Evolution is a farce: Evidence

Genesis supports Evolution

Same topic ... somehow.

originally posted by: josehelps
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Your not explaining why we didn't keep any parts of any form of any social language they have.

That's cool. You haven't told me which primates are able to speak. So I guess we are both even.

originally posted by: josehelps
I have been telling friends and family for years that if our sun was truly our sun, it wouldn't burn us, it wouldn't give us skin cancer, we wouldn't have to wear sun protection, we wouldn't have to wear sunglasses.

Why wouldn't we?

We only need sun screen in some places and while skin cancer takes a terrible tole on those affected, it doesn't kill or harm enough people to have an affect on the population and our progress as a species.

Why would you assume that we would/should have a perfect living environment?

a reply to: Prezbo369

Because it's not our target sun

a reply to: GetHyped

haha touché!

a reply to: Krazysh0t

They can sign and communicate with us.
We are not so different.

a reply to: boymonkey74

Well those are the ones that we TAUGHT how to speak.

originally posted by: kennyb72
When it comes to omniscience and omnipotence, size really doesn't matter.

I do not believe any being could exist with those attributes.

Can God create a rock so heavy he can't lift it?

Omnipotence Paradox

originally posted by: josehelps
a reply to: kayej1188

Ya, it's really a big story, with what all happened to us, it's not something easy to simply debate about. But I'll try.

1* his books are largely rejected by scientists and academics / Of course they are. You're bringing a knife to a gun fight. I don't know how many more times I have to post this, but I hope this is the last. The supernatural is not tested, bound, measured, observed, understood, or even remotely related to science. So here it is again, maybe this time you will read it and understand it.

su·per·nat·u·ral

/ˌso͞opərˈnaCH(ə)rəl/

adjective

adjective: supernatural

1. (of a manifestation or event) attributed to some force beyond scientific understanding or the laws of nature.

"a supernatural being"

synonyms:paranormal, psychic, magic, magical, occult, mystic, mystical, superhuman, supernormal; More

rareextramundane

"supernatural powers"

ghostly, phantom, spectral, otherworldly, unearthly, unnatural

"a supernatural being"

unnaturally or extraordinarily great.

"a woman of supernatural beauty"

noun

noun: supernatural; plural noun: supernaturals

1. manifestations or events considered to be of supernatural origin, such as ghosts.


2* Well probably none that I have mentioned yet so far. You see, it was quite odd that God made these clear orders to have our abilities removed, in the bible, but what was even odder, was trying to figure out exactly how he did it. It would appear that the only remaining thing that we haven't dismissed in science to explain why some people here on Earth have powers and others don't is variances in each persons DNA. Even people with these gifts, usually end up getting cat scans and MRI's to try to see why they are so different, which of course never reveals anything unusual. Again, this equipment doesn't look at the DNA. Where things get real crazy is that there is what appears to be proof that God manipulated DNA to make his own versions of existing life. In the same Ezekiel chapter where god descends in a UFO, he is witnessed being accompanied by a four headed creature of lion, ox, eagle and man. In another reference God states that punishments will be handed down to our offspring.
This technology you are reading about has the ability to program, or reprogram DNA using sounds and word. Is it just possible that this is what was meant by the term "The word of God?" Either way, at the end of the order of removal of our supernatural abilities, God admits to making us sick by indicating we can turn and be healed. So not only did he have a way to make us sick through DNA, but he also had a way to put us back to normal. In the future because of this technology, you will see doctors using sound booths where they have you sit in for a few minutes and expose yourself to a per-determined set of sounds and words to heal you.

3* The 10% brain myth according to wiki is nothing more than a myth, and they are CERTAIN our brains are operating at full potential. Then they turn around at the end and say however we know very little about the brain. Now you can read the cold hard facts. Allan Snyder has dis-proven the claim that it's just a myth. It's common sense people. If your brain can work better, there is only one simple reason why, because it can.

4* Well nobody here on ATS tested the fetus and professionaly determined it to be a squirrel fetus, and ATS is not an authority on the subject, plus I would be more than careful at taking the opinion from anyone on ATS. I mean after all, just look, we have people that actually think we evolved.

