Whoever made this post deserves a cookie.
Lol maybe but I've seen it before...
In this thread: Butthurt Jesus-freaks defend their giant rule book by being "disappointed" in us nonbelievers.
Please don't group all Christians together into one big, ignorant group. That guy arguing with you is a fool, but not all Christians are like that.
This I know, my friend. But I enjoy making him look like an ass. Don't worry. This trollololo lololo lololo is never srs.
Ah, I see. Just wanted to make sure you knew that. :)
Very true. Take Eminem for example. :) He's a Christian, though you might not think so...
Ah, I had no idea he was a Christian. That's cool. :)
Yes please, we're not all crazy, I can assure you.
To everyone trying to prove religion with facts, religion can't be proven with facts.
You need to take a leap of faith to believe in religion.
agree with omg. disagree with chosentolead.
Do as he says, sheep...
youre a fucking douche
Explain please (:
Look around everything you see god made. and you tell me god doesn't have evidence for himself?
Everything we have can be linked to God or the Big Bang or whatever other ideas of creation we have.
Could also be linked to the spaghetti monster? so what's your point?
jesus is a magician
Funny, but it just doesn't fly for me. Sorry!
Just laugh about it and shut up.
Evolution can never truly be scientifically PROVEN because true scientific proof requires Observation (as per the Scientific Method). And no one can observe evolution because it takes too long and they would be dead by the time anything happened with it, and there was no one there to observe evolution when it first started happening (cause it's Evolution). Likewise, Creationism cannot be proven either because there weren't any people there to witness the creation of the world. Both require a belief; faith to an extent. Stop arguing over it, no one is going to suddenly pull out a whammy that convinces the other people in this post that what they're saying is right, so there's no point in arguing.
Oh but it's so fun to egg them on.
I have to agree. lol. It's so easy to get most anyone worked up on the internet.
^ Why I have fun being a troll.
...You're a troll? I thought you were serious, I'm so disillusioned! :(
Just a joke. Calm down. It's like laughing at a Black joke even though you're Black. It's OK.
Yeah, half the people saying "Pics weren't invented!" Don't get the meme and the joke.
sigh arguing over the internet is like running in the special olympics, even if you win, you're still retarded
The things I've learned from this post: Christians have no humor and today's youth scares the SHIT out of me.
For all of you religious people, admit it, if this was a post with evolution in it instead of the bible, you'd be telling everyone who argued with it to take a joke. So just let it go you guys. The sun is shining, it's another day in this beautiful world, and it's passing you by. So go have a glass of lemonade and ENJOY this day instead of arguing with each other.
yeah people don't seem to be as ROFL at that.
Well no shit people aren't laughing at that, it's not original. Honestly, if that post was before this one, I would have laughed at it.
I love comment threads that remind me how much I hate people.
LOL. I'm going to mention this is religion class and see what happens.
Pics or it never happened.
The post was amazing, but the comments really brought this post to another level.
It's fun to read this while being Jewish.
Mary was a whore. She was balls deep in Joseph, but he had a tiny penis, so she cheated on him with a black guy. (because they have huge penises) Then Jesus was born. As he grew up, him and David fought 3 headed lions together and went camping in whales stomachs, like every other weekend. One night while they were chillin in the whales stomach, they both got bi-curious, and tried "things," and they liked it. But no one approved of it, so David and Jesus were never allowed to see each other again....This is a FACT....no seriously, I put "Bible" on the cover.
Darn... I guess George Washington wasn't really are first president
i just feel bad for whoever posted this. "there are 400+ comments on a post which you created."
I don't see why everyone's making such a big deal out of this.
I believe in a God, and I found it very amusing.
Stop being so uptight. It's just a light-hearted joke.
Exactly. Who's to say God doesn't have a sense of humor?
Yes! I mean, look at the platypus and tell me with a straight face that God doesn't have a sense of humor. :P
You have a good point. I don't even know why I'm writing this, because there are so many comments that no one will care :)
Nahhh, it's the fact everyone is reading the bitch-fest going on with that scrantoncity-person.
EVERYONE SHOULD JUST SHUT UP. its a JOKE and i think its FUNNY so enough with the religious arguments.
Holy shit (no pun intended), I think that is the longest Jesus debate I've seen on here in a while. Damn.
lol i believe the Bible is historical fiction, because events and people from the bible have been proven (artifacts have been found), but the Jesus/God/Holy Spirit/Miracles/Devil thing sounds like a crackhead made it up.
Are you saying the idea of Jesus as a person in history is false, or just that the idea of a Holy Trinity (Father/Son/Holy Spirit) is whack?
I think she meant the latter.
the trinity and the other religious shit. do you seriously think this 40 year old virgin was dead for 3 days than magically became alive, and made other people alive? and this old creepy man who lives on a cloud is really writing down every single little thing that billions of people have done? and how we're gonna be hermaphrodites in heaven? give me a break. its worse than Harry Potter or Twilight.
Jesus was 33 when he was crucified. :-p
ANd I've never heard of God described as "a creepy old man who lives on a cloud". lol.
Scrantoncity is a tool. Which is proven because it saus so right here in this comment. Its also proven throughout this entire post :)
You guys argue over the little things in religion but ignore the biggest part of any religion: being a good person.
i only got through like.. 150 comments then got tired.. But to sancroncity, alot of the bibe is a metaphor, even priests have told me so. If god created the world in 6 days, as you said, which day were the dinosaurs? And how did they live for millions of years if just a few days after earth's creation humans were born?
And also, on gays, they say god makes everyone the way they are meant to be and we should all love thy neighbour like we love ourselves, so then if god MAKES people he makes them gay. It's not their choice. but then he says it's wrong? So he makes someone destined for hell unless what? Unless they say 'god i'm sorry you made me this way, let me repent for something you did to me'
That's bs. We should all realise we are made the way we are forson, people are born gay, it's not a choice and they shouldn't have to deny who they are for your stupid christian ignorance. so up yours, you're so wrapped up in the bible you miss the most important bits. Goodbye.
Good god, I think I love you.
amen to that.
It's going to be hilarious when, after "a few years", there's still no "rapture" (one of the stupidest ideas espoused in the bible, btw... I mean, come on) and the poor unlaid loser behind scrantoncity will either be so disillusioned that he turns the other way, or be forced to just keep saying "a few more years... a few more years and you'll see iamrite..." until he gets old and senile. I'm sure you'll find lots of dotty old codgers to debate religion with at the funeral home.
Regardless of how little evidence you think scientists have, at least they have something. Fossil records, and it's obvious from looking at ancient buildings that people have gotten much taller over the centuries... what do we call that? What do we call mammoths shedding all that hair that was uneeded after the ice age and becoming elephants?
As a matter of fact... fossil record proves the bible wrong, because the bible says people came right along with all the animals(some of which didn't even e...
Oh, god's little fan club. This was extremely entertaining.
Every point of this argument has already been presented at some point or another. Why does it continue? The believers have a calling to share the Gospel. The non-believers like to egg us on and/or shove things in our faces. So what's it about? The people who haven't made up their minds. Non-believers: you've made your decision, but don't hinder us from helping the undecided. Believers: don't go to battle unprepared, and leave the those who have already decided to the fate they have chosen.
(Your+name+(optional)): lol, why?
Because your holier than thou bullshit is annoying? Just a guess.
when did I refer to MYSELF as Holy? But since you brought it up I'll tell you about that. As a being of this world by myself on a scale of 0-100 I am (along with everyone else) a 0. But I have found Jesus. Although I don't always represent him as well as I should, he is in me, and I in him. He makes me 100. He washes me clean and makes me Holy. I don't deserve it but he loves me unconditionally.
You brought it up so I'm telling you, He has saved me, and I have been set free.
I vomited a little right there.
haha. Need some pepto?
And here is a man who gets the troll. Will wonders never cease?
You have my backing, sir.
You had so much logic with your original post. But when you did the whole "Jesus saved me", your credibility died.
Let me be the first to inform you: Non-Christians don't want to hear about how Jesus saved your life (speaking as a Christian), especially when you speak about it online, where no one knows you.
Cool story, I don't want your conditionally comforted approval of my credibility.
Yeah, you are way better at arguments than I.
There's one fatal flaw in your argument. God didn't create the world in 7 days. . . Tia did.
You're right. He made it in six and rested on the seventh. Tia made her Sims world in seven days, or so I've heard.
Evolution is real. It's happening, it may not be as quick as a "dog making a new animal such as a fox". But, it's gradual. How else would a dinosaur become a chicken?
Dude, can't you see how you're using circular reasoning?
Evolution is happening. How do we know?
Dinosaurs become chickens. How do we know this?
Because of evolution.
Dude, that is your argument. Reread that, and realize how that isn't even saying anything. That's like me saying God created the earth because it exists. Why does it exist? Because he created it. How do we know he created it? Because it exists.
That is not my argument; that was an example to show what you are doing.
Are you being sarcastic?
No, I'm serious. You keep your composure. I don't. Good job.
Who is to say that the Bible is always right? It's been changed before.
Ha, you must be talking about the book of mormon. The only thing changed in my Bible is the language. Yes, there are different translations but they all have the same basic meaning or purpose.
(excuse my spelling I'm mobile) I hate how creationist say that there's no evidence of a spiecies evolving to another. Then they give an example of a dog changing to a horse. A modern aninimal isn't going to chamge to another modern animal. what happens are many little changes over time. Take a rabbit. Let's say a rabbit was born with larger feet than the others. That rabbit will breed, and it's offspring will have large feet to. They will have the ability to run and hop faster, escaping faster. Others with smaller feet will have higher chances of being eaten. Eventually, small footed rabbits will die out while large footed will keep breeding, making all rabbits have large feet. Many many small changes like this over millions of years make the spieces look entirely different.
I love how so many people are taking this seriously! :D It's a joke people, lighten up. Almost NOTHING on this site is serious!
If anyone gets down this far, it was a joke so be quiet
And you disagreed with the post because?
Religion is just an excuse. You get nothing out of it. Period.
(PS don't give me a load of 'christ himself will punish you' because if he will, he would've done so by now)
You're entitled to your own opinion. No one should bash you because you don't believe in what they do.
Sorry, i really didn't mean to sound so ostentatious.
You actually didn't to me, I was just saying because I can relate. The only thing I believe in is God and the rest isn't that believable to me lol.
ahh jokes, no one can take them anymore
Lol, you guys who are arguing about religion are morons. Everyone knows that every single argument is the same; Both sides thinking they're right, both sides defending and attacking while getting angrier and angrier, and then eventually it ends, but neither side has any change whatsoever in their opinion. -_-?
I like chocolate milk! :D
I'm full of win.
Someone's full of themselves.
and also win. hahah ;)
so this post is hilarious, but the arguments in the comments are even better pahhahahaha
Good enough?: http://www.creativereview.co.uk...o-google-earth ?
Nah, just kidding. I'm a christian, I laughed.
scrantoncity, it's really vile of you to say that if you're gay then as a result you're going to hell. I feel like God should smack you in the face.
