quantum nature of our reality, the pendulum will settle in the middle and public opinion will change.

What makes you so sure that your multi verse idea is true? I do generally agree with many of the concepts, but there really is no actual evidence for it. Scientists do not study our spiritual nature, because there is absolutely no evidence to suggest a spirit or spiritual dimension exists. It's like saying most scientists do not study invisible gnomes. They can't because there is nothing to study. Remember, philosophy is nice and it can help lead you to better scientific understanding, but it doesn't over ride science itself. But again, you post doubts about evolution and complaints about scientific theories, but you accept multi verse despite the lack of evidence. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm asking why. What was it that you learned that put you over the edge to accept multi verse / the hidden teachings of Pythagoras.

My comment regarding the stars is simple scientific observation of cause and affect, I post a valid comment, I receive a reply, a simple puerile one liner,can earn the poster 5 stars. My conclusion, I am a star maker.

Yes, you are a star maker, because most of your statements in this thread were NOT valid and the misunderstandings were corrected and facts were presented to demonstrate it. You criticized evolution unjustly, attacked science as a whole and made up a whole bunch of nonsense about scientific theories you didn't like. Generally people give stars to folks when errors in understanding are corrected, because the purpose of this site is to deny ignorance. If somebody tells me they have proof of something, I expect that proof to be presented.

a reply to: Barcs

This is the problem I find with many pseudo-scientific topics. One of their favorite rebuttals is, "but but... Philosophy!" Philosophy is a good springboard to newer scientific ideas and topics, but it isn't a replacement for real scientific research. You are free to let your own personal philosophy say what you want it to say, but if it contradicts science, you are probably wrong.

originally posted by: josehelps
a reply to: Barcs

What do you mean there aren't that many people? Every time God made a decision that changed the face of humanity, humans were there to endure the punishment, EACH and every soul. Sure they are all dead, but they left documentation. There is no reason to assume every story in the book is true? No, there is no reason to assume any of it was made up. They were probably real as well, unless you know something that everyone else doesn't .

My point was that it could be all made up, and you wouldn't know. There is no reason to assume they are true. People write a lot of nonsense and fiction stories. It's part of our culture. We create fiction to read to kids before bed, who are you to say that these weren't originally bed time stories for kids to teach a lesson? But again, the Greek, Roman and Egyptian gods were written about by witnesses as well. Why are they not valid while your compilation book is? I'd like to get a legitimate answer on this. If it's just faith, then why argue about the validity?

I'm sorry, Evolution has never been proven to have a strong hold over time. It's all in your imagination. Now if you had a book like the bible that made such claims that we were able to match up with today, you might be onto something.

Evolution is beyond proven and you haven't addressed the evidence, so who are you to say it's false? You aren't a biologist. You haven't studied it. You haven't even read the bare minimum about it, let alone presented valid evidence against it.

I don't have to prove anything supernatural exists. We already have a historical document proven we are made from supernatural design. We also have documentation of supernatural abilities in the usage during the bible, as well as today.

The bible isn't proof of anything , other than the people believed that at the time. Science uses verifiable experiments. The bible makes demonstrably false claims that cannot be verified. Sorry the bible isn't proof. Otherwise, the Koran is proof of Allah, and the book of the dead is proof of the ancient Egyptian gods. Are you suggesting that all of these gods exist? They were all written about by witnesses in historical documents as well. You are seemingly trying to say there is proof beyond faith, but howso? Please explain your proof and why it counts more than other documented gods.

Of course I know monkeys aren't claimed to give birth to a human, but through long evolution it might as well be the same thing.

It's not even close to the same thing.

You're are trying to tell me that since small research proving that speciation shows groups that no longer create offspring with their original group, that they changed species.

That's the biological definition species. You are getting caught up in the labels. Organisms all slowly change over time with genetic mutations. This is a proven fact. If you are suggesting that small changes cannot add up, you need yo explain why.

I have yet to hear of a doctor telling a woman that the reason she cant make babies is because she mutated.

fertilitynj.com...

here are some PROVABLE FACTS you can learn about.

