Can you prove evolution wrong

reply to post by sacgamer25


You have to know I have read stuff from these sites before.

You tell me to disregard anything that is an assumption yet within a few paragraphs of the very first link I am asked to assume light may have been quicker in the past. This has not been observed or measured and by writing some people say light was quicker does not hide what the are doing is making an assumption.

The further you go the more I am asked to assume what the author says with no evidence other than attempts to refute any real science with assumptions taylor made to fit the young earth view.

Answer me this. Are fossils the work of satan put here to test us or did we once live amongst them?

reply to post by SN4FU


I point you to the lungfish. Long thought to be extinct, we have the fossils. Found to be alive and kicking. I have shown you the stones...... bones....... Fish.

Is that acceptable?

Is it really that hard to believe that the flintstones was a documentary?

reply to post by LogiosHermes27

I saw what you did there.

ups, 2nd line. (dammit cant do that either, oh well)

Satan placed all the fossils to trick us Thats about it, what more of an answer do you expect? Here is a rather beautiful visualization of the process

reply to post by Atzil321

Satan placed the fossils there? Where did he get them from? I thought all things were created by GOD. Does satan have the ability/power to create anything?
You embarrass me. There is blind faith and there is bad faith. I'm a Christian. I have that faith because of what I can only call a personal, revelatory encounter with the risen Lord Jesus Christ. People here can make of that what they will.
People (mostly western christians I'll admit,) tend to view the bible as something written by a bunch of english speaking people a couple of thousand years ago: People that looked, walked talked and thought like us. This is why you get so many poorly and uneducated interpretations of scripture written by people (Hebrews mostly,) who assumed that the people reading it knew what they were on about, be it syntax, idioms, puns, play on words, cultural trends etc.
People think dinosaurs aren't in the bible. They are. C'mon guys, the word 'dinosaur' didn't even exist 200 years ago!!! There is a Hebrew word used in the Genesis record 'Taniym'. It means 'monsters'. It refers to a group of the animals in the 'creational' scheme of things that didn't fit into all the other categories. There are poetical descriptions in the book of Job (recognised as the oldest book of the bible) that speak of creatures man was aware of, that sound very much like dinosaurs, even dragons in one case.
Dude, get a concordance/translator and read your bible for what it says, not what you think it means so you can fit it into your bad theology.

In regards to evolution.........there is no belief system involved...it is simply a conclusion drawn upon utilizing the scientific method of the evidence that exists. At this time, evidence continues to quantify it as a valid understanding of the appearance of intelligent life on this planet. However, anyone subscribing to this evidence would acknowledge any new developments that would be pro or con to their understanding of the existing evidence……..if and only if it substantiates itself in a replicable and objective manner of experimentation.

That stated, consider the following...........Humans have a genetic map that is 90% accurate to that of a flat worm (our earliest known fossil ancestor at this time) and 99.8% accurate to that of an Orangutan (our primate ancestor).......Humans show no direct genetic tree with all apes……..the chimpanzee and/or gorilla for instance branched off in different directions due to random environmental stimuli that to this day remain in their current development. Not all Orangutan’s evolved along the human route as well due to these various environmental impacts on both natural selection within the species……. and the evolution of extra species development as well.

The human species from a population standpoint has only recently grown in population exponentially since the development of economical energy applied to machine labor starting with the industrial revolution of the mid to late 1800’s. The limited energy (human and beast of burden) and resultant resource carrying capacity of the human population prior to those developments remained in the 500 million to 1 billion ranges for many centuries. Assuming an infinite growth of population as a result of humans reproducing for millions of years would have to assume infinite resources and/or energy from a finite planet. That not being the case is the reason why despite early humans tracing back millions of years ago, we haven’t outstripped the planet in population because of its finite sustainability characteristic and our limited technological developments of only the past 200 years.

Evolution is not an accident but a random event……..there is a difference. Our universe is conducive to life, if not for common occurrences of intelligent life at least at a molecule level. All molecular precursors to life are found throughout the universe. Those precursors in the form of amino acids are even found in interstellar gases. The critical point of a specific gravitational field, a medium liquid and temperature with specific atmospheric gases provides the ample environment for the recombination of amino acids into primitive molecular life. From there intelligent life would require many environmental issues that in my opinion make intelligent life in the universe quite rare in the factors of millions if not billions of failed processes on other planets………but the numbers are out there in our galaxy alone to side in favor of it. We are evidence of that on Earth in our galaxy.

What few people understand is that carbon based life is highly electrolized into recombination through the high valence level of electronic shell sharing by the element of carbon. Additionally, when compromised of organic hydrocarbon molecules the electrical charges of those molecules actually encourage recombination and replication over time. That at its simplest form is life and holds little mystery to it.