Oh boy, the word 'bible' only mentioned once and now people are arguing and can't just laugh at the OP itself. Who didn't see that coming?
if you're going to take a post like this seriously and argue about it, get outta here. this is the wrong site for you
I love these kinds of posts, the comments make up for the fact that this is far from original.
Anyhow, God is a lie, religion is a lie, your sub-conscience isn't really the holy ghost. Please pop that prehistoric bubble you keep your mind in.
... exist that long ago), and yet fossil record proves that there were animals on this planet for millenia before people.
Religion comes down to: a way to explain the unexplainable, and a list of rules for living(most of which are common sense). If it makes you a better person, great- if it makes you a sanctimonious, narrow-minded pain in the ass, then stfu seriously. I don't need promise of otherworldly reward or threat of otherworldly reprisal to be a good person who doesn't hurt and tries to help others. Lots of us don't need an excuse or a push for such simple decency. It's sad that so many still do, otherwise religion would be even more out of favor than it already is.
Sure, you see lots of "christian" kids on this site... but I bet before 30 at least half of them will have grown out of it. The conditioning and brainwashing of parents only lasts so long.
Scrantoncity likes satan's dick.
I'm a Christian, and it didn't offend me.
People get too sensitive
If one person belives in a magic and can hear voices in his head etc you call him crazy, if loads of people do the same, you call it a religion
Haha amazing post :)
Some people really need to calm down and respect other's beliefs. Not the OP, I thought the joke was funny, but everyone commenting.
flame wars are awesome
hai guiz wuts goin on in dis thread?
"RAHRAHARHARHAR EVOLUTION DEBATE!! RAHARHAR"
Oh.... Um... Sidesteps out of camera
Pics or it didn't happen.
love how you didn't fight back about my very valid point about god purposely damning gays. Cool. ignorant ass.
I'm a christian and I would like to point out that we are not all ignorant assholes like SOME people. cough scrantoncity cough
Lol. Scrantoncity really is a tool. I saw on another post he wrote about never being invited to parties or anything. I wonder why. Hahaha.
how about everyone just chills.
we are never gonna agree.
Brilliant post. Totally agree.
Did God have a first day? If so, what was before that?
omg you guys its just a post! get over it :P
And now I remember why I'm not pro-life.
PEOPLE WHO DISAGREED:
You know there's no pictures, you can't take a joke, instead of facing the problem head on, you try to convert people with meaningless nonsense. So you have extreme butthurt, extreme stupidity, and an extreme case of "I'M ALWAYS RIGHT SO THAT MEANS YOU'RE WRONG!!!! WAHHHH."
Just fucking face it already, there's no proof. I don't give a damn if you believe or not, I give a damn when you try to create false facts just so other people can believe your bullshit. Accept it or get the fuck off of Earth, because you're making us look even stupider. And yes, that is a word.
If the Bible isnt true (which it is) how did we get here? The Big Bang Theroy? No. Jesus Chirst created us in HIS image. And if you believe in him you dont need proof! You have to have Faith that its true! No matter what you say about the Bible or how you dont believe in Jesus,Jesus Loves You.Forever and Always
(Jessie!!): You suck at logic.
Evolution. HERP DERP.
The Big Bang Theory is just that. A THEORY. And you know what your religion is? A THEORY, HURRRRRR. How old are you, 11? I understand. You're just another blind following sheep who isn't mature enough to question what they believe in. It's OK, just come back to me when you actually have legitimate proof to support yourself.
Also, I don't believe in Jesus Christ, Yahweh (your deity, and deity means god, so "the Lord" I s'pose you'd say is really called Yahweh), or the Holy Spirit. Your argument is incredibly invalid.
I hate people who want to turn me into a Christian.
Saying that "THE BIBLE IS PROOF SO HOW CAN YOU NOT BELIEVE?"
Wanna know the best way to help me turn into a Christian? Don't do crap.
If neither parents carry the allele for white fur, it is a mutation, not genetics. An example of evolution (evolution, not mutation) that I learned yesterday in anatomy is that long ago people were much shorter than they are now.
They didn't have cameras in those days. :3
someone probably built that "cross that jesus died on" like 600 years ago i bet.
It seems that the ones who disagreed and are arguing on here are the ones who aren't that secure in their faith.
Hi, my name is Saint Isaac. I'm not religious, though slightly faithful. If you've read down to this, you probably think all Christians are insane. Well, you're probably right.
But, I believe in the Bible's... ermm... stuff. And I would like to tell you that I am not crazy. Revel if you wish, for those like me are few.
ok, i was reading this, but i couldn't finish it because it was getting so ridiculous. here's what i think about the bible and such, and i know a lot of people who think the same way.
I am not denying that the people, and a lot of events, in the bible are true. however, the events such as the burning bush or moses parting the sea, i seriously do not believe happened. there havent been a lot of cases of things like that happening, and there aren't really was it could ever happen. evolution, i find easier to believe. there is a lot of proof that it happened/is happening. i dont know if others see it this way, but thats how i do.
It sickens me that people would rather keep arguing than take the advice of all of the posts that say, "let's drop it, no one will ever agree" and "let's enjoy this day instead of argue on the Internet". Pick your battles people. If you REALLY want to change someone's mind and that's what this has all been about, then go door-to-door or start up something in your own community rather than insult your peers over the Internet.
Neither the theory of evolution nor the beliefs of creationism are infallible. There's really not much use arguing because neither side will concede the other's point or change their set-in-stone minds.
Can we settle at that?
In other words, agree to disagree.
Refer to my post: "REligious debates never turn out well"
woot called it
I lol to all you people for having a debate on a amirite post
Reading these comments were very entertaining!
i like cheese
To all the people saying thing like, "But they didn't have cameras back then. How were they supposed to take pics?"
You make me brain hurt due to your I hate you all.
You're missing the meme. And the joke.
This is weird. All the posts are dated at Aug 29, but my computer promises me its Aug 28.
meh, I don't agree with it, but I suppose it's all in good humor, so whatever!
Except this is a POD, so it's going to have at least 5000 more comments. ugh.
for the lulz.
NO pictures of the mayflower coming to america and being here? Did it happen? im pretty sure it did
I'm not O.o
Many evolutionists have tried to argue that humans are 99% similar chemically to apes and blood precipitation tests do indicate that the chimpanzee is people’s closest relative. Yet regarding this we must observe the following: ‘Milk chemistry indicates that the donkey is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Cholesterol level tests indicate that the garter snake is man’s closest relative.’ ‘Tear enzyme chemistry indicates that the chicken is man’s closest relative.’ ‘On the basis of another type of blood chemistry test, the butter bean is man’s closest relative",Morris, Henry M., The Twilight of Evolution
oops, forson should've said * for a reason. Stupid phone. :)
...Oh my god.
How does one make that lovely icon, which summarizes basically every other comment on this post?
Crap I just reread that and wow I did not mean to sound that stupid.
Greenleader, you comment restored my faith in humanity.
Through this post we've got an other agressive Religion, amirite?
@anonyMouse thank you? Haha
i dont get it?
EVERYBODY NEEDS TO CALM THE FUCK DOWN
Do you believe that wind exists? Can you see it? Nope. Can you feel it's presence? Yes. Can you see the effects of what it can do? Yup. the same thing goes for God. He's all around you. He's present and He loves you. :)
Do you believe that God exists? Yes. Can you see it? Nope. Can you feel its presence? Well, you can't see it, so you don't know what that presence is. You can't just automatically assume it's God. Maybe it's fucking Zeus for all you know. Can you hear it? Sure, if you're insane. Can you smell it? No. Can you taste it? No.
This is not the first time I've heard this poorly presented argument. And I'm really sick of it. Create something original.
I don't see how evolutionists are bypassing other science to make their theory seem right( no I'm not creationist I think the theroies can co exist)
Everything people think is a fact is only supported by theories. Everything is a theory cause the only thing you can prove is that you exist. The saying "I think therefore I am". So religion, scientific crap and what not is all up to the individual. The only reason I chose to follow Christainity is that the evolution theory says you cease to exist afterwards so why not be optomistic. Other than that it really doesn't matter what others think because as one of the earlier posts said (That I read 2 hours ago, u guys seriously post a lot of long posts) that at the end of the day its all the same to all of us. So please lets end this ridiculous post comments thread NOW!
who says all scientists are opposed to religion? they're there to find facts. they question everything. they are on nobodies side except reason. people can't go on saying that they are 'lying to cover up christianity and the bible.' umm.. no. they're looking for proof to all these different theories.
i gave up on christianity long ago because i DONT WANT a 'personal, loving relationship' with a dude people seem to think sits in the clouds and has a plan for me. no thank you.
Are you really that much if a delusional twat that you really thought she was siding with you? You're such a goddamn imbecile.
I have a question!
If we evolved from monkeys where are all the in-between stages?
And don't just say they died off, if they died off why didn't the monkeys? I'm sure the in-between stages would have been more capable of surviving than the original monkeys things...
Hope that makes sense!
i am supposing that you are joking, cause if not you have a serious problem. man didnt evolve from monkey but from homo sapiens(or one of those species i dont remember :) ), monkeys are just our cousins.
I wish I hadn't wasted my time reading this whole thing. I wish A) I had evolved to an intelligence level where I would have realized this was a big waste of time of B) God had blessed me with the inteligence to realize that this would be a big waste of time
or* (oops) XD
First off, I am 17, not 12. So what if my spelling abilities aren't the best? You have not backed up your beliefs yet, you've only made fun of people who disagree with you. I never said that there is not a higher power that set off the big bang. No one can answer where the universe came from, but there is evidence to support the Big Bang. The evidence is that the universe is expanding. When something explodes, the explosion expands. That is why scientists believe it is true. Can YOU tell me where the universe came from without using references from the Bible? I highly doubt you could. There is evidence that there is a god, but there is no evidence that it is the god you worship.
(Please note that I've been able to respectfully disagree without making fun of you. You should try it sometime. People might like you better then,)
this was potd on my brithday
Hmm, I think the one with a profile pic of a nasty troll/ogre lookin thing is the scaredy cat. Why don't you man up kid?
-Some- Christians belief God created evolution. They believe that some of the Bible is just fables to teach people right from wrong (most of which is in the Old Testement) since it is so close to other religions. And some non-Christians believe that Christianity is a more evolved form of older religions that is still evolving as time goes on.
Yeah so becuase you dont have pics of your great great great great grandparents, you dont exist either.
Oh lawl, here comes the debate.
Srsly, people, it is a joke, let it go.
We were monkeys. God doesn't exist. This is funny. The end. Lul.
i'll go buy you one from the dollar store. You can even color some of the pictures! :)
i voted down cuz i'm Christian, but this is funny.
ok haha I get the joke but the reason the Christians are arguing it is not because they are insulted they just want to prove the point that this isn't a sound argument and by people arguing back it just makes it worse
AAAH! 666 NO WAYS! IT'S AN OMEN! Oh, never mind, another oversensitive atheist downvoted it.
I PREFER SMOOTH PEANUT BUTTER!
This isn't MLIA. Say something relevant.