Humans had Telepathy, just like God up until the tower of babel. You probably missed the fact that language was NEVER mentioned in the bible even though God allegedly created Adam and Eve. There was never mention about God teaching them how to talk, but he sure was interested in controlling them. There was also never mention of language regarding other races that were also here on Earth. It never became a problem until God scrambled our language. But taking our Supernatural ability away to speak to our own race and any other race, we had to invent language. God only removed our ability to transmit telepathy, this is why you hear stories about people getting abducted claiming the alien was talking to them via telepathy. It's a primary ability that ALL humanoids have, unless someone tampered with them like God did to us.

None of that is provable. You're calling science a fantasy and then claiming that as fact?

Scientists have been baffled at how humans got dispersed all over the globe, HERE YOU GO.

No they aren't.

Here is proof we are not from Earth, and are from supernatural design.

Faith in Action

Sorry faith in ancient texts is not proof Mr tooth. Otherwise I can prove Zeus exists.

Plus you straw man the defintion of faith to suit your needs. Faith can mean trust and faith can mean blind belief. For you and other religious folks it is both.

If you are incredulous to this even being a possibility, you may want to research more on remote viewing and explain to me how it is that not only have several people had this ability and were even employed by the Government for it, but they later opened up 16 training centers in the USA to teach others how to access this supernatural ability.

I'm not saying your viewpoint is wrong. I'm saying there's no proof of it and that evolution is a valid science, regardless of the nonsense you make up to discount it.

My claims about what is found in the bible in terms of it's supernatural origin is ALL redundantly backed up by other facts, also found in the bible,

You do realize that is the textbook definition of a circular argument right? I claim the bible is right. How do I know? It says it in the bible.

a reply to: AngryCymraeg

Ok I looked at it, and the common sense problem here that uneducated people are making here, is that they are basing Evolution took place, based on our ASSUMED knowledge of knowing what the bacterium was Suppose to be known to eat. Just because they were able to find it eating something else, could have stemmed from them not knowing that they would have before. It's poor insight and judgement and a lot of assumptions are being made which are not proof.

Again you are confusing correlation with causation.

a reply to: kayej1188

Many people do not believe that the Bible is a reliable document of history. But, the fact is the Bible is very trustworthy as a historical document. If we were to look at a chart that compared the biblical documents with other ancient documents, we would see that the Bible is in a class by itself regarding the number of ancient copies and their reliability. Please consider the chart below.1

Author Date
Written Earliest Copy Approximate Time Span between original & copy Number of Copies Accuracy of Copies
Lucretius died 55 or 53 B.C.
1100 yrs. 2 ----
Pliny A.D. 61-113. A.D. 850. 750 yrs. 7 ----
Plato 427-347 B.C. A.D. 900. 1200 yrs. 7 ----
Demosthenes 4th Cent. B.C. A.D. 1100. 800 yrs. 8 ----
Herodotus 480-425 B.C. A.D. 900. 1300 yrs. 8 ----
Suetonius A.D. 75-160. A.D. 950. 800 yrs. 8 ----
Thucydides 460-400 B.C. A.D. 900. 1300 yrs. 8 ----
Euripides 480-406 B.C. A.D. 1100. 1300 yrs. 9 ----
Aristophanes 450-385 B.C. A.D. 900. 1200 yrs. 10 ----
Caesar 100-44 B.C. A.D. 900. 1000 yrs. 10 ----
Livy 59 BC-AD 17 ---- ??? 20 ----
Tacitus circa A.D. 100. A.D. 1100. 1000 yrs. 20 ----
Aristotle 384-322 B.C. A.D. 1100. 1400 yrs. 49 ----
Sophocles 496-406 B.C. A.D. 1000. 1400 yrs. 193 ----
Homer (Iliad) 900 B.C. 400 B.C. 500 yrs. 643 95%
New
Testament 1st Cent. A.D. (A.D. 50-100) 2nd Cent. A.D.
(c. A.D. 130 f.) less than 100 years 5600 99.5%