Why is our universe so conducive to atomic and organic molecule structure that encourages life as a result of the constitute of our matter and elementary forces is a matter of speculation at this time, but ample evidence is beginning to present itself at the quantum level that simply demonstrates that through higher dimensional bursts of quake bubbles, an infinite amount of universes can exist in an equal amount of infinite dimensional and force combinations that one universe will appear (if not many we are not aware of) that will result in the field characteristics capable of producing atomic structure and its recombination into organic based molecules. In other words life exists in our universe because we are here to observe that out of the potentially infinite amount of universes in existence.

I keep an open mind to the idea of an intelligent creator and am always interested with any replicable/objective evidence to quantify such a view. I’ve seen very little to substantiate it objectively as it is mostly a matter of faith that resides within unalterable authority for most. But that by no means discourages me to sharing further on the subject.

I hope you find this information helpful.

reply to post by metaldemon2000


Doesn't something have to be proven right, before it can be proven "100% wrong"? When did evolution become a fact?

reply to post by Lucius Driftwood

I like the point that if "dinosaurs" existed before the flood than according to the bible they exhisted after it. How did they fit on the 'ark' you say... well of course nothing in the bible suggested that noah had to take the adults.

That is actually a good point of science for this thread... According to most geologist there was a 'global event' at least four thousand of years ago...

It has been surmised that around this same time period there was a massive die out of many species. (again species... not genus or family or order etc...)

I prefer to believe this global event was a flood... not just water falling down but guysers rushing up... boulders and mountains were tossed around as "the waters of the deep" were released all at once...

And let's be honest... if Dino's were as big and plentiful as they would like us to believe... there was a lot of meat on them bones... could feed a small village weeks... or a pack of wild dogs could live off the scraps etc... And one thing human's have always been good at was keeping our bellies fed.

So where did the dino's go? We hunted, killed and ate them to extinction.

We've done it to other species even in rescent times. Why don't you think it couldn't have happened thousands of years ago? Of course it could have. Remember modern weapons are still just rocks, sticks and fire. So what if one man can kill as effectively as a hundred. big deal... just get a hundred hunters together with rocks sticks and fire.

Originally posted by Atzil321
Satan placed all the fossils to trick us

Thats about it, what more of an answer do you expect?

Do you seriously believe that??!?!?

Seriously?????????

reply to post by Kicking2bears

So where did the dino's go? We hunted, killed and ate them to extinction.

Small issue with that...humans didn't even exist before the dinosaurs died off. But who cares about facts, right?

reply to post by Kicking2bears


We also have many cave painting showing man hunting and the animals they hunted. It amazing that something so big would be missing from this record.

Ignoring the fact that many dino's were small (see birds) and most had teeth and were hunter themselves hunting the larger ones would be so fraught with danger it would be madness to put them on the menu. Man on the other hand would have been a tasty slow moving easy snack

We know about early mans diet by his rubbish. Strangely we do not find dino bones amongst it.

Can you point me to the info on the, according to most geologist there was a 'global event' at least four thousand of years ago and do they also agree it was a global flood.

reply to post by colin42


I think someone spent too much time in that Florida "Jesus Park" where you can roam around with mechanical dinosaurs and get into an arch that apparently saved people/animals from a global flood we KNOW never happened.

LINK

reply to post by MrXYZ


Thats just wrong. Nice to know Jesus is still a european white man. Some things never change.

Originally posted by colin42
reply to post by MrXYZ

 

Thats just wrong. Nice to know Jesus is still a european white man. Some things never change.

edit on 22-9-2011 by colin42 because: (no reason given)

To be honest, when I first heard about that park, I thought it was a joke

I mean, at least when people go to Disneyland, they KNOW it's not real...mice don't normally talk. But when it comes to this Jesus park, people going end up believing stuff that's DEMONSTRABLY wrong.

reply to post by HexagonSun

Dunno why but i just thought id let you know i agree with you i also believe in both

reply to post by Atzil321


I don't believe in a six day creation, but that video is beautifully done. There's no denying the poetry of the Bible, just its authorship!

reply to post by colin42


Remarkable discoveries by archaeologists and scientists indicate the human race is far older than we previously knew. Similar discoveries also indicate that we are close to evolving again, the Sphinx is over 1.2 million years old, and the Great Pyramid in Giza was built from the peak to the ground, plus many more discoveries that defy physics and are thus baffeling science, Truth and Fact are simply and idea accepted by the majority, doesn't always mean it's right today we witness this.

I used to date an ecologist/evolutionary biologist and we had this ongoing argument that went on for years.

The argument we had went something like this:

She believed evolutionary theory states that it takes hundreds of thousands of years for an animal to evolve, and that it only happens when said animal has a mutation that gives it an advantage over it's environment.

I would say to her... "show me some real direct evidence of this argument", the theory feels wrong to me and this is why. That argument implies that evolution is just a chaotic random set of mutations that happened to bring our planet to this state of highly evolved life, it implies that life is striving for the easiest possible existence, which would lead to a weaker existence in my opinion

WRONG!

Here is how evolution really works and why both the Bible's version and Science's version are both true, and false.