Actually, the 6 days the world was created in, that was gods time; which is about 6000 years here :O
Also dinosaurs could have existed and been wiped out while Adam and eve were in the garden, they were immortal; who knows how long they were in that garden for before the fall happened? 6 years? 6 million years?
this is idiotic why do people have to post controversial things i think people should just stop trying to cause arguments on amirite i understand stating your VALID opinion but one as invalid and jsut pointless as this...just leave it out and plus PoTD really?!?!?!?!
When I don't measure up to much in this life, I'm a treasure in the arms of Christ :)
may God bless all of you :)
They didnt have cameras back then LOL.
Pics? hi. there was no cameras back then. and drawings really wouldnt survive 2000 years.
thats exactly what i was thinking...... cameras werent around.... anddd.... how would they even make it this far if they even had pictures. why the hell is this the post of the day....
It's a joke, and a meme which you don't seem to get... (:
Evolution can't be real since it conflicts with the 2bd law of thermodynamics" all things move to entropy ( disorder) so evolutionists aren't really scientific at all
Yeah, except camera's weren't invented for another couple hundred years. Lmao.
It doesn't work like that.
From 1600-Present, we've had stories go from one to another until we eventually made history books.
But I guess what the the point of this post is saying that from the time of which Christianity originated was too far as to where we don't know if it was told from person-to-person, and it was just made up.
I'm not saying Christianity is made up, it's just a theory. I'm agnostic.
Christianity, though, is made up :D.
See, but you can't prove that, there's always a catch.
It's not really a catch, it's only a matter of time till science is able to explain what we still don't know, just like it happened with the sun, the rain, thunder, etc.
Cause they're actually were cameras at that time to have some pics -_-
Whoa controversial post! And false btw, just saying!
There weren't any cameras then. Unless I'm missing something: no way.
@506926 (fangirl12): You are missing something. Pics or it didn't happen is sorta a meme. Like if someone says something spectacular, someone says, pics or stfu, or pcs or it didnt happen.
This is referencing that and showing how the bible could possibly just be stories.
Have I mentioned how much I hate memes? They're so stupid. And anything could just be, "stories". Jesus is no less credible than King Henry VIII, Sacajawea, or Squanto.
Way to copy my comment
There is proof of evolution with fossils. But pictures weren't invented during bible times, sorry. That's why there's art. You are a sad fool if you thought this post was really clever : )
I just drew my cat with three heads. That must mean my cat has three heads in real life, right??
(Your+name+(optional)): When people say "pictures" they mean "photographic evidence". So no, drawing doesn't count. :)
...Wait, I just realized this was a sarcastic reply to the post above you. I should pay more attention... :)
Way to state the point of the JOKE and still not get it. You are a sad fool if you thought your comment was really clever.
False. I am severely disappointed in all the people who also voted it down, and haven't stood up for it yet. Besides the Weasel. Evolution, pics, or any historical sources about it, or it didn't happen.
Actually there are pics for evolution, it's called fossils!
Well, if things did evolve, explain to me why we don't see fossils of the inbetween animals. Scientists say: Oooh yes!!! Finally we found ONE fossil of this animal! Everyones gonna believe us now! Well sadly, you're mistaken.
You're mistaken about evolution it seems. It's not a bear evolving into a lion. I'll paraphrase a post below that explained it well: Let's say there's a rabbit with longer feet that can run faster and jump further than most rabbits. Over time, this rabbit and its descendants will live longer than rabbits with shorter feet because they can escape from predators. Many years later, the rabbit population will all have long feet.
So yes, there are fossils of this type of change.
Let me tell you something; yes, that is a valid argument. Only for adaptation or 'micro-evolution.' Not for macro evolution. The long-legged rabbits can still breed with each other. They are one species. That is adaptation, not evolution.
Same thing dumbass. You gain an adaptation, when all the inferior species die, then the adaptation becomes to new species. Are you saying that snakes and fish are the same species. Jesus, go back to school.
No, the long legged rabbits ARE still rabbits. They can breed with the smaller legged rabbits. For real, dude, if you're gonna insult me, be sure you are actually posting VALID information.
Those are rocks. Not pics. I could use the same argument for the Bible. "Noah's flood causes most of the animals to be fossilized! Fossils are evidence!" See how it works?
Fine, then take pictures of the fossils, then they're pics.
And no, that's not how it works. I'm religious and all, but if you don't believe in evolution, you're just ignorant. In a few hundred years people will be looking at people who didn't believe in evolution the same way we look at people who didn't believe the Earth was round.
What does " I am religous and all" mean?
Exactly what it says. Did I stutter?
Hey! It's my favorite over-opinionated sixteen year old!Let me first voice my opinion: I, as a fairly faithful person, find this joke unfunny. Why? I just don't find it that humorous. I don't take offense, and I can see why some people find it funny, but I guess I just don't have a sense of humor. Now, to wage religious war on amirite because of a funny/nonfunny post is absolutely ridiculous. Just sayin'.Also, Caped: I only tagged you to bother you. So that I will do: you're gay and your voice is squeeky, something something, suck your dad, etc. I do not know of any proof of evolution other than fossils, but I won't devalidate your suggestion of evidence, because frankly, I have not read much into it. In short, I won't argue with you, simply insult the fact that you're stupid, gay (because I've concluded that from the web), your mom is a hoe (don't care if she's dead), and such and such. Feel free to reply angrily.
Wow, I can't believe you........
Are completely 100% percent right!
Wow, am i good or what?! I took a course on learning about someone's entire life on the internet. Let's argue. Topic: abortion!
Really? I do think the Earth is round, and I do think evolution is wrong. There is absolutely, and let me repeat that, absolutely no proof. PROOF. There is evidence, but not as much as Biblical teachings.
Wow. To say there's no proof of evolution might be one of the dumbest things I've heard in a while. There's tons of proof, you're ignoring it. Maybe if you actually were open to other things you would learn that evolution happened and it can coexist with religion.
Not with my religion, buddy. The Bible says God made Earth in six days. Dawn, then dusk, day 2. Not through million's of years of spinning. There isn't PROOF of evolution. Give me proof. You can't. It doesn't exist. You cannot show me a cow that produced a horse. Because it didn't happen.
Dude, you have to stop being so ignorant and should be tolerant of other people's beliefs, just because some body does not believe in the same things as you, it doesn't mean that you have to go around criticizing them.
FYI: The Bible isn't meant to be taken verbatim. It's supposed to be a guide as to your morals as a human and such. Most of the stories in it were written hundreds of years AFTER Jesus' death, and then the King James Version of The Bible was put together by a committee of the king's men who decided on what the morals of their society (circa 1100 AD) should be and how The Bible should lead them. Sure, back then that was a great way to control the people and keep them in their "place"- below the king on society's totem pole. But it is just full of pick-and-choose beliefs such as homosexuals are bad, but The Bible says to keep women who are menstruating out of the town which most, non-extremist Christians, choose not to follow.
But, all that aside I'd say you're being a terrible "Christian". You aren't respecting greenleader4, CaptainCrusader and the rest of the amirite community by pushing your beliefs on all of us. Go back to the underside of your rock.
You, sir, are wrong. Even if you are a girl, you're still wrong. Any "evidence" to back up your accusations? It took place over several centuries. They canonized it, and it is supposed to be taken literally. The Bible itself says in 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness." Every word is intended to be there. Don't start spouting lies, please. Also, in the Old Testament, that was before Christ fulfilled the prophecy. I understand how that is confusing, but they had to perform rituals to alleviate their sin. God and sin cannot coexist. But, Jesus died for us. He himself said in Matthew 15:11, "What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'" Take that. And I am not being a terrible Christian. We are called to lead others to Christ. I am not being disrespectful or rude. Please take two seconds to verify
"The Bible itself says in 2 Timothy 3:16, "All Scripture is God-breathed and is useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness.""
You can't use something as evidence for itself. That's like me writing on a piece of paper "This paper is heavier than a jumbo jet because it is written here that it is heavier than a jumbo jet". That style of argument isn't valid.
On the contrary, it's an excellent argument. But only if you're arguing with those who believe in it's validity. But, here, you're right, it isn't fitting. But, that was a secondary point. I'd already refuted his, that was just a little extra leverage.
@429004 (scrantoncity): There was no extra leverage added whatsoever by that post. Using big word phrases like 'on the contrary' does not make an argument intelligent or valid. Chromana is right - of course the Bible will say it's right. How do you make sure that everyone listens to what you have to say? Tell them it's from the mouth of God.
And I also noticed you didn't answer the post regarding Leviticus. Shall we stone the football players for touching the skin of a dead pig? Do we shun the farmers who plant two types of seeds in their fields? If your child talks back to you, are you going to ground them, or are you going to sell them into slavery? These are all actions condoned by Leviticus, the same book that says gays are wrong.
Actually, if you'll read I did. Here, I'll copy paste it, because obviously you skim over the parts of my posts that actually matter. Also, that was in the Old Testament; that was before Christ fulfilled the prophecy. I understand how that is confusing, but they had to perform rituals to alleviate their sin. God and sin cannot coexist. But, Jesus died for us. He himself said in Matthew 15:11, "What goes into a man's mouth does not make him 'unclean,' but what comes out of his mouth, that is what makes him 'unclean.'" Understand, troll?
Thanks for the clarification, faggot. So you're saying they can blow each other and remain clean, but bulimics purging after eating, THEY are evil, amirite?
Actually, no. Are you trying to stir up controversy, or do you really believe that? I desperately hope it's the former, because if it's the latter.... Anyways. Like I said, Jesus fulfilled the prophecy. No longer do we have to atone for every sin. We get a blanket wipe, because of his Crucifixion. Understand? But that doesn't mean you can just keep sinning. Not that you could understand. 1 Corinthians 2:14 "But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Ooh big words, again. Not that I could understand? "Judge not, lest ye yourself be judged." "He who is without sin cast the first stone."
You're probably right. I have no idea what I'm talking about.
I don't understand what you are trying to prove. I haven't said anything about you. Besides insinuating that you aren't a Christian, which anybody with a brain stem can see. So you quoted a couple verses. What of it? I haven't called you anything. Explain yourself.
I explain nothing to a lulzy Christfag.
See, it's funny that you assume things like that I'm not a Christian. I was raised Christian and will probably die a Christian. But that doesn't mean I don't see some fault in people being led around like lemmings.
Or even sheep, if we're sticking to the Bible metaphroically.
Yes, but you know why I don't think you're a Christian? Let's see, you are insulting me without cause, you don't believe in the validity of the Bible, you curse like a sailor, and you, time and time again, insult Christian sin general. That's my reasoning. You, from my observations, don't have the Holy Spirit in you.
Ah, well your optical receptors are keen, I see. I'm not insulting you without cause. You're a holier than thou ass. I curse like a sailor, and so do most of the "Christians" I know. I don't believe in the INFALLIBILITY of the Bible. And I insult Christianity because it gets a rise out of Christians and I enjoy watching them reveal their true hypocritical animosity.
Ah, have I said I was better than you? I don't recall. I also don't recall me ever partaking in immature namecalling. I have been respectful, which is a lot more than you can say. I think you think that I think that I'm better than you because I act like a true Christian. Well, you are mistaken. I actually pity those going to hell. No one deserves hell. Not even Hitler and Stalin combined.
