It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
There was no worldwide flood 4000 years ago. There is absolutely no evidence of it in the fossil record.
Originally posted by Gorman91
Originally posted by MajorMalfunction
There was no worldwide flood 4000 years ago. There is absolutely no evidence of it in the fossil record.
Sea shell on highest mountains. Yea they were lower then, but it did NOT take 6000 years for them to get from sea level to there if it took millions of years for the rockies to form is SW USA.
+ most cultures, even isolated from others, preach a great flood around the same time. Native Americans, Christians, African aboriginals. Australian aboriginals. Chinese.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
I am wondering where ATS'rs stand on Evolution and Creation and the Age of the Earth. These two belief systems have been in a fight since the day the evolution theory was written down. So I am just wondering where the Trained Minds of the ATS boards stood. The two beliefs are pretty easy to understand when you get down to the bottom fo them.
1. All mankind came from Adam and Eve whom God created about 6000 years ago.
OR
2. All mankind came from a rock about 3-4.5 billion years ago.
Originally posted by Obliv_au
1) adam and eve have kids, who do their kids breed with?
and this even applies to noah and his 2 of each animal
in religion im supposed to believe that Incest, a game the whole family can play was responsible for spreading life?
dont think so, that makes god a hypocrit.
[edit on 17/7/07 by Obliv_au]
Originally posted by Rasobasi420
I think you may have gotten some misinfo. There have been Sea Shell Fossils on mountaintops, but that's to be expected given millions of years of change to plate tectonics.
Originally posted by jfj123
There is no fight between creationism and Evolution. It's a misconception that these are 2 competing theories. In fact, they are not. Only creationists say there is a fight over the 2 beliefs. Evolution is not a belief, it is a fact with it's foundation firmly set in scientific evidence accumulated over a LONG period of time and CONTINUALLY re-enforced with new evidence. The age of the universe, galaxies, solar systems, our planet, etc. are also not in dispute with anyone but creationists who refuse to belief FACT.
I'm not saying there is or isn't a god who may or may have not created the universe thus starting evolution. The problem is that there is ZERO evidence for the belief in creationism and there is tremendous amounts of evidence supporting Evolution.
Before anyone says, "evolution is just a theory", please read the definition for a scientific theory, it's not what you think it means.
I have known a few creationists who also believe that dinosaurs never existed. I have found there arguments are lost in ignorance of fact. I believe creationists in general have the same problem.
Originally posted by jfj123
there is tremendous amounts of evidence supporting Evolution.
Originally posted by dbrandt
Could you please post some of the "evidence" that says evolution is true.
I think you see evolution as a gradual change over time (one generation has a bump, then the next has it longer, then it turns into a finger ages later) But in fact this is false, evolution is a simple change that happens in one generation that makes it different, but still accepted. For example, if a cat is born it 5 fingers, its different, but not abandoned (mainly because mother doesn't see how it will cripple the kitten in the future) SO this 5 finger cat mates, one happens to be born with 5 finger and the rest with a normal 4. Now you have a 5 fingered cat in the gene pool. If, by chance, it finds a mate that has 5 fingers also (very rare, but it happens) then it will have more kids born with 5 fingers. If, by chance, the 5 fingered cats inbreed, then the gene becomes dominate. Over time, the gene become a major one, perhaps this gene allows it to climb faster, so it is more of a good mutation then bad, and because it is seen to be better, mates will be attracted to it rather then a slower 4 fingered cat. Eventually over time, all cats in the local group have 5 fingers. Now, if that local group remains isolated from 4 fingered cats, and its gene pool remains pure, it will slowly become a dominate gene, and replace the 4 fingered gene. Now, one more thing must happen. Tiny mutations happen in everyone, one of which is the inability, or difficulty, to mate with isolated gene pools. Like the liger. It shows that tigers and lions are still close enough genetically to mate, but so far away genetically, that the different chromosomes make the product sterile. So, after the 5 fingered cats become isolated for enough generations, it become impossible, or extremely difficult, to mate with 4 fingered cats. It may not even work, and the product would be sterile. Once the product become sterile, that means a new species is born, because now it no longer can mate with the original species.
Does that clear it up a bit? This has no conflict for me with the bible, as the bible talks about how everything changes, and how God made it so things could change.
Originally posted by Rasobasi420
Are you talking about the sea shells on mountain tops? Please provide a source for this info. And try not to link to any creationist web pages. If you can, poin me towards a reputable source without an individual agenda.
thx
Originally posted by Gorman91
SO this 5 finger cat mates, one happens to be born with 5 finger and the rest with a normal 4. Now you have a 5 fingered cat in the gene pool. If, by chance, it finds a mate that has 5 fingers also (very rare, but it happens) then it will have more kids born with 5 fingers.
This has no conflict for me with the bible, as the bible talks about how everything changes, and how God made it so things could change.
Originally posted by dbrandt
You haven't enhanced the case for evolution at all.
Could you please, please post the verse references for your statement that says the Bible contains verses stating everything changes.
The Bible says the opposite.
Ecclesaistes 1:[9] The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is no new thing under the sun.
[10] Is there any thing whereof it may be said, See, this is new? it hath been already of old time, which was before us.