When an animal is confronted with a stressful, dangerous or different and difficult environment it goes through a process in it's lifetime of becoming tuned in to it's new home. It ceases to just exist in it's happy niche and it's brain starts to pay close attention to it's new world. In a colder environment with much snow, the hares and foul start to bear young that have traits that will help them deal with their environment. They are born with more hair, maybe it is white, and even their young are born to grow larger bodies maybe. This does not take hundreds of thousands of years, it starts to happen in the very first generations after climate or environment change. If it didn't happen this way most species would have died off long ago or never came to be. The evidence of this is everywhere, it takes place daily in our own lives. Humans in the Andes have evolved to have larger lung capacity than those living in the valleys in only a few thousand years. You cannot make me believe that these people have lived in the mountains for hundreds of thousands of years and they just migrated from the Himalayas or some other place. What about the Canadian fox breeding incident? I'm not going to go on here but the evidence is all around us.

That is one of the most important jobs of the brain, to log information and pass it on to the DNA of future generations to further the success of the species.

One more argument I have that I feel is share worthy.

If you take everything that happened during this day, today, across the universe and measured it in a beaker or some sort of container and called that the measurement of a day... and then went backward in time measuring these exact amounts into seven beakers, who is to say that you wont have everything that ever existed into these seven beakers, or days?. Scientists say that the universe is expanding, we all know that one of the major issues that we face now on this small planet is that too many things happen in a day now for us to keep a firm grasp on the future. Who is to say that this is not just another law of nature. At any given time you can follow history back to the beginning by simply going back seven increments of what you call is a day right now. Maybe this idea can be used for a second, or year perhaps as well, the point is that time diminishes very quickly as you go backwards in time. One day they will prove that time is speeding up, then this theory will be true to some extent.

Looking back in time can be comparable to looking down the road, the farther away things are the smaller they are comparably. It's just a question of perspective. The way we see things today is just seen in a different shape than it used to be. Tomorrow some new science will come along that proves that the earth is flat and yes it is the center of the universe.

Intelligent design is something that takes place inside of each individual animal in it's reaction to nature. It is something that is preordained in the fact that it follows an upward path to self awareness and conscious decision making. It draws life towards an ability mentally and physically master it's environment.

These ideas are simple and the evidence is all around us, but we are taught to have closed unwavering opinions for some reason.

Evolution is intelligent design in practice.

reply to post by aero56


This is a misconception about science and evolutionary theory. Nothing can be proven 100% true, because we only ever have a limited amount of knowledge upon which to base our conclusions. But we don't need 100% certainty, just a majority. It's the process of investigation that carries more weight. Science continues to grow as time goes on, because we continue to investigate and gain further knowledge that previous generations lacked. A good scientist is open to being proven wrong by the appearance of new data, in fact they welcome it! Richard Dawkins tells the story of one of his lecturers who held a particular theory of biology, only to see it demolished by a visiting lecturer. After the man had finished speaking, the man went up and thanked the visitor for proving him wrong, because in the process he'd also expanded his knowledge of biology. Creationists work in the opposite manner, adapting selected data to fit an existing belief.

reply to post by Kicking2bears

According to most geologist there was a 'global event' at least four thousand of years ago...

Who?

It has been surmised that around this same time period there was a massive die out of many species. (again species... not genus or family or order etc...)

That doesn't even make any sense, if a many species die out then obviously if will affect the genera they are contained in. A species cannot go extinct without decreasing the size of the genus.What you are saying is basically the same as saying, "People in America all died because of some [insert catastrophe here], but the population of the US remained the same"

Oh yeah, again, post some proof that there was a massive species die out 3,000 years ago

And let's be honest... if Dino's were as big and plentiful as they would like us to believe... there was a lot of meat on them bones... could feed a small village weeks... or a pack of wild dogs could live off the scraps etc... And one thing human's have always been good at was keeping our bellies fed.

Yeah, they probably did have a lot of meat on them and it probably would have provided humans with an ample amount of food. But just because this fact is true, does not mean that dinosaurs existed alongside humans. I actually have no idea how you could even connect the two ideas together

So where did the dino's go? We hunted, killed and ate them to extinction.

If by "We hunted, killed and ate them to extinction" you mean "Were the unfortunate victims of a colossal asteroid that hit the earth and changed the climate causing them to die" then yeah

Why don't you think it couldn't have happened thousands of years ago?

Because we have successfully and accurately radiometrically dated the fossils - often sending different fossils from the same dig to other, random, independent laboratories who have both confirm the same date - and have come to the conclusion that dinosaurs ceased to exist 65 million years ago.

You can attempt to prove these scientists (whose careers involve such areas as archaeology, palaeontology, geology, geophysics and many many more) wrong and also disprove evolution. Alls you have to do is find your own dinosaur fossil - you can probably borrow one if you ask real nice - and radio date it yourself, so that you find millions of scientists wrong by it being dated as 100,000 years old. It won't happen though