Thumbs up to you for your incredible act of humility.
p.s. I don't believe in Hell. A benevolent and unconditionally-loving God would never damn someone for eternity, at least IMHO.
True Christian that you are, I'm certain that you understand my feelings on that.
Earlier scrantoncity said that God is all-powerful, therefore he doesn't believe God is all-loving. Those two things are mutually exclusive.
Really? Explain how, please. He loves everyone, and he is all powerful. Mutually exclusive? And rainbow, really? Darkness cannot be with light. It's either light or dark.
If he were all powerful and all loving then he wouldn't allow natural disasters/wars etc because he would be unable to let us come to harm and he would stop them from happening.
So the two options are:
All powerful, not all caring: God is powerful to do anything but he chooses not to save us from harm.
All caring, not all powerful: He wants save us from all harm but can't because he's not all powerful.
This stems from the "why is there suffering in the world" question.
All right, let me clarify one point. He IS all powerful, but he chooses to LET us have free will. We have free will. Simple as that. He won't interfere with free will. Several reasons why, which inevitably you'll ask me to explain.
I probably have completely different ideas about free will to you, so there's no point in having this conversation because it'll get too complicated.
Are you seiriously saying that?
i can now assume that you have either lived life blindly, or you are just plain stupid
Well, it's man's own fault. We damned ourselves. Through sin. God and sin cannot coexist. Just like darkness and light cannot coexist. Satan rules in hell, and he wants to see God brought down. He influences man to do the stupidest stuff.
Dark and light can coexist, just think of a pitch dark room with someone shining a torch at one side of it. One part would be dark, and one would be light. :)
you must be the most ignorant stupidest person on the whole of the internet
and if your gonna go on about how 'ive never insulted you' im a sailor and saying 'you curse like a sailor' is the biggest generalisation ever
did you get that from the bible as well?
can't you take a hint from the hundreds of times all your posts have been voted down and everyone else up?
and stop quoting from all your religious texts there all just stories saying you should beat your children and kill gay people
Fucking Ignorant stfu :l
No, it's not a good argument at all! I'm not insulting the Bible or anything, I'm just saying that the kind of argument you used can never be used in any discussion.
But the thing is that there isn't any evidence for the Bible apart from the Bible. And that's where faith comes in. But you still can't use the Bible to prove the Bible.
This thread has become so full of FAIL.
Trololololo lololo lololo. There, it's become a lot better now.
Much. I graciously offer my thanks.
There is plenty of evidence, actually. You just choose to ignore it.
Then why don't you use this evidence to prove the Bible instead of using the Bible to prove the Bible? You're ignoring my main point.
It didn't apply to that point. Nothing else can prove that all the scripture is God breathed. And Trollcat, how is it fail? By your own refusal to believe in facts?
So if it's all fact then why do you need to have faith? The point of faith is that there ISN'T proof and that you listen to your heart/soul/God etc to help you decide.
Actually, ignore this comment. Although it's true it doesn't fit in exactly with what you said.
It's not ALL fact. I have nothing to say. Look at 1 Corinthians 2:14. You cannot understand. As I can see. John 20:29 "Then Jesus told him, "Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed."" You seem to twist my words around. There is proof. There isn't proof for everything. There is enough proof to put it as the most valid religion, though there isn't enough TO CONFIRM EVERY SINGLE THING IN IT. Do you understand? Some things cannot be proven. Burning bush, for example. The Flood, however, has plenty of evidence.
Your own words: Some things cannot be proven.
If some things can't be proven then your arguement that evolution isn't real due to lack of fact and proof is invalid. Damn, gain an IQ point or do you need prove that those are real as well?
So, if that which goes into a man's mouth does not make him "unclean", can he give another guy a blowjob and still be clean?
Sure. But if he's gay he's going to hell. Unless he repents and accepts the Holy Spirit. Understand?
No. Because Hell doesn't exist... I don't understand.
Really. Do you know that for a fact? Have been everywhere in the universe, explored every single cranny and nook at every different time of the day? Maybe you can only get in on friday the thirteenth at 7:06 whilst drinking root beer. You don't know that for a fact.
I'm sure you have a lot of friends. You're so fun to talk to. I bet you also get ALL the ladies with your charm. It's great that you have fun instead of coming on the Internet and criticizing people whom you don't even know. I bet a whole lot of people really like you. I am certain that you will NOT brainwash your children into this cult that you are NOT creating. That is, if you ever get laid, which I'm CERTAIN you will. It's wonderful that you're accepting of everyone, especially gays. You must be such a fun guy in general who DOESN'T give Christians a bad reputation because you LOVE enjoying life!
Thank you! You know, at least I don't post sarcastic replies trying to insult the other party when I'm trumped with logic. Understand? Don't make it personal. I also see that you're hiding behind the face of Anonymity. Too scared to reveal who you are? Man up.
No, actually, you are just a stubborn ass (oh, does it offend you that I'm calling you names?) who can't take into account that he is not always right. I was trying to prove to you that you need to SHUT UP. This is a freaking website based on opinions, which means that you'll never be able to win over everybody. Stop trying to shoot us down, and we'll stop shooting you down. Maybe you're right, maybe you're wrong. NO ONE KNOWS. So, leave it alone. Who cares if you win an argument on the Internet? Will that bring you satisfaction? My guess is that everyone you know hates listening to you talk because you always bring up your beliefs and you make others feel insignificant. So, you resort to the Internet to try and feel better about yourself. You think that you can find some poor, innocent sap who you can metaphorically murder. I realize that I am attacking you. But you deserve it, honestly. Please, just SHUT UP, and I will as well.
Uncle Leo?? So, let me get this straight. You think that I, who have been nothing if not respectful, make myself feel better to win an argument of the internet, when you, the one who has been cursing and calling me names the whole time, don't? I am appalled. Good day to you, sir or madam.
no offense but what you call "being respectful" is not what the greater poplulation would agree is indeed being respectful. Threatening somebody, and questioning their beleifs, and buttering the whole thing up with "big words", is not at all repectful
You may have been "respectful", but you are also being very arrogant.
How the hell would you know? Unless you REALLY have no live like you make it seem; How old are you even? You are obbessed with Disney songs for Christ's Sake! And yes, I did put Christ so get over it.
I'm honestly sick and fucking tired of your 'logic' that you can't even prove without a fucking 'holy' book. Science has fact, books, scientists, and so many things to back it up while you have a group of people who can't get the stick out of their ass.
Besides, if you are so intouch with the Holy Spirit, why are you on a computer? It goes against most of the morals as my heavily relgious friends have told me. She doesn't even have TV or see movies in class due to her faith yet she isn't as bitchy and controlling as you are about people who don't argee with her.
As you stated on your profile, if you don't agree then you are stupid and need your brain checked. With so many people against you, you should be getting that check-up
Wow you bash him for assuming that he'll isn't real and that there's no proof of he'll not existing, but you yourself say there is enough to prove it.
How does it work for a book to validate ITSELF? it seems like if you want a validity check you would have to go to some other form of media for support.
That at least one of your points is correct.
First of all, the Bible is not a history book, if you're taking it as one then your view of Christianity (assuming you're Christian) is distorted.
Second of all, there IS proof of evolution and it's a lot more complicated than turning a cow into a horse. Of course that didn't happen. Don't be ignorant. If there was a passage in the Bible that said "And then God made everything fall to Earth when it rose up" would you dispute gravity? I hope not
The Bible isn't a history book, but do keep in mind that it is full of a lot of history.
The Bible may not be a history book, but there is more evidence for a creator than for nothing to explode. Show me the "proof" of evolution, and I'll show you a lie. You are so ignorant. Maybe I would believe such a thing, maybe I wouldn't. It depends on how much evidence there is for it. God is all-powerful. So he could do that. But that's hypothetical, and a pointless example.
"Scientists most often use the word "fact" to describe an observation. But scientists can also use fact to mean something that has been tested or observed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing or looking for examples. The occurrence of evolution in this sense is fact. Scientists no longer question whether descent with modification occurred because the evidence is so strong"
-The National Academy of Science
You really think you know more about evolution than the entire scientific community?
Entire. Entire? No. Evolution is the only option besides Divine creation, so all the athiest scientists hop on the bandwagon. You know the tests they do? What do they test? One paltry piece of evidence repeatedly and claim it as fact? Radiometric dating is so inaccurate it's funny. They use circular reasoning to date stuff, and they completely change data to make it fit.
Oh man, you are so brainwashed. Show me one respected scientist who doesn't believe in evolution. You will be hard pressed to find one.
And there is more than one piece of evidence. Get your head out of the sand: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ev...common_descent
You link, I link. You do realize that anybody can change wikipedia? Wikipedia is a terrible source. I'll give you a scientist. He is a bit.. overzealous, though. Kent Hovind. Research him, and you will stumble across his tax fraud. I will go ahead and tell you. But he, before he was locked up, was willing to debate any evolutionist. He was never stumped.
First off, you can't just go in and change the evolution Wikipedia page. Maybe 5 years ago you could and maybe on some tiny page you could, but you see those little numbers within the text? Those link to sources, actual, legitimate sources. Instead of giving you all those sources I decided to just give you the Wikipedia page, but they're the same thing. At least get your facts right.
Second of all, I looked up this Hovind guy and he sounds pretty crazy. Chemist Karen Bartelt said his "message appeals to those who are unaware that his 'evidence' is without merit" and no actual scientists believe in the Hovind theory.
Without evidence. Funny, when I was listening to him it seemed like he wasn't just saying things. Did you visit my link? About the lies? Pretty good, eh? Still no "Proof," unless you count rigged tests. Also at the bottom, it has undeniable wit: "In connection with which I must say that there is one Darwinian claim that the Darwinians have inadvertently proved: a species that lets itself be suckered by the obvious lies that Darwin's acolytes and publicists have been swilling out for the last 150 years can hardly be thought of as the crown of creation."
Look, you're obviously unwilling to see what's so obviously true. Evolution happened. If 99% of the smartest people in the world believe something and put good research and thought into it, what makes you believe the 1% is smarter?
I'll end with this: don't be like the the Catholic church during the Scientific Revolution when they denied all the scientific advancements and had to eat their words later.
Don't worry. In a few years, after the Rapture, I think you'll realize I'm right. But 99% that was made up on the spot, and you know it. I'm not presenting my best arguments at this time.
Have you not noticed that every one of your comments has been voted down, while CapedCrusader's have all been voted up?
Who's wrong now?
Dude, just because most people believe it doesn't make it right. Majority rule is a very risky vote. Have you seen "Who Wants to be a Millionaire?" And they ask the audience? The audience has been wrong before. I couldn't care less if my comments were voted down a thousand times. It doesn't matter; common belief is nearly always skewed.
That is a terrible link that is full of mostly opinion with almost no sources to back them up. Also.. it doesn't prove anything about creationism and gives absolutely no evidence. So while he says that evolutionists have no evidence, neither does he.
I might be more inclined to take your link to that site more seriously if I didn't also find this one on there about how we need to abolish equal rights:
I don't understand how these people call themselves patriots without even adhering to the basic principles of the country such as, you know, The Bill of Rights.
are you from texas?
