Swimmercga25 Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 I believe in creation. The big bang theory could be right.... but who the made the atoms that rubbed together and exploded. I believe god created the big bang himself because it would explain phi. Big band creates the heaven and the earth then god made us...then he got lazy when making animals so he shoved osme human features in i believe in this somewhat. it is said that God did create us, but He never said how He did it. if there is so much evidence for the big bang theory, then maybe that is how He created us. also, when you are making a lot of things, dont you think you might repeat your design a little bit once in a while? also the animals could have evolved after God created them. He said that He created man in his image, He said nothing about animals. i guess we will never know until judgement day... :? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
____ Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Moral of the story, we didn't evolve from monkeys. We both evolved from a different distant ancestor. At some poing it was a common ancestor, iirc. And I also believe the change between traveling on 4 legs and 2 legs has been suggested as the need to travel between clusters of trees as the jungle or whatnot receeded and grasslands / savana became more dominant. The ability to travel on 2 legs had said group traveling between tree clusters quicker and it also allowed them to carry stuff in the free arms. I'm not sure how accurate that is since it was only a suggested change of sorts as to how it happened. But the general concept remains the same :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 creation... nothing as complex as 1 strand of DNA that barely 2% of it has been cracked by scientists of today....could have evolved from a single celled organism... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatsilverwyrm Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 Moral of the story, we didn't evolve from monkeys. We both evolved from a different distant ancestor. Well, yeah, monkey is just a simple term. Some sort of primate.. *shrug* Moral of the story, we didn't evolve from monkeys. We both evolved from a different distant ancestor. At some poing it was a common ancestor, iirc. And I also believe the change between traveling on 4 legs and 2 legs has been suggested as the need to travel between clusters of trees as the jungle or whatnot receeded and grasslands / savana became more dominant. The ability to travel on 2 legs had said group traveling between tree clusters quicker and it also allowed them to carry stuff in the free arms. I'm not sure how accurate that is since it was only a suggested change of sorts as to how it happened. But the general concept remains the same :) There are a ton of theories in that area.. An interesting one I heard about was that at some point our ape ancestor began to take to the water a lot, which is why we shed most of the hair covering our bodies, and a few other things.. should find more info on that or watch the show again or something.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman089 Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 creation... nothing as complex as 1 strand of DNA that barely 2% of it has been cracked by scientists of today....could have evolved from a single celled organism... A lot can happen in the span of 2.2 billion years, when life on earth was first said to become apparant. Gamertag: King Arizona Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 creation... nothing as complex as 1 strand of DNA that barely 2% of it has been cracked by scientists of today....could have evolved from a single celled organism... A lot can happen in the span of 2.2 billion years, when life on earth was first said to become apparant. thats if u believe earth was that old... half-life dating is said to not be at all accurate past a couple thousand years...and the dating itself has been proven false on many occasion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehjl Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 anyway i personaly have only been to church for wedings and cristonings of my freinds. quite frankly they scare me... alot. :S anyway, i fell that all supernatural things are unbeleivable. i dont want to offend anyone but i find it hard to beleive that there is a all mighty being that has created everything. and if there is a god, why do people get sick, and why are there wars, and why are people like Osama alowed to do the things they do. well most of that was kinda offtopic but i wanted to say it lol, y do u get scared? Yes, there's some church's that yell at the congregation, but I don't see that as right. Well it would be hard to believe that He created us because our mind cannot comprehend it. And for why do people get sick, it all depends. God can choose to make some1 sick if He wants them to repent, wake him up, or trial him, or some cases punish. Side note: I hope your talkin about life threatening diseases, and not like common colds. And for wars and osama, it all come to free will. He gave us the right to make our own decisions and live our lives the way we want. I see where you're going with this, but think of it this way. There's still monkeys living. If it was adaptation, that means that the monkeys wouldn't be alive anymore, because they needed to adapt to survive. *claps* I can't believe people are still capable of saying that. If you isolate a minority of a species and put said group in a situation where it has to adapt or die, eventually the only genes that will be passed on will be those which help it to survive. Mainly because those which couldn't would've died. The rest of the species will NOT adapt along with it. Why? Because they have no reason to. However, if you want to follow your logic: there should only be only one species of every animal since all of said animal would've adapted at the same time as the rest. And if you disagree with that, you deserve to be hit in the head since that is exactly what you implied with your