5* See number 3

6* It does actually reference the original Eve as we have been taught, and they just haven't figured this out, and there are a multitude of reasons why I can say this for sure. The first is that it's clear as I mentioned earlier, Adam and Eve were abducted and brought to Earth. This female that was abducted, is one and the same that we all know as biblical Eve (which however is not the real first female in our real lineage). If you read the article, you will clearly see, she was separated from her contemporaries. This is obvious proof she was abducted. She also has lineage prior to that which NIH is not public with. You have to be smart enough to read between the lines and realize they never actually tell us exactly how far back our lineage goes, and I'll tell you why. It's simple, it goes back further than the age of earth and the world would either think they are idiots and did something wrong, or all hell would break loose. This also tells of course the obvious that God didn't create us allegedly when we were claimed to have been created. Which also tells us that God is not our real creator. Unfortunately it also proves we are all inbred as well.

7* You should read it again, as I'm sure you're not getting this.

8* No, Francis S. Collins was the head of NIH during the mapping of the genome. I could care less about anyone's opinions here, in case you haven't noticed I'm only interested in facts. And seriously, if YOU want to have any credibility here, or anywhere in the world, you should be too.

9* Ah yes the cheese guide. I have spent countless hours tying to figure out how humans are suppose to acquire their needed 1000mg of calcium per day. It's simply not here. Fruits and vegetables only offer low double digits, and cows milk isn't natural, it's processed, and it's not good for you. Cheese even though processed seemed to be the best source.

In the United States, more than 40 million people either already have osteoporosis or are at high risk due to low bone mass. According to the National Institute of health.

Gray aliens dumped us here without our proper food. SUFFER!

you have yet to prove that a) a supernatural event took place, b) that supernatural event was caused by a god, and c) which god caused it.

still an awful lot of presupposition going on here.

a reply to: josehelps

I'm just curious..what exactly is it about the definition of supernatural that you think we're not understanding? You've posted this definition about 8 times thus far, yet everybody here knows exactly what supernatural means. I'd like to point out a few things to you regarding your overall logic.

1) You say: "The supernatural is not tested, bound, measured, observed, understood, or even remotely related to science." If the supernatural cannot be observed, understood, or tested, then it necessarily follows that one cannot know for certain that it exists. After all, how can you possibly know for sure something exists that is, by its very definition, not able to be observed or understood?

2) Just wanted to bring up your numbered point "8)" regarding Francis Collins. Nothing I mentioned about him were opinions, these were direct quotes from him and facts about his life. They were straight from his Wikipedia page, which you love to cite. Also, just to help you out in the future, the phrase is not "I could care less.." This would imply that you actually do indeed care. The correct phrase is "I could NOT care less."

3) I'm going to bring up one of the more obvious logical fallacies you make, so listen closely. I understand that science is not your strong suit, but you make the claim that we use "science to explain why some people here on Earth have powers and others don't" and concluded that this occurs due to "..variances in each persons DNA." As you may or may not know, DNA is a nucleic acid--made up of Nitrogen-containing bases, monosaccharide sugars (called deoxyribose), and Phosphate-groups. DNA undergoes transcription and translation to create proteins. DNA and it's processes are physical, natural, observable, measurable, and testable. But you claim that changes in DNA account for people having supernatural powers? Since supernatural, by definition, is something above and beyond the laws of nature, how could it be attributed to changes in DNA? You see, every change or mutation in DNA is accompanied by a physical, natural, testable change. This change will be manifested in either a person's phenotype, or their genotype. But no matter how you look at it, changes in something purely natural and physical cannot, by definition, manifest in something supernatural. If supernatural abilities are due to changes in DNA, then they can NOT be considered supernatural, rather, they would be natural.