@428516 (scrantoncity): Doesn't it also say he created man in those days? When did he create then kill the dinosaurs who's fossils have been dated to centuries before any kind of human-like forms even started to evolve? Try not being so close minded. Also where in the bible does it say that you should look down upon and insult people of different beliefs? I don't recall reading that shiny tidbit.
(AgaspNon): I didn't insult them because they are a different religion, nor because I look down on them. They are blatantly lying, and misinterpreting stuff. Makes you pretty frustrated. Repeatedly. But, the dating processes... Don't believe any of that. The scientists use circular reasoning. You cannot date it with carbon dating if you don't know how old it is, because it could be over 50,000 years. And you can't date it with uranium-lead dating if you know how old it is. So basically, you can only uranium lead date things if you don't know how old it is. And you can only carbon date it if you know how old it is. WTF?
technically in the bible there was proof that earth was in the center of the world. Thats why the church denied galliles theory
The earth IS the world.. Also don't make stuff up.
definition number 9: everything that exists; the universe; the macrocosm.
the Catholic Church nevertheless condemned heliocentrism as "false and contrary to Scripture", and Galileo was warned to abandon his support for it—which he promised to do. When he later defended his views in his most famous work, Dialogue Concerning the Two Chief World Systems, published in 1632, he was tried by the Inquisition, found "vehemently suspect of heresy," forced to recant, and spent the rest of his life under house arrest.
This passage proves that 1) the church denied gallileos theory and
2)that this was contrary to the church's view "false and contrary to Scripture"
Okay; I cannot believe the amount of ignorance of such people. I am not Catholic; I'm Baptist. We are polar opposites. There IS a reason why the Protestants split. I simply do not agree with the Catholic church on most subjects. It does not say the earth is the center of the "world" based on the ninth definition of the word, anywhere. That is the Catholic Church, not the Bible, and there wasn't "proof;" there was (not) a reference to it. If you're gonna completely change the facts while trying to back up your statement, at least be sure to use the best description, and not the ninth best.
You criticise others for not having good enough proof, yet you have still not given any proof of your own out of the Bible and that one time you said (this is paraphrased) "There is a lot of proof, I won't bother mentioning it because you won't understand" ... or something like that. Until you give proof, you have no right telling someone alse to back up their statement.
I was going to explain it, but nobody replied.. I'll explain it to you. It's more logic than tests that have a high chance of being wrong, or at best, inconclusive. I'll explain it, if you'll actually bother reading it.. If not, then no way, for it's a ton of typing.
Please explain it. I'll read all of it, I'm actually curious about your proof. Unlike a lot of people I'm open to ideas different than my own. I may not agree with it, but if it makes since I won't complain about it.
Okay; it's in two parts. The first point: Everything that has a beginning has a cause, right? That is, things don't assemble themselves randomly, trees don't spring up in the middle of the street, and horses don't sprout fully grown in your bedroom, right? Things cannot bring about their own existence, right? It is essential that you agree to this logical statement.
I agree that you can't get something from nothing (I think that's what you were trying to say).
Okay, yeah that's what I meant. Something has to initiate the creation of something. That's only logical. Part 2: The universe began to exist. This is fairly simple. The scientists "proved" it back some hundred years ago. And mathematicians theorized that it has to be true. This is accepted as fact; the Universe must have begun at some point.
The funny thing is, that before this was "proved," the evolutionists were arguing against the second part, for it is simply preposterous to argue the first point. Do you agree? It's going against logic, common sense, and rational thought, not to mention that it is constantly confirmed every day. The first point is so logically inevitable, you'd think it ridiculous that someone would say it's untrue. Then, once it was proved, the anti-theologians attacked the first point. It's utterly absurd.
Finally, the third point. Have you taken Geometry? Do you recall the Transitive property? This is fairly straightforward...
Therefore, the universe had to have been created. Pretty simple. This argument is solid logic, and is confirmed every day. When you go out do you ever worry that a dinosaur will appear in your house and wreak havoc? No! That is preposterous. The 'scientists' who claim the big bang started it all are deluded, in my opinion.
I get your point, but it does not support your disclaims to evolution. I'm sorry, but all you have done is said the universe had a beginning and something had to spark that beginning. Evolution is not the theory that the universe had always existed. It is not a theory that is trying to disprove intelegent design. It is a theory of how newer, more intelegent species were created. I do not see why the scientist who support the big bang theory are diluded. The big bang theory is not about something coming from nothing. It's about a super dense mass of matter that exploded and the universe is the debris from that explosion basically. It states that matter was not created, it just expanded. It is common knowledge that the universe is still expanding, which is why scientists thought up the big bang theory. I am not afraid of dinosaurs because they went extint long ago. And I really do not see how dinosaurs wrecking havoc are relevent to your argument.
Yeah, you completely misunderstood everything I said, and that isn't surprising. Are you like twelve or something? 'Diluded?' 'Intelegent?' The theory of evolution is the only one where INTELLIGENT (Not 'intelegent') Design can be thrown out. What part of my argument do you disagree with? Huh? Nowhere? Then why do you disagree! I am so mad. You said you would read it, and now you are just blowing it off. Should be expected from a twelve year old. The Big Bang says nothing exploded. Where did the super-compressed matter come from? What was before it? Answer all these questions, or you have the weakest belief I've heard of. Can't you back up or even articulate your beliefs?
what facts did i change??
Your argument changed, not facts. You said the Bible said the earth was flat. No, that is a lie. The catholic church said that, not the bible.
This was my first comment
technically in the bible there was proof that earth was in the center of the world. Thats why the church denied galliles theory
if the center is the place where "things are flat" maybe your right but i dont believe it works like that
I didn't understand that nonsense. The Bible says nowhere that the earth is the center of the 'world.' I accidentally said 'flat' instead of 'center of the world,' up there. Show me in the Bible where it says the earth is in the center of the world. You said it said so; back it up.
it dint say it openly but strongly suggest it normally you talk about the center of the world before the sides
I know what you're comment is talking about, but I think he was excommunicated for saying the Earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around. The Catholic Church said that since the Bible mentioned the sun "rising" then the sun must be moving around the Earth. I don't know for sure if that's true, but it is what I learned in History.
" There is absolutely, and let me repeat that, absolutely no proof. PROOF. There is evidence, but not as much as Biblical teachings."
... soooo... there's evidence, but there isn't proof? wow, you sure do make a lot of sense...
Also, i don't really see how some book saying something makes it true. they could have said "and on the eighth day, god decided to create flying purple elephants to take his place in the world and make sure life was good!" and the freaks like you would believe there was such a thing as a flying purple elephant who was the embodiment of god.
not to interrupt your argument, CapedCrusader, you're doing a very good job. I was just reading through all this and thought i'd put my two cents in along with all of srantoncity's bullshit.
That was a bunch of unlinked drivel, lauren. The thing is, I could say the exact same things about scientists. They can make up a bunch of tests, make up some evidence, and present it as fact. Oh wait! But the sad thing is that you had to make up something, and personally attack my beliefs, and yet you still didn't make a good point. Evidence isn't proof. You're the lowliest of imbeciles if you believe that. You really need to take a good long look at what you believe, and I sincerely hope it is much better articulated than what you just wrote.
Evidence is a synonym for proof you ignorant, stupid fool. they mean the same thing. if a scientist performs an experiment multiple times and gets the exact same result every time without any changes, they aren't "making up some evidence", its a FACT that the experiment will produce the same results every time. now, i know you can't do an experiment for evolution, but fossils have been found that are freakishly similar in appearance, skeletal structure anatomy to animals living before and after that fossilized animal. its obvious, evolution is real. animals adapt to their surroundings. evolution happens, whether you want it get that through your thick skull or not. besides, maybe the animals god supposedly created ADAPTED TO THEIR FUCKING SURROUNDINGS. then, we could both be right.
Oh, you are right. They do adapt to their surroundings. However, they didn't spawn new animals. Have you ever seen a dog create a non-dog, like a fox? Have you? I don't think so. That's because they don't. But, you say evidence is proof. Yes, proof in it's loosest sense. But, with that evidence, you can come to a wrong conclusion. Suppose I did a test with a frog. I put him on a line and said "Jump frog, jump." And he jumps 50 centimeters. Then I chop off one leg, put him back, and say, "Jump frog, jump." He jumps 40 cm. Then I chop off another leg, leaving two, do the same thing, and he jumps thirty. I repeat it again, tell him to jump, and he jumps 20 cm. Then, I chop off another, leaving him legless, and tell him to jump. He doesn't move. I could come to the conclusion that frogs with no legs go deaf. It's illogical, but it fits. Understand? Also, don't personally attack my beliefs, like vvv Because you have no idea what I would or wouldn't believe.
I've been reading most of this arguement (it's too long to read the whole thing) and I have come to the conclusion that you have no idea what evolution is. It is not one species giving birth to another. Evolution is simply genetic mutations that an organism gets that can be either good or bad. If it's good, the offspring of that organism could inherit that trait and over hundreds of years, the creature becomes different than it is today. If it is bad and the creature has offspring, they could very well form a new species over thousands of years, but until they are indistinguishable (sp?) from what they are now, they will be seen as a new breed of the same species.
Let me ask you something. Give me one, any one, positive mutation. They are all bad. There is simply not a good mutation yet. You obviously haven't poured through the amount of lies or misleading evidence supporting evolution. Many credible scientists know the information is false; it's not just religious nuts.
Have you ever wondered why there are different races of people? That's because of evolution. Over time, people who live in a sunny climate will have darker skin and people living in places without much sun will become more pale. That is why people on the African plains are dark, and most Europeans are light. Their skin color protects their skin from the sun. That is why black people don't get skin cancer as often as white people. That seems like a pretty good mutation to me.
That isn't a "mutation." Please don't make up junk like that. You made up that entire paragraph. That would be an "Adaptation," Not a genetic mutation. Also, even though they won't admit it, most evolutionists think black people are less evolved. They more closely resemble apes, don't you think? They are stronger, more able to bear a load, and have apelike features. Therefore, they are less evolved, right? No. It was adaptation. Evolution doesn't explain black people very well.
A mutation is a mutation no matter how small and no matter it's affect. A child can be born with green eyes even though no one in the child's family has green eyes. That has no affect on the child, but it is still a mutation. Adaptation and evolution go hand in hand. How do you think things adapt? A fox doesn't automatically go from being able to live in the desert to living on the tundra. They evolve to adapt to their environment.
Yes yes, and I understand that, but those are adaptations, not mutations. Mutations are when a gene gets messed up, and causes an impossible change in the person. Green eyes, yes, but how would that benefit the child in evolution? There is no beneficial mutation. They are either neutral, or detrimental.
Not all mutations are bad. Think about a baby rabbit with brown parents being born white on snowy a mountain top. That baby rabbit has camoufloge and will more than likely not be caught by a fox or something. That seems like a good mutation to me.
I am honestly curious: have you even taken biology? That is not a mutation. That is simple genetics. Any more bad examples you want to run by me?