monkey analogy. Now, make your choice. Personally, evolution works. I don't see how that relates to my sentence. Of course i'm not talkin about the entire species, how is an animal in japan gonna be affected with what we have in america, i thought i wouldn't have to spell it out for u. I just wrote that because he didn't put that monkey---> man as a life/death situation, so i wouldn't exactly see it as adaptation. He said they evolved just for the heck of it. Dragon drops: D med x3, D Spear x2, Left Half x1, D2h x1Crawling Hands X4, Cockatrice heads X2, Basilisk head X2, Kurask head X1Support me in the drop race Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneffie Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 *looks around the corner* This is a touchy subject to touch since you will automatically wander into the Religion section of the discusion but this is my two cents. I believe in the big bang theory and mainy because there are scientist who have recreated the conditions the earth was millions of years ago and they were able to create the proteins that the human body is made of so that is proof to me that every living being is created by evolution and not a higher power ( i speak of a high power and not a god since there isn't any proof that there is a god nor proof of the fact that there isn't a god) But to speak in the words of Bob Ross ( the painter) we are all happy little accidents and that is true, just have a look at the DNA of every living thing the only difference is the basepair ( ok sue me i've had biochemistry in college lol). And yes we all had a common ancestor when you have a look at the primates did you know that 95.5% of our DNA matches the DNA of Bonobo's ?? This makes you wonder if we're not a highly skilled primate who can communicate, think and problem solve. And the whole religion thing is an invention to keep ppl on the straight and narrow oh and don't forget in the Dark Ages to pay for the building of all the huge churches in Europe lol Not to offend anyone but untill i have proof that there is a higher power i choose to stay away from the straight and narrow that the church preaches. Besides i don't like it when ppl tell me what to believe or do. Don't get me wrong if you are happy with your religion please don't be offended by my post but please don't force your beliefs onto me as i won't force mine on you. In my eyes evolution works due to the fact that the stronger ones and the best adapted ones of a species survives and creates a new species next to the old one that might survive due to their adaptations. Greetz Sneffie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jesselt Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 was life created by a super being or did everything evolve from certain proteins mixing and creating life, or anything else you beleive. my opinion is simple. Evolution. we can see it hapening all around us, animals, people and plants adapting to there suroundings for the better. Bacteria becomes imune to certain anti-biotics things like that. its all living proof that we evolved to what we are today and are still changing. Also if there is a super-human being that created us, who created him, and who created him...... There's a point between Evolution and Adaptation. Evolution is going from a let's say frog to a cow. Adaptation is when you adapt to your enviroment. What you said is adaptation, not evolution. I believe in Adaptation, how an animal can in a way control his offspring to better his life in his environment, but I don't believe we came from monkey's. As you can prob. tell from my avy and sig, I believe in creation. Evolution is NOTHING like going from a frog to a cow.... Evolution: "A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form." What you are describing is also called evolution, not just adaptation. If somehow we all wound up in the air and eventually we developed wings so we could move around, that is not just "adapting to our environment" is EVOLVING. My view: Creation at first, then things evolved. Things do evolve, it happens all the time, so denying that it happens is like saying that there is no such thing as milk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magekillr Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 heres an interesting point that i just thought of...i wanted to include it in my original post...but i couldnt remember what it was until now alright...creation believes God created man from the earth... well...dont u find it a tad interesting that the 7 elements found naturally in "earth"...dirt...etc...(cant remember the exact elements)...are found naturally in humans?....both match up equally...the same EXACT ELEMENTS... just a little bit of evidence that points towards creation from dust to humans... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mayjest Posted July 2, 2005 Share Posted July 2, 2005 heres an interesting point that i just thought of...i wanted to include it in my original post...but i couldnt remember what it was until now alright...creation believes God created man from the earth... well...dont u find it a tad interesting that the 7 elements found naturally in "earth"...dirt...etc...