It should be obvious that the biblical documents, especially the New Testament documents, are superior in their quantity, time span from original occurrence, and textual reliability. People still question if the documents are reliably transmitted to us; but they should rather ask if the biblical documents record actual historical accounts.
The Bible is a book of History

It could be said that the Bible is a book of history--and it is. The Bible describes places, people, and events in various degrees of detail. It is essentially an historical account of the people of God throughout thousands of years. If you open to almost any page in the Bible you will find a name of a place and/or a person. Much of this can be verified from archaeology. Though archaeology cannot prove that the Bible is the inspired word of God, it has the ability to prove whether or not some events and locations described therein are true or false. So far, however, there isn't a single archaeological discovery that disproves the Bible in any way.

Nevertheless, many people used to think that the Bible had numerous historical errors in it such as Luke's account of Lysanias being the tetrarch of Abiline in about A.D. 27 (Luke 3:1). For years scholars used this "factual error" to prove Luke was wrong because it was common knowledge that Lysanias was not a tetrarch but the ruler of Chalcis about 50 years earlier than what Luke described. But an archaeological inscription was found that said Lysanias was the tetrarch in Abila near Damascus at the time that Luke said. It turns out that there had been two people name Lysanias, and Luke had accurately recorded the facts.

Also, the walls of Jericho have been found--destroyed just as the Bible says. Many critics doubted that Nazareth ever existed, yet archaeologists have found a first-century synagogue inscription at Caesarea that has verified its existence. Finds have verified the existence of Herod the Great and his son Herod Antipas. The remains of the Apostle Peter's house have been found at Capernaum. Bones with nail scars through the wrists and feet have been uncovered as well demonstrating the actuality of crucifixion. The High Priest Caiaphas' bones have been discovered in an ossuary (a box used to store bones).

There is, of course, a host of archaeological digs that corroborate biblical records on places such as Bethsaida, Bethany, Caesarea Philippi, Capernaum, Cyprus, Galatia, Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, Athens, Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, etc.

An inscribed stone was found that refers to Pontius Pilate, named as Prefect of Judaea.’ (The New Bible Dictionary, (Wheaton, Illinois: Tyndale House Publishers, Inc.; 1962.)
Luke 3:1, "Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Caesar, when Pontius Pilate was governor of Judea . . . "
"A decree of Claudius found at Delphi (Greece) describes Gallio as proconsul of Achaia in ad 51, thus giving a correlation with the ministry of Paul in Corinth (Acts 18:12)." (The New Bible Dictionary)
Acts 18:12, "But while Gallio was proconsul of Achaia, the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat."
Excavations have revealed a text naming a benefactor Erastus which may be a reference relating to the city-treasurer of Rom. 16:23. (The New Bible Dictionary)
Rom. 16:23, "Gaius, host to me and to the whole church, greets you. Erastus, the city treasurer greets you, and Quartus, the brother."
At Ephesus parts of the temple of Artemis have been uncovered as is mentioned in Acts 19:28-41. (The New Bible Dictionary)
Acts 19:28, "And when they heard this and were filled with rage, they began crying out, saying, "Great is Artemis of the Ephesians."
"It is known that Quirinius was made governor of Syria by Augustus in AD 6. Archaeologist Sir William Ramsay discovered several inscriptions that indicated that Quirinius was governor of Syria on two occasions, the first time several years prior to this date . . . archaeology has provided some unexpected and supportive answers. Additionally, while supplying the background behind these events, archaeology also assists us in establishing several facts: (1) A taxation-census was a fairly common procedure in the Roman Empire and it did occur in Judea, in particular. (2) Persons were required to return to their home city in order to fulfill the requirements of the process. (3) These procedures were apparently employed during the reign of Augustus (37 BC–AD 14), placing it well within the general time frame of Jesus’ birth."2
"The historical trustworthiness of Luke has been attested by a number of inscriptions. The ‘politarchs’ of Thessalonica (Acts 17:6, 8) were magistrates and are named in five inscriptions from the city in the 1st century AD. Similarly Publius is correctly designated proµtos (‘first man’) or Governor of Malta (Acts 28:7). Near Lystra inscriptions record the dedication to Zeus of a statue of Hermes by some Lycaonians, and near by was a stone altar for ‘the Hearer of Prayer’ (Zeus) and Hermes. This explains the local identification of Barnabas and Paul with Zeus (Jupiter) and Hermes (Mercury) respectively (Acts 14:11). Derbe, Paul’s next stopping-place, was identified by Ballance in 1956 with Kaerti Hüyük near Karaman (ASLuke 2:2) and to Lysanias as tetrarch of Abilene (Luke 3:1) have likewise received inscriptional support." (The New Bible Dictionary.) 7, 1957, pp. 147ff.). Luke’s earlier references to Quirinius as governor of Syria before the death of Herod I (Luke 2:2) and to Lysanias as tetrarch of Abilene (Luke 3:1) have likewise received inscriptional support." (The New Bible Dictionary.)