Hate to butt in, but that is a mutation. If no one else in the bunny family has white fur, the genes and alleles got confused or mixed up. Haven't you taken 7th grade Science? That's when I learned that. :)
Most white bunnies are a result of dominant genes. There are albino mutations. But they can't pass on the albino gene. I relent, yes that is a beneficial mutation. But I discounted it because they cannot pass it on. That doesn't help their offspring survive. So, that doesn't make any other bunny survive. The whole population would have to receive the exact same mutation for it to help them all.
Evolution doen't happen in only a few years. It takes millions of years for that new species of bunny to be made.
Yeah, I know. But they can't pass the trait down to their offspring. Evolution won't help you there, buddy. No matter how much you wish.
They can pass on the allele. The resulting offspring may not have the trait, but they can still carry the recessive gene. The offspring would just have to find another bunny that carries the allele for that trait and then over time there would be more and more genetically superier bunnies.
Actually, mutations can be passed on.
Ok. Get your facts straight. Animals don't just SPROUT OUT NEW ANIMALS!!! God, it takes millions and millions of YEARS to be able to evolve and adapt to the enviroment. There are things that can go wrong during the fertilization process with mutations. Look it up. You honestly really think that everything is perfect? Get your head out of a hole.
It doesn't take millions of years to adapt. Not even close. That is made up. Darwin himself disproved that with the finches. Get YOUR facts straight. Seriously.
Yea that's because evolution takes billions of years to produce a fox from 2 dogs or whatever
I don't think so. Darwin thought it took a long time, but today people think differently. Did you know it took only twenty years to domesticate foxes? You can have a fox as a pet in Russia. They domesticated them. That's pretty swift.
domestication is different than evolution... similar, but different
Birds are thought to have evolved from reptiles. That doesn't mean that a turtle one day gave birth to a bird, it took thousands if not millions of years for that to happen. That's evolution. If no one can prove that evolution is real and provide evidence (Which there is A LOT of evidence) then what created everything? And you have to give evidence or else it most likely didn't happen.
That is incorrect, but that isn't what I said. They adapt fairly quickly. And by "fairly quickly" I mean in like fifteen generations. They can adapt to their environment. That doesn't mean that new animals go quickly, or that they are even formed from old animals. To me, evolution is illogical. But maybe that is because I actually think for myself.
What created everything? Can't you answer that for yourself? An intelligent designer. Namely, the God of Moses, Abraham, and all of us. He spoke the world to be. Because, being all powerful, He would be able to do that. Evidence: It's too much. You won't believe it anyways. It is far easier to disprove evolution than to prove creation. There are only two options: Evolution, or Creation. There is no third option. Evolution has hundreds of inconsistencies. So does the theory of Creation. Evolution is basically a religion. Scientists, even though they deny it, "bend" their evidence for it.
You really didn't provide any evidence for creation still. The only evidence you gave, if you can even call it evidence, is "It's too much. You won't believe it anyways." I want to see the facts.
Okay. This is called the "kalam" argument. It's mostly logic. Therefore, irrefutable. Do you agree that anything that starts has to have a cause? E.G. We don't just see houses popping into existence without someone building it, animals don't spring up from the ground, and computers don't assemble themselves from nothing?
You do not have to be for one or the other. It is not a decision you HAVE to make.
The decision you may not have to make, but if you have an opinion, it's one of them. Also, why couldn't you refute my post? Is that the only point you can make? Pretty sad.
As for me making up the elephant thing, i was saying that to prove my point that you'll believe anything, no matter how ridiculous, if the bible says its true.
There is honestly no evidence for that. That's like me saying you'd believe the earth doesn't exist if a scientist told you. Because you believe what they say.
@scrantoncity: There isn't prove that the bible is correct either, get over it. Oh yes, some BOOK says it is. While I'm at it, I'm going to go out and bow down to Twilight, Harry Potter, hell let's all worship the Where's Waldo books as well!
If you want something to think about for evolution, the T-Rex is related to the chicken.
You are obviously one of those die-hard Christians that are against true love just because the couple is gay, that believe they will go to 'heaven' even though they have 'sinned' due to the fact they have spread Gods word. Your God is suppose to forgiving and loving yet all you jackasses do is hate anyone who doesn't see the Light. Well no thanks, I like the dark since it has dinosaurs and cupcakes.
Have a lovely day.
You are utterly and completely wrong. I don't believe the Bible because it has words. I believe it because there is just as much convincing evidence supporting it as any other theory, historical sources backing many major events, and because it hasn't been proven fallible. Also, the Bible explicitly states that homosexuality is a sin. That doesn't mean we should hate on them, but they cannot, in good conscience, continue to sin while being a Christian. Therefore, they do not have the Holy Spirit in them, so they are not true Christians. I don't care if you are sexually attracted to guys (or girls if you are a girl). I don't. Just don't sin. You can resist the temptation. You can. If you choose to be that noble.
You said "I don't care if you are sexually attracted to guys (or girls if you are a girl). I don't. Just don't sin. You can resist the temptation. You can. If you choose to be that noble."
Excuse me, but no, they CANNOT choose to be gay or straight. That's like asking you to stop liking girls and suddenly be attracted to guys. You can't do it. And it's not just because you believe it's sinful. You wouldn't be able to even if it weren't a sin in your eyes.
I do believe they are not born "gay." It is an orientation, a choice. They can choose so. I know you can. I bet I could. I'm not gay, so it is an irrelevant hypothetical, but being gay is more like a lust, in my opinion. Not that all straight people, or practically any people at all, don't lust for another, but I think all homosexuality is lust, along with some of straight marriages. Maybe I couldn't; I don't know. But, you can at least squash those feelings, and go through life single. That can be done.
Assuming that there is someone you are attracted to, you can't suddenly snap your fingers and just like that, not be attracted to them any longer. And when you were born, I don't believe you were attracted to both men and women and then decided to be straight. You were most likely only attracted to women, and not men at all. The same would go for people that are homosexual, just of the same gender instead of the opposite.
Like I said, if one really believes in the Christian faith, s/he could easily go through life single. But instead, they live by sexual urges and make up stuff about the Bible to make it seem like not a sin.
Okay, by all of these posts both above and below, it's clear no matter what I say is going to sway your opinion on the matter. I'm not even going to try and start a religious debate with you.
Ah, do you mean because I am easily able to refute it, at least in my mind? None of those arguments were valid. If there were one, then maybe it would change my opinion. Thus far, no cigar.
I guess I mean that we all have different views on the matter. You believe your views are valid while we do not, and vise versa.
How do you know that I am completely wrong? Just because you say so? Go back to second grade and grow up. And please, share this amazing evidence just as long as it doesn't belong to a damn bible verse.
I'm sorry that I'm a proud person who doesn't believe in relgion or a God since you can believe in a God with belonging to a relgion. I'm not athiest since that is an offical relgion. I'm my own person and not a sheep like you. Oh please forgive me for that since you make it seem like you are so fucking holy. Homosexuality is a sin yes, and they can be a Christian while sinning. The fact you are being so very rude to a female and not even bothering to listen to what I am saying is proof of that. And who said I gave two shits about the fact you are into girls or guys? It's your life, not mine. and it's not noble to deny who you are, it's stupidity.
Just you wait, I'm betting that when you finally grow up, you will be gay. And no, not the gay type of gay either
I will be gay? You are so ignorant. I hope you put a few thousand down on that bet. Wait, put all your assets, including your own life, on that bet, and then I'll be happy. You seem to think that I have one piece of evidence, say Mose's staff to part the red sea, or something, that I haven't revealed to the world or something. That is false. The facts have been laid out in front of your eyes. You, having a secular worldview, interpret evidence far differently from I. You wouldn't believe the evidence I propose, and I've done it about twenty times already. Scroll up, and you can see. I'm not getting into a third argument on the same post over the same thing.
"Oh please forgive me for that since you make it seem like you are so fucking holy." I am not holy. I am as bad a sinner as any, and worse than some. I don't follow a book blindly, I do what I think is right, I research stuff, and I listen to both sides. Forgive me for seeing the facts as they are.
See how you had a minus 1 there? That's because homeboy up here didn't like your post. As evidenced by the above burn he received and retorted with grade school level "wit," he's just a butt hurt little boy out of his league.
He puts a dwarf as his profile because of the beard - reminds him of the pubes he has yet to sprout.
Oh, do you commonly resort to unbased accusations and unfunny conclusions when you are trumped with logic? I always thought that you were supposed to keep playing the game, not post something completely stupid, like I care about a minus one.
Cool story, bro. Thumbs up to you and your rapier wit.
I really hope you don't care for a minus one, because just about every one of your comments is AT LEAST minus one
Yeah, generally the truth is unaccepted.
The truth? not exactly. i bet you think global warming is all wrong too
All I know is that those people lied like dogs. So yeah, probably. But I think it will become a trend to find out that most scientists DO lie.
I'm not so sure about that, i mean scientists do know a great deal more about what they are doing then the average citizen... and there is overwhelming evidence that supports their theories
Yeah, then why is so much of it lied about? Global warming was a lie. Well, most of the evidence supporting humans causing it was a lie. You cannot deny that.
So far this year, 18 countries have set their all-time record high. Moscow had its first temperature EVER over 100 degrees, and this actually happened about 3 or for times in a stretch where moscow's high temperature was at least 17 F degrees above average for 31 straight days. You can say the winter last year was bad. Just because there's global warming doesn't mean it will never snow again in a place where it's cold enough to snow! In fact, global warming, or climate change which is a better for it probably cause this bad winter due to more energy in the atmosphere.
I said the evidence saying HUMANS caused it was a lie. There is no way you can prove that either way. Even so, that is weather, not climate. Maybe there was a hot year. (I'm not arguing that.) You just cannot prove that Humans caused it. I don't think it matters much, because it'll be a few hundred years before it matters. In the last fifty years, the average temperature raised .5 degrees. It needs to raise two more before the damage is permanent.
Well, the earth's average temperature just doesn't raise a whole degree just like that! think of the energy it takes to raise or cool the temperature on your house. It doesn't seem like much, but it can just raise havoc on your energy bill! so it must take a lot of energy. Now picture the entire world, and the energy it has taken to raise the average temperature 1 degree celsius (which is 1.8 degrees farenheit). Where did it get all that energy? It came from all the extra energy trapped by carbon dioxide and other greenhouse emissions! prove me wrong if you can find another answer, and "the power of god" does not count.
I am not here to argue Global Warming. I don't think there is enough evidence to conclude either way. In any case, it probably doesn't even matter. It'll be hundreds of years before it's detrimental to the human race.
Well if you were a loving Christian you would try to stop global warming and help out those future generations!
Yeah, no. We do not currently have the technology to do that, and I am completely uninterested in that field. Namely because I do think the Rapture is soon. (And yes, I know people will derive all kinds of illogical things from that)
That excuse can be used alot. "I will fail this class, why does it matter? that rapture is soon!" "Why save money? the rapture is soon!"
Watch The Inconvenient Truth. Then tell us that Global Warming and humans causing it is a lie. Because it's not just a 'hot year'. It has been more and more hot years since humans have become more... industrialized. The factories producing so much pollutants and such. Read about it.