4) Your blurb about mitochondrial eve lacks any basis. How is any of this "obvious proof that Eve was abducted?" Mt-Eve is simply the most recent carrier of the unbroken lineage of mitochondrial DNA. Every resource you mentioned clearly states that that is known and proven that "mitochondrial eve" was living among 10's of thousands of other women (yes, here on earth, not another planet), and had a mother (yes, here on earth). You have still failed to provide one valid source which backs up your claim on this matter. And no, the bible would not be considered a valid source, for reasons mentioned numerous times. Also, you haven't addressed this point mentioned in the article you provided, which clearly contradicts your ideas: "This was the first crucial step in understanding the usefulness of mtDNA in estimating evolutionary divergence and relationships,[13] and they soon published a paper describing the evolutionary relationships among gorillas, chimpanzees (common chimpanzee and bonobo) and humans.[14] "

5) Your claims about cheese and osteoporosis being proof that aliens dumped us here (LOL), also lack any basis. I'm having trouble linking the two ideas. Yes, osteoporosis is a very common condition that humans acquire. It's one of the conditions that result from age-related degeneration. Our bodies break down over time, it's a natural process. Our DNA's ability to fix germline mutations decreases as we age, which results in degenerative deleterious effects. This is why osteoporosis mainly occurs in people after the age of 50, and 80% of cases occur in women. Post-menopausal women produce significantly less estrogen, and thus they lose the bone-protective effects of this hormone. Osteoporosis actually fits in beautifully with evolutionary theory--"Age related bone loss is common among humans due to exhibiting less dense bones than other primate species.[55] Because of the more porous bones of humans, frequency of severe osteoporosis and osteoporosis related fractures is higher.[56] The human vulnerability to osteoporosis is an obvious cost but it can be justified by the advantage of bipedalism inferring that this vulnerability is the byproduct of such.[56] It has been suggested that porous bones help to absorb the increased stress that we have on two surfaces compared to our primate counterparts who have four surfaces to disperse the force.[55] In addition, the porosity allows for more flexibility and a lighter skeleton that is easier to support.[56] One other consideration may be that diets today have much lower amounts of calcium than the diets of other primates or the tetrapedal ancestors to humans which may lead to higher likelihood to show signs of osteoporosis.[57]" Human diets have changed over time, I do hope that you realize this.

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Prezbo369

Because it's not our target sun

What about target universe? 99.9% of our universe, we cannot survive in! We aren't from here! Ahhhhhhhh!

a reply to: kayej1188

Exactly, but don't take it at face value on just that.
Also consider the following...
Some people here on Earth have or had back in history supernatural abilities.
The fact that the bible clearly references we were abducted.
The fact that mtDNA matches with proof that we were abducted, and also inbred, and God not being our real creator, and us having previous lineage.
Also take into account that our own Government has shared that we know of 160 different alien species at this time. Keep in mind that would only pertain to Ether what they have caught, killed, or witnessed.
Don't forget about chapter 13 of the FEMA manual clearly showing that not only are alien visitations real but they have caused us serious problems in history with electrical blackouts.
One source I found by the name of Lloyd Pye, is clearly explaining that through his dealing with several DNA labs, he was able to learn that human DNA has obvious signs of being tampered with. There are six sections which are inverted, two chromosomes which are fused and a gross amount of defects. The defects are from us being inbred, and the rest is changes made to our early ancestors way long before we had the technology.
WHO DID THIS? Who could possess that type of technology? Well when an alien abducts you and a counter part and erases your memory and replants you on a planet not made for you, you have now been set back to day one in addition to fighting an uphill battle through genetics.

Also don't forget about supernatural findings by Michael Persinger, and Allan Snyder, the fact that we have people that remote view, and they were listed in the bible as visions, removed also in the bible. Dont forget Robert Fludd, Ted Serios, David Morehouse, Ingo Swann and Joseph McMoneagle, Hopkins, Jacobs and sociologist Dr. Ron Westrum, Endangered animal Author, George, S Fichter, 10% brain myth, Dr. Gariaev, Earth-is-not-our-home-hebrews.

Then you have a little more reason to understand and accept it.

a reply to: Krazysh0t What I was trying to say, is that we didn't keep any of their language, or their ways. WE HAVE NOTHING IN COMMON WITH THEM ASIDE FROM THE FACT THEY ARE A FORM OF HUMANOID.

a reply to: kayej1188 I can't observe radio waves, but I know they exist. I can't observe words but I know they exist. It depends on what you are talking about. Events that are caused by someone that can identified as the source of the change, is the only way to do it, and even then, it's not the same as scientific. The supernatural cannot be observed by SCIENCE, in terms of it's limitations. It's not bound by SCIENCE. This seems to be hardest part your not getting.