There are many such archaeological verifications of biblical events and places. Is the Bible trustworthy? Absolutely! Remember, no archaeological discovery has ever contradicted the Bible. Therefore, since it has been verified over and over again throughout the centuries, we can continue to trust it as an accurate historical document.

carm.org...

originally posted by: josehelps
a reply to: kayej1188
....
And you are WRONG again. The bible is considered to be "A Historical Document."

"Bible the work contains many historical documents"

rationalwiki.org...

I know others would have pointed this out by now, but it deserves repeating -

Hilarious. You just own-goaled yourself with that link that you didn't actually read.

a reply to: josehelps

Your statement is incorrect on so many fundamental points that I barely know where to begin. I note, by the way, that you did not address my earlier posts about the bible. So, here we go again. The bible says that Solomon was the king of a large kingdom that stretched from the border of Syria to the border of Egypt. Archaeology tells us that there is no sign of any such kingdom over such an area. There is also evidence that at this time Jerusalem contained under a thousand people. That's not much of a capital for a great kingdom and there's also the fact that no trace of the Temple of Solomon - not a brick, not a carving, not a stone - has ever been found. You mentioned Jericho, which was supposed to be conquered by Joshua at around 1,400BC. Small problem - it was then a ruin, having been destroyed at around 1562BC, according to radio carbon dating. There's no evidence of the invasion of Canaan. There's also no archaeological evidence that the Exodus even happened. The bible is not an accurate document. Barely any references to the Hittites? Pi is 3? St James vanishes? The Ark vanishes? The missing female consort of god? No evidence of a global flood?
Look, I'm sorry but the bible is a collection of folk tales and myths, leavened with philosophy.

a reply to: kayej1188

Tell you some, well some of those would be based on the findings in the bible, clearly showing we had supernatural abilities, and no one would EVER be able to convince me that evolution makes supernatural abilities. If you have ever heard the old saying that the chances are compared to a completely disassembled 747 being magically reassembled in a storm, this would be like that, only times a million. I'm sorry, it's just not possible.

Genetic variation is incorrectly observed and attributed to Evolution. Again I think you are confusing correlation with causation. Can you prove the difference? Evolutionists do the same thing in regards to assuming similarity's in our DNA with everything else to mean we are once again related. However they totally ignore the fact that a creator could use the same DNA to make different life. Evolution was only created for people that either didn't understand the bible, or didn't want to understand the bible, which I totally get. If I was you, I would probably believe in Evolution too. You lack the Supernatural understanding to realize just how dead on it is. There are NO gaps in understanding our history through the supernatural unlike Evolution. There are pretend sections that hold Evolution together, parts that have never been observed or have proof, or bones, or any other proof. Oddly with the Supernatural it's all redundantly backed up by multiple things, some of which are also in the bible, and some which are found in science TODAY. I don't need to pretend, I know exactly how humans got to earth and it has nothing to do with any of the other life that is here today.