Where did I use circular reasoning? I look at facts, and interpret them. And I search to make sure they're backed up. What about you?
Where did I do that?
You are so biased it isn't even funny. I didn't say anything like your list. Whatever you derived isn't correct. Who says evolution is more valid than creation? Evolutionists? Who says creation is more valid? Creationists. Don't use your own logic to decide which is correct; for you are a child, and by no means no expert. There is literally no evidence for the mutation life theory. You cannot claim that. That is a guess. There is hardly any evidence; they cannot come up with a logical explanation, so they make up something that can defy the laws of science to explain life. Stop being so biased, seriously. YOU'RE the one who needs to broaden his mind.
You just did pretty much the exact same thing you accused 'flyingtoastowns' of doing. And, as a matter of fact, you DID use circular reasoning. You may not of put it exactly as they said, but you did it nevertheless. I'm pretty sure you are one of the least open-minded people I have ever known of. You use one mistake in scientist's experiments to try and prove your point. Reality check, honey. Of course they are going to make mistakes. Everybody does. That doesn't mean all of the experiments they've conducted that prove evolution has happened are a lie.
No but I could bring up more examples. I'm open minded, as long as it's true and logical. Many many tests they do are lies, or mis-represented. Can you give me an example of circular reasoning? I may have, but I can't find it. I'll try to correct it. Also, don't be so quick to accuse.
You should read "Inherit the Wind". SPOILER ALERT: At the end of it, it explains how you can put religion and science together.
Yeah, you can. Science already supports Creationism, but most people are unable to see that, and believe the most easily refutable lies, and deny the truth.
I would really love to hear your explanation for dinosaurs.
What about them? They existed. Then they all died during the flood. Noah only took two dinosaurs. Probably small ones. Not two of each dinosaur, two dinosaurs. Then those probably were killed through poaching or just couldn't adapt.
So Noah was alive at the same time as the dinosaurs?
Yeah, actually. There are footprints of a dinosaur found with human's. Funny.
Theoretically I could kill someone and put their bones in a museum next to a dinosaur skeleton, and a human skeleton would be found next to a dinosaur skeleton, resulting in effectively the same scenario you just cited. Would you say that that person was also alive at the same time as that dinosaur?
Let's not bog ourselves down on theoretical situations. I could make the same argument for evolution.
I think it was a valid situation. I was merely pointing out that the human footprint could easily have been made long after the dinosaur footprint was. And when did I mention evolution?
It's assumed that if you don't believe in Creation, you believe in evolution. There is no other option. In any case, that isn't my point. There is no evidence AGAINST dinosaurs living with humans. People have painted pictures on cave walls for millennia. That should be evidence in itself. Do you think they made up a 'dragon' that looked exactly like a T-Rex? Strange.
Since you seem to have left, and I have nothing better to do, I will finish this little argument by myself. Now, LOGICALLY, a person can not hold two mutually exclusive beliefs. For instance, a bat cannot be both a mammal and a bird, it must be one or the other. You insist that the Bible is to taken absolutely literally, and the bible says (in two separate places, Leviticus 11:19 and Deuteronomy 14:18, KJV) that bats are birds. Now, if you answered that bats are birds, congratulations. You have shown that your faith is so strong that it overcomes what you can observe with your own two eyes; namely that bats are warm blooded, produce milk, and have fur. And I think that is sufficient to discredit any pretense of reasonability on your part. If you answered that bats are mammals, then one of several things is true. 1) you are a liar and a hypocrite (no offense) who doesn't really take the bible literally in every respect
2) you didn't know that the bible said that, and will now seriously reconsider your belief to point of admitting that you MAY be wrong, 3) you don't know the difference between a mammal and a bird, 4) the bible is wrong (this kind of goes along with 2), or 5) bats aren't really furry, warm-blooded, milk producing animals, and no one has noticed. This concludes my argument, good night.
Yeah, that won't work. Someone monologuing is not an "argument." Back then, people classified bats as "birds." Yes, they were incorrect, but science was practically non-existent, and bats 'look' like birds. They were classified as birds back then. In any case, that is so minor, not that it lessens it. It is so minor. Are you familiar with the Miller Experiment?
so you will admit that some things in the bible need to be considered in the context in which they were written, since it was written by people? That's all I am saying. I am. What about it?
Do you know how completely wrong that is, and how much they have lied to get it to to be validated? What do you mean, by written in the context which it was written? The Bible was written long ago, it was applicable to them. They had no idea bats were mammals. It was written for THEM to understand. Do you see what I mean? The New Testament is more applicable today, but that doesn't change the historical facts of the Old.
A monologue is a perfectly valid form of argument utilized in nearly every philosophical work ever written.
Good retort. Care to uh actually rebut any of my arguments?
You mean no evidence aside from a few giant craters and lots of radiometric dating on both dinosaur and human fossils. And before you go on about the inaccuracies of carbon dating, yes, after about 14,000 years it becomes very inaccurate, but not the difference between 65 million years and 200,000 years inaccurate. And here I am back to theoretical situations. Just because someone draws a picture of something does not mean they really saw it. Now I'm going to list some examples to prove my point: unicorns, leprechauns, fairies, angels, devils, assorted other magical creatures. That really isn't so strange as you make it sound, dragons also look a lot like big lizards, which did exist at the same time as people did. Coincidentally, is a bat a mammal or a bird?
I don't know if you realize this, but yes, it is the difference between 65 million years and 200,000 years. They did different tests on rocks from Mount Saint Helens to determine the age of them. (Because they were new.) They got a range of 35,000 years old, to 2.8 million years old. I don't know about you, but that seems way off. And, that was a test done fairly soon. So, if something is actually about 5,000 years old, it stands to reason that it would be even more wrong, and come up with 65,000 years old, or more. The thing is, with the cave drawings, there are also reports of dragons roaming the lands, terrorizing cities. There are accounts of 'dragons' in the Bible. 'Dinosaur' is a recent word, so it would be illogical to assume that they would call them that.
While I will admit to not knowing the details of that particular experiment, it seems to me that those rocks weren't just magically created when Mt. Saint Helens erupted, but were actually violently removed from deeper in the earth's crust. And they use different techniques for dating rocks, usually using radioactive decay, which is much more consistent than carbon dating, which was commonly used on fossils, and only works for organic matter. I am willing to concede that I don't entirely understand the origin of dragons or the cave paintings depicting them, but I simply don't consider the word of people who apparently couldn't classify birds and mammals as conclusive evidence that dinosaurs were roaming the earth alongside humans.
The test is a ton of lies, yet they still use it as evidence. The rocks actually were made when Mt. Saint Helens erupted... Any fool knows that. That is third grade stuff. Igneous rock? Formed from hardened magma? Please don't make up stupid theories like you did. At least my theories have backing and evidence. You completely made that up. Refrain from doing that in the future.
Take a look at this: http://www.asa3.org/ASA/resourc....html#page%205 , it explains exactly why those numbers were so off.
Yeah, so they verify it with four OTHER false ways, and then give out the number. Sounds logical.
It explains evolution and how you can put that with religion also.
Yeah, only you can't do that with Christianity.
Or at least if you believe in the Bible.
God didn't write the bible, people did, so how do you know that everything in it is exactly as it says.
Through historical backing, and the same tests that scientists trying to prove "Origin of Species" use. If you believe in the Bible, then you would have to take it literally, because it says in 2Timothy 3:16 "All scripture is God-breathed and useful for teaching, rebuking, and correcting in righteousness." You cannot believe in the Bible and take it metaphorically.
If you think we should take it all literally then shouldn't you have poked your eye out or chopped you hand off when they caused you to sin.
No actually, because that was before Jesus. He now atones for our sins. Seriously, learn a few things about the opposing argument, to avoid stupid comments like this.
So are you saying that Abraham and Moses should have done that since they were before Jesus
Done what? You don't know the first thing about the Bible. They were both holy men, but they sinned. They also atoned for it with sacrifices of animals and Abraham even had his son prepared to be sacrificed. That is how devoted he was to the Maker. He had a special covenant with God, but even he sinned, so he made up for it. Don't start making up stuff, yet again.
You don't even act like you believe in God. You just believe in the bible.
You can't take everything in the bible literally.
You can take was is meant to be taken literally literally. I think it's saying you're smarter than God to take some stuff literally and others hypothetically.
Yeah, but "noah's arc" didn't happen millions of years ago. The bible says more like 4000.
What of it? The methods which they use to date are illogical, and use circular reasoning. There is no, let me repeat that, no reasonable method to date things unbiasedly. Either you date it one way, and take that date, or you date it the other way, and take it that way. Either it's old or young. Depending on your view, you can argue either way which way to date it.
Your an idiot.
Is that the best retort you have? Pity, I thought you were at least a little smart. Oh well. Don't let this bother your blissful existence, and remember, look both ways before you cross the street!
Arguing with idiots only brings me down to your level, trust me, I'm probably smarter than you.
Yeah, and that's not being arrogant at all. You have no idea how smart I am; for all you know my IQ could be 175.
I bet I am smarter than you, considering you blindly follow something without any scientific truth, and then try to defend it with bullshit answers. Seriously? we can date things you know. Plus the bible was written, what was it, oh yeah, 400 years after, and they chose what they want to put into it. The bible is more of a guideline for life, not a religious book.
You don't know what you're talking about. It wasn't written four hundred years after, it was canonized. Maybe you should look that up. You don't know the first thing about dating things. You seriously do not. Nobody knows how to date something where the age is unknown correctly. You cannot. I have defended mine feasibly, what about you?
They literally chose what books to put in the bible, and changed them to fit their plans for it. And you can date things.
It's called canonization. They chose WHICH books to put into the Bible. They didn't write new ones to fit it. Also, you can "date" things, but not really.
You can't be serious.
ever heard of carbon dating?
Yeah, actually. And guess what? It's not infallible.
jeez dude its a joke. if it were about, oh i dont know, the koran, youd be laughing.
No, it isn't a joke. That is literally one of the better arguments I've heard against it, you know? Most of them are like "You didn't see it." And I'm like "Well not one person has witnessed evolution. Ever. Have you ever seen a dog create a non-dog?" Don't think so.
I think this is meant to be taken as a joke to be honest since If he wanted attack Christianity's validity there are so many better arguments that you can choose.
Well yeah, you're mom created you didn't she?
(:D): I'm a human. She's a human. How is that evolution? Unless you're suggesting that I am so talented I cannot be human, in which case you are incorrect.
You fail at intelligent comebacks.
(D:): Really? I said that was incorrect. That was wit, and just because you are too dumb to understand it, the value isn't lessened.
Ah, of course. Wit. How could I have missed it? Your intelligence is that of the gods good sir.
Oh excuse me, of GOD.
No, no. I am nowhere near omniscient. Intelligent I may be, compared to the average population, but even I cannot compare to the All Mighty. I doubt even Rowena herself could.
dude, okay its people like you that give christians a bad name. i heard this saying once: ' i dont mind God, its his fan club i cant stand' point in case.
I believe it was Ghandi who said "I like your Christ, I don't not like your Christians".
im a christian and i totally agree with that quote XD
Then you're not a Christian.