No, Dr Collins personal beliefs, while they may have been listed on the site, have NOTHING to do with the human genome being decoded.

I don't believe God used Supernatural abilities to alter our DNA and I'm sorry if I came off eluding to such. I'm sure it was through science, obviously as we are now able to do it as well. While that's not proof necessarily of how he did it, there does seem to be a pattern here of the use of science.

The virgin Mary, thought by some to still be from miracle, has been achievable for decades now, through invetro fertilization.
The large explosion God used in Sodom and Gomorrah which turned the sand to glass, and fire and brimstone, and flash you were not suppose to look at, creating pillars of salt. Very familiar to what we have called an atomic bomb.
The Arc of the covenant is very similar to what we have today known as a radio transmitter. Again, if Adam and Eve's memory were erased, we started from ground zero. This obviously place Gods technology way ahead of ours.
Now we find a Russian scientist that is able to reprogram DNA using sounds and words. Not that it's proof but it is quite odd how there is important reference to "The word of God" when changes are made.

You need to go back and read it obviously. You're not understanding it.

Mitochondrial Eve is named after mitochondria and the biblical Eve.[2] Unlike her biblical namesake, she was not the only living human female of her time. However, her female contemporaries, excluding her mother, failed to produce a direct unbroken female line to any living woman in the present day.

What it's showing is that she obviously had female lineage among here, but they all failed to produce a direct line to us today. This is because she is the OLDEST common descendent to US. The others did not recombine, because they were inbred. Again it goes back to Eve. She was OUR first, but they also aren't telling us about her prior lineage to living here. I don't know if you know this or not, you can't maintain a race with one female, which is why we are sick now. There are a lot of things that are common sense through extrapolation in this.

Well use some common sense, if a creator was smart enough to make you, along with Supernatural powers, don't you think he would be smart enough to create food for you? Don't you agree that if the person that made the car, never made gasoline, what a useless invention it would be?

a reply to: josehelps

Actually you can "observe" radio waves, turn on the radio, and there is the result. Deity is something else however. I am not suggesting one needs to validate deity. However to claim Creationism and evolution (for example, given the topic od the thread) are to play on the same playing field, one needs to set such rules.

Basically neighbor, you are trying to change the rules of the debate again.

a reply to: Prezbo369 If someone or something is smart enough to create you, let alone a whole planet in perfect balance, I'm sure they would provide you with the proper sun that doesn't damage you. Would you ever invent a car if there was no gasoline?

a reply to: Noinden And show me where a radio grows in the wild.

originally posted by: josehelps
a reply to: Noinden And show me where a radio grows in the wild.

Have you ever heard of something called the sun? It is actually a star.

solar.physics.montana.edu...

a reply to: kennyb72

Astyanax, and in three sentences explain to me what your argument is against Pythagorean Hylozoics as presented by Henry T Laurency in his book "The Philosophers Stone" As an alternative explanation to life on earth.

1. I see no problem with the current scientific explanations for the origin of species and the probable origins of life.
   
   
2. There is no existing record of what Pythagoras said, wrote or did, so any attempt to create a science out of his ideas is an utter travesty.
   
   
3. There is no need to disprove every crank theory that somebody puts on the table. Why should I prove to you that Earth is not flat?

a reply to: josehelps

Well neighbor, James Clerk Maxwell did a fantastic job predicting their existence based upon observations of how visible light behaved, it allowed subsequent scientists to go looking. I've yet to see such works for deity however. One does not need to have a "natural radio" to do such things. You are building yet more houses of straw, and well someone is going to huff and puff and you will be "homeless" yet again

You have demonstrated a complete lack of willingness to understand or acknowledge the validity of scientific method in this thread. Many of us have been patient with you. Hell a number of us are not (as you and your creationist pals imply) atheists, but actually theistic