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 Zezima
I go to a Christian School.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
fact the evidence points in a young Earth, less than 10,000 years old.
What proof of creation?
The whole thing is a theory that keeps morphing when another proof of Creation appears
, now they have gone to punctuated equilibrium which basically states that 2 animals had a baby that was either male or female that was a completely different Kind, and that nearby another set of different animals had another one of the new kinds and was the other sex.
Talkorigins Now it's pretty silly that you criticise this considering that you creationist HAD TO adopt a mutant form of evolution to explain how all life can be traced back to the ark. Since every "KIND" of animal that there is today and has ever been could not possibly fit onto the ark you guys were looking pretty stupid. I mean you could fit all the species of beetles on the ark, let alone all the root "kinds" of modern life. And how did the plants survive underwater for 40 days and nights? THERE is an impossibility for you.
The theory of Punctuated Equilibria provides paleontologists with an explanation for the patterns which they find in the fossil record. This pattern includes the characteristically abrupt appearance of new species, the relative stability of morphology in widespread species, the distribution of transitional fossils when those are found, the apparent differences in morphology between ancestral and daughter species, and the pattern of extinction of species.
Again, what evidence, where? Never, ever have I seen anything supporting the creation myth in scientific journals.
There is so much good scientific evidence of Creation, or young earth age out there for those that seek to know.
Watch the new movie by Ben Stein coming out on DVD this week called EXPELLED
Have you ever looked at a watch and thought that wow over billions of years through "good mutations" and "natural selection" this watch has been made? Of course not, you see anything manufactured and you know that it was designed and made to operate the way it does.
One cell is more complicated than New York City and evolution wants you to believe that a New York City appeared out of water and rocks and electricity and that New York City found something to eat, another New York City to produce offspring with, and it all happened by accident.
If I put all the gears and makings of a watch in a room and kept it locked for 1 billion years would I return to find a finished watch???
And as for the reason you can not have the God of the Bible and evolution is simple, read Darwin's own words in how he described evolutionary theory. He said it was the meanest, cruelest and most evil thing he had ever thought of.
On the assumption that God even exists. This IS NOT a foregone conclusion.
God
It also gives our descendants strength and resistance to sickness you realise. Natural Selection is not the survival of the fittest but rather the survival of the most adaptive.
is Love and love doesn't use mutations and survival of the fittest, which is basically the killing off of the weaker kind through mutations
OK fine. Hypothetically, evolution doesn't exist. Is there still suffering in the world? Miscarriages? Babies born missing limbs, malformed or otherwise mutated. Id say God has a lot to answer for, but you seem to pretend that it doesn't exist. Life is tough. Life can be very ugly, and if you cant realise that and grow up you should just leave right now.
, to create everything you see on the planet today and in space and in the Galaxy and in the Universe. Love doesn't use chance and time and death to create, so evolutionary theory is by it's very nature anti-God.
There are a million things I would like to put out here but it is all to complicated for such a forum as this, please use the link above and read the information and look at the evidence and then use your melon to think.
Originally posted by JaxonRoberts
reply to post by Good Wolf
Hey, I liked Catwoman, thank you very much!!!
Originally posted by Horza
reply to post by Geemor
Can you explain why Creationists must argue that evolution goes against the idea of a creator?
Originally posted by Anonymous ATS
reply to post by Good Wolf
interesting, i checked that link and found no evidence of evolution. just a bunch of speculation as to what creature came from what. lots of bold claims and no solid evidence at all.
If this is all it takes to convince you of evolution then it shows you were just looking for an excuse to disbelieve in God and the Bible.
Evolutionists can play on words all tey like but an open minded person can stand back and see there is no evidence that creatures are evolving into other creatures.
lots of different types of dogs, pigs, cats or whatever. Nothing that cannot be axplained by adaption and variety within a species.
Originally posted by JPhish
Originally posted by Horza
reply to post by Geemor
Can you explain why Creationists must argue that evolution goes against the idea of a creator?
it does because modern evolutionary theory claims that everything happened by chance. There is no chance in a world governed by the G*d depicted in the bible. There is no aspect of "chance" in relation to other religions and spiritualities as well . . .
[edit on 10/21/2008 by JPhish]
Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by juveous
Im not going to ridicule you for being a christian. I respect your opinion because it's thought out and rational. I used to be a christian too, and a few years ago I was a creationist, so I do get creationism but when I learned that evolution was not equal to atheism but rather the rejection of dated fables, I had to follow my gut, I became an "evolutionist". What I don't get is why others are so unable to do the same. Someone said that these people are unable to distinguish doctrine from deity, which makes sense to me.
Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by juveous
they've got it wrong. Mutation is random and to certain degree, so is the environment BUT natural selection is not. Natural selection is just that, selective meaning what ever is best and most functional, wins.