Then who isn't a Christian? And what makes them so?
If you are a Christian you believe in your heart that Jesus is Lord. They, by agreeing with the statement, are saying that it didn't happen.
Just saying, evolution does not have to create a completely new species. We could make new adaptations, or a mutation could occur, just like blue eyes, or something like that.
The definition of evolution is:
change in the gene pool of a population from generation to generation by such processes as mutation, natural selection, and genetic drift.
Great point! I don't get this page...pics or it didn't happen? What fucken moron didn't know that cameras weren't around in biblical times. Yeah evolution is true but who made the very first living creature to have it in turn start evolving into other species? Think about it. Someone had to make it, all this shit didn't just appear.
Well, actually, there is evidence that species adapt to their surroundings through generations.
"Evidence" for adaptation or microevolution, but not macroevolution. And I know it's a joke. But I can still bash it, yes?
if it were a bad joke, yes. but its funny. and at the end of the day, its just that, a joke.
(brunetterox915):No, right now it's a joke, but at the end of the day it really isn't.
"The genome-wide comparison, performed by biologists at the University of California, Berkeley, uncovered more than 30 genes with DNA mutations that have become more prevalent in Tibetans than Han Chinese, nearly half of which are related to how the body uses oxygen. One mutation in particular spread from fewer than 10 percent of the Han Chinese to nearly 90 percent of all Tibetans."
That's still microevolution because both Tibetans and Han Chinese are still human. Macroevolution means a species becoming another species.
Macroevolution is thought of as the compounded effects of microevolution.
Speciation has been observed.
Notably in plants
"Nicholas Matzke and Paul R. Gross have accused creationists of using "strategically elastic" definitions of micro- and macroevolution when discussing the topic.The actual definition of macroevolution accepted by scientists is "any change at the species level or above" (phyla, group, etc.) and microevolution is "any change below the level of species." Matzke and Gross state that many creationist critics define macroevolution as something that cannot be attained, as these critics describe any observed evolutionary change as "just microevolution". "
Matzke, Nicholas J. and Paul R. Gross. 2006. Analyzing Critical Analysis: The Fallback Antievolutionist Strategy. In Eugenie Scott and Glenn Branch, Not in Our Classrooms: Why Intelligent Design is Wrong for Our Schools, Beacon Press, Boston ISBN 0807032786
I only have a basic understanding of microevolution and macroevolution; so when I say microevolution I mean adaptation and by macroevolution I mean the theoretical idea of a species becoming two separate species. Maybe there are better words for those two ideas, but I don't know them.
The examples you gave for speciation looked suspiciously like a modification inside of a species due to a few mutations, not a species changing into a noticeably different species (adaptation/mutation, not macroevolution) to me.
You seem well informed, so I have a few questions for you regarding evolution; how did they eye form step-by-step in a way that was beneficial to the species during each step? Same question for bones, mitochondria, and any other organs/organelles/structures which you may choose.
As if the skeletons found that possess both ape and human traits isn't enough. Get your head out of the sand.
Wow, I don't know what's more amusing, the post, or this argument.
But anyway, you sir, need to calm down. It was just a joke, don't get your panties in a bunch. Also, please don't try force your religion onto other people. It can get quite annoying.
It seems as though everyone is against you. I'd just stop now if I were you ;P
If God is with me, I don't care who opposes me. I have no offense to the post. None. I just disagree. I take offense at all the ignorant people spewing lies. That's just me. I'm calm, though. Don't start assuming stuff.
Alrighty then, if you say so. But, 'all the ignorant people spewing lies'? Is that what you saw? Because all I saw was people expressing their opinions and trying to prove a point to someone who clearly can't take a joke. Meh, maybe that's just me.
By spewing lies I mean regurgitating what they were taught in school. They aren't liars, they are wrong. I can take a joke. I just disagree with it. They are 'ignorant' of the truth. Most can't hold their argument, which is why I'm only arguing with two people, rather than about 15.
You are just as ignorant and spewing just as many evidenceless lies.
Bah. Haven't I held my arguments tenaciously? Yes? That's because I can back mine up. Most can't.
if you really dont care who oposes you, why are you here arguing?
To back mine up. Seriously, try to be logical.
Darwin's finches. There's your evidence right there.
There is a fundamental difference between "microevolution" or "adaptation," and macroevolution. Adaptation, like the finches, happens. And yes, the finches do look different. But they can still breed together. They are the same species. A small beak can still mate with a large beak and produce fertile offspring. They are the same species. That, in no way, constitutes a new species. In any case, they are almost identical. No one group is anatomically better than the other. If one were, then that would rule the island and all the other died out. They simply adapted to their conditions.
i'm pretty sure adaption is a fundamental part of evolution
Yeah, because it's practically the only evidence for it, and afterwards they go on to explain it through some illogical method. Adaptation happens. That doesn't make new animals. It makes better, more streamlined animals best fit for their environment.
That's how evolution happens. survival of the fittest. species won't give birth to other species, rather, it takes millions of years for species to develop. what else do you think happened for the 4 billion years or so life has occurred on earth?
Stop right there. "Species won't give birth to other species." You then go on to refute that. You forgot a word, 'instantly.'
Continue. You still haven't given any evidence that the streamlined, adapted animals create new species. Someone posted something saying how bunnies who have longer legs are faster, etc, and then their offspring will be faster, etc., so that makes all rabbits better. Yes, that is true, and that is adaptation. But that wasn't an example of 'macro-evolution.' To this date, I have never seen an example of macro-evolution. Not once. There is simply no evidence at all for it.
Hello. I just wanted to say. Get your ass off the internet. I think it's stupid that you would go so far to defend your beliefs on a website like this. No one is ever going to agree with you. Why bother? You're wasting your time and ours. Believe whatever the hell you want, but stop trying to cram it down everyone else's throats. That's why America has freedom of religion, so we won't have to listen to whackjobs like you. I also wanted to ask, do you attend church at Westboro Baptist? Because your ignorance of how the Bible is supposed to be adapted to fit modern times amazes me. Never should it be taken literally. And as a departing thought, I am not an atheist, or agnostic, or whatever. I'm a Lutheran, however I don't favor Creationism over Evolution or visa versa. I think the two theories can exist in harmony, as neither one will EVER be proven. Which brings us back to my main point. This'll never be resolved. So shut up.
Your argument consists of nothing. I'm not the one cramming lies down the students' throats; the textbooks in the school are full of lies. Lies supporting evolution. Where in the Bible does it say don't take it literally? Nowhere? Hmm, did you just make that up (or someone) to explain away some things. Very smart. Claiming you know more than God.
Dear lord, there is no reasoning with you. >.< You can't prove one theory over another, so I wouldn't refer to either as "lies." When you find a way to prove Creationism is valid, come talk to me. And no, the Bible does not count as a legitimate source. Also, it never says in the Bible not to take it literally. I never said it did. HOWEVER, the Bible has a lot of rules and such that people nowadays do not follow, for they just don't make sense. The Bible says you can own a slave as long as it's foreign. Do you own a Canadian? I didn't think so. I do not claim I know more than God, I am just saying there is no way to prove one theory over the other, and that the Bible was written as a code of conduct, however due to the passing of time, it has become outdated and things in it need to be adjusted to fit the modern day scenario.
I cannot believe that you believe the nonsense you just typed. I didn't say the entirety of evolution theory is lies, I said that some of the more 'convincing' parts of it happen to be misleading evidence. Like the half bird reptile thing. I don't know where it says you can own a slave, but that doesn't mean you HAVE to own a slave. You understand? It's like saying you CAN eat vegetables, but that doesn't mean you SHOULDN'T eat meat. Get it? Also, the Bible was written to be taken literally. That being said, there are things to take metaphorically, such as parables and the like. Genesis was written as a historical narrative, and we should interpret it thusly. The Bible isn't just a "code of conduct," rather, it's an entire history of man, complete from the beginning, to the end of the world. When I say "complete" I don't mean that everything is written down; that'd be impossible. I mean that it is accurate, and NOT outdated.
I give up. There is absolutely no way to get you to open your eyes a bit wider and see more than you're comfortable with. I can say so many things, like, "Do you actually have friends?" etc, but I don't want to be immature about this. Religion is something that different people take different ways. According to you, my view on Christianity and the Bible is wrong. According to me, my church, my pastor, and probably God, it's just fine. I have faith, I believe Jesus died for us, and that God is watching over everyone. Maybe I'm not so technical and I don't go by the book (haha, pun), but I consider myself a Christian all the same. You have no right to tell other people on here what's right and what's wrong, for they too are allowed to believe what they want. And as I stated below, I would quit getting so up in arms about a normally funny meme, and get yourself a sense of humor. I'm done with this.
NOW you're on my side once you realize that your argument was invalid. Whatever, do what you will.
Excuse me? Did I say I was on your side? Because I missed that. Actually, I recall saying I was on no one's side, and that religion is a free for all, and arguing over a meme was stupid. But somehow you found in the subtext that I agree with you. I really don't, hate to burst your bubble.
As a final thought, I'm not on either "side" in this argument. I believe both theories are plausible and could be valid. The truth could even be a combination of the two. But, until we find tell-all scientific evidence, or a prophet who isn't a mentally unhinged homeless man, we're at a stalemate. As a result, I don't see any point in arguing about all this on the internet, for it's not proving anything, or changing anyone's perspective. It's just getting people mad. I find it even more ridiculous that such a debate was sparked by a post that was meant to be a joke. It's not seriously doubting God or the Bible or anything. It's a joke. Like, ha-ha. So learn to laugh, or get off the internet. Good day.
Okay then. Give me a piece of solid evidence that evolution didn't happen. And no, passages from the Bible don't count as solid evidence.
If it helps,
You've done a great job of holding to the Christian beliefs, but if you want encouragement/reference you can use that post's comments.
God Bless all of you. Peace out.
Dude thank you. That post is amazing. And I cannot believe that 1200 people disagreed with it; it's undeniable.
At least we can prove our "higher power" (scientists) actually exist. But eh, whatever floats your boat.
Yeah, but that doesn't make them right, now does it?
Very true, but I honestly don't think anyone can claim they know exactly how creation began, whether its coming from an Evolutionist or Creationist.
No, but there are some good theories. Big Bang is pretty logical, but it still needs a cause to set it off. That's where an all-powerful, timeless Being comes in.
Ok, you're arguing religion here. When we fight like this, no one can win. Everyone's stance is a differant religious opinion, thus, no one is right or wrong.
No one will know any of this until we die, so it's stupid to fight. Everyone is going to hug and makeup, because we are all good people here!!!
Maybe science and religion can coexist, then, because like mlpanda said, no one will probably ever totally agree. Even in the case of Evolution vs. Creation, the initial act of the universe itself being created (by God, as you believe) could be followed by evolution.
Anywayys, I doubt it'll do any good continuing the debate.
"Pics of evolution or it didn't happen"? Genetic evidence and fossils~
But this post was seriously a joke. Calm down.
@509777 (Katffro): This has to be one of the most longest conversations in amirite history
(Crayons,crayons....): That's why I didn't read it all :P