First off I don't have a theory. A theory would mean there are opinionated sections of my claims. I have, or truthfully had no opinion about any of this, until I got toward the end. Of course now I do have an opinion. I need to make this clear, no one and certainly not I, woke up one morning and decided to prove Adam and Eve were abducted by aliens and we were relocated to this planet against our will, and that the person claiming to be our creator is deceitful, dishonest, and evil. Who would do that?

I stumbled onto this back in 2009 while doing an Etiology, and it grabbed my attention. I didn't believe what I found so followed it up to see if I was understanding it correctly by seeing if it was backed up by anything else. After about 87 times of being in denial about this, I realized it's too obvious that it's dead on accurate.

Assecing a crime scene, and finding a dead victim with a 357 mag slug in his chest, and the gun near by on the ground, leading to finger prints that identifies a person that has no aliby, obviously at the scene of the crime when it happened, and finding gun residue all over his hands, and the gun registered to him, and he is hard of hearing from his ears being exposed to open gun fire, and he has the victims blood splatter found on his body as well. I'm pretty sure he did it.

Meanwhile your trying to tell me a gunman on the grassy knoll did it.

I'm a researcher, since you asked. I do research for businesses that need details on products.

I can't fit everything that proves we are from another planet, in this little box. But perhaps starting with some OBVIOUS quotes, in addition to how they currently match in science today, will open your eyes.

As you know, I'm claiming the bible is clearly indicating Adam and Eve were abducted, and brought to this planet.
Here is some bible help in this section.

Faith Produces Action (Faithfulness) (vv. 4-12)

The key question in our messes, brokenness, discouragement, and exile, and in our successes, blessings, celebrations, and joys needs to be, “What is God doing and how can I be a part of that?” That is faithfulness. And that comes out of the hearts and hands of people who realize that earth is not our home.[sic]

In plain English, it's saying Earth is NOT our HOME. GET IT! good.

Our planet was populated with only one woman. This woman, we will call Eve for the argument. Science concurrs. Research of our Mitochondrial DNA explains that one female other than her mother, have the ONLY unbroken line to descent to every living human on Earth. They can see contemporaries in the history but their lineage is broken.

What this means in English, is first of all, we are inbred, and we have the defects in our DNA to prove it as well. We have over 4,000 gross defects in our genes, and it will get worse with time. Another thing they are claiming is that Eve was separated from her contemporaries. Now it's clear she was abducted and separated from her family. Of course the obvious here is that God did not create us like we understood, 6,000 years ago, with the same article showing Y-chromosome Adam to possibly be 587,000 years old.

You can read the wiki for explanation here.

Later on in the Ezekiel chapter in the bible, God is visioned descending from the skies in a metallic space craft. Being how it was first obvious that Adam and Eve were abducted, and fit two of the qualifying sections under commonly known abduction details, now we have proof that God was a space alien as he flies in a metallic space craft. It was at this point that I knew I need to turn on my alien radar to make sure I didn't miss any other points.

Being that we were abducted from another planet, this obviously means we are also aliens. Can you please share any instinctive values you have that proves humans are from Earth?

Ecologist/ Dr. Ellis Silver even has a book claiming Humans are NOT from Earth.

www.dailymail.co.uk...

So is he wrong too? How can you be making the false delusional assumption (based on opinion BTW) that humans are related to primates, when we aren't even from the same planet?

Intervention is NOT a theory...

Intervention is the understanding that we were brought to this planet by another life form, against our will. It's not a religion, not a faith, not a cult, not a belief, not a practice, not a church, not a following, not a theory, not a hypothesis, it's certainly not a joke, it's simply an understanding based on redundant facts. This understanding can only be realized if you have a plethora of years in the study of the supernatural, and have a keen eye for spotting activity in stories, even if the author doesn't. Of course the best source for this information is several versions of the bible, in addition to the facts that concur in science. Lets be sure I'm clear on this. Lets pretend for the moment that you know nothing about math, and let's say that I present you with a problem that says four times four. Now lets say that this subject is seriously something you want to understand, as this is about your lineage. You might even come up with some ideas as to what it means. But there is seriously no way you're going to guess what it all means.