(cant remember the exact elements)...are found naturally in humans?....both match up equally...the same EXACT ELEMENTS... just a little bit of evidence that points towards creation from dust to humans... You mean carbon, hyrdogen, ogygen, nitrogen etc? Well, yeah, there's a parallel there. anyway... *yawn*. You know, 2 days ago I'd be well up for this, but right now, I just can't be bothered. I suppose I'd better say something, justy to keep my side up. Plus, I think it's kind of expected of me by now. :lol: I apologise to GreatSilverWyrm, as I'm gonna have to go a little off topic in order to explain some of my points. Frankly, evolution and creationism are two ways of looking at the same thing. Creationism is what God did, evolution is the method he used. Everyone knows the story of Genesis 1, the 7 day creation. Fewer know the story of Genesis 2. There is a difference between them. 1 Says that animals were made before man, while 2 says that animals were made after man, in order for them to be their companions. Most Biblical scolars worth their salt consider both to be 'oral' tales, told by word of mouth for generations before they were written down. Most say that Genesis 1 is regemented, and in the style of priests. Genesis two is more descriptive, and more 'common'. Two different ways of looking at the same story. So, from this many people say that the Bible conflict, and therefore cannot be true. Uhuh. The main point of the stories are consistent: God created the world. A literal 7-day creation may not have happened, but God still created it. Consider it like an artist painting an picture. He knows in his head what he want to do, the colour, the overall picture, etc. But from there he's free. He can use pastels, poster paints, oils, chalk, whatever. It's the same with God. He knew what he was doing. He knew what he wanted the world to look like. He could have just made it appear exactly at the year 6000 BC or whatever, and started from there. But what's the fun in that? The fact that he chose to use evolution or whatever is frankly, of no importance what-so-ever. That said, I do have some problems with the Big Bang and evoltion. The universe started with just this dense matter of everything, and expanded from there, and thus time began. I say that time did not begin there, but our ability to percieve time did. Time is a constant, our perception is based on movement. That's why faster than light travel is impossible, as the closer you get to the speed of light, the slower time gets, so you don't actually go anywhere. So, why did time start with the explosion? And if time didn't start with the explosion, when the ball of matter must have existed before hand. So what put it there? And why did it choose that exact moment to explode? How did it explode? The best reason I've heard so far was that there was another type of matter, not the regular matter or anti-matter that we know of. This matter, instead of having gravity like normall matter, instead replelled normall matter, thus forcing the matter apart and starting the explosion. Luckily for the physicists trying to find evidence, this 'matter' decayed soon after, leaving nothing but background radiation. Gee, what a coincidence. As for evolution, my main concern is, when is a species a species? How do you define a difference between two animals? As for those bird in the Gallepedos, how does slightly different beaks define a species? If they were different colours, would they be different species? So am I the same species as a human with different skin colour. No, I'm not racist, I'm just using this an example. There's a disparity there, and it can undermine the entire theory if someone smarter than me uses it. Anyway, my point: arguing about this thing is pointless. All your doing is describing the same thing in different ways, it's useless. Goals to get my skills back up to a barely respectable level on the high scores: Currently going for Bone to Peaches spell. It's amazing how boring doing the same repetitive task is! Stupid MTA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xzarn Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 As a Christian, i believe in creation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mk Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 hrm. interesting argument. im agnostic, i openly admit i have no idea if god exists. Id hope that if god does exist it would be wise enough to understand why i cant believe in something i cant understand. i like science, i think that physics is beautiful. one of the best things i ever heard came from my physics teacher. we are all made of carbon, us, plants, the earth. Carbon is only created in the heart of dieing stars when they supernova. Its just too awesome to know we are all made of dead stars, recycled and brough to life. The universe reborn inside our bodies. theres gotta be so much we are yet to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dusqi Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 "Religion" tried to tell us that the world was flat and that the Earth was the centre of the universe. It took intelligent people a while to rubbish these assertions, and it will take a while before they gather enough evidence to completely rubbish the assertion of creationism. They're working on it, but it takes a lot before these long-standing myths can be overcome, mostly due to people's inherent conservatism. However, intelligent people's interest in the real universe, rather than the 2,000 year old story version of it, continues apace - unburdened by the religious layman's opinion of events. Scientific journals don't waste space on the consideration that there might be 'creationism' every time that an article is written - there's no asterisk after every sentence saying "*assuming that evolution is real"... and since scientists are the people that are actually discovering and interested, they're the only people whose opinions matter. So mostly what I'm trying to say, is that religious people aren't discovering anything new and they're not finding any more real evidence to back themselves up, all they're doing is looking for holes in current evidence... the majority of the religious are opposed to humanity's progression, because deep down they know that it will prove them wrong. But it doesn't matter, because progress will happen, and the religious will always be on the backfoot, fighting a rearguard action against reality. For it is the greyness of dusk that reigns.The time when the living and the dead exist as one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insane Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 "Religion" tried to tell us that the world was flat and that the Earth was the centre of the universe. It took intelligent people a while to rubbish these assertions, and it will take a while before they gather enough evidence to completely rubbish the assertion of creationism. Using emotional terms doesn't make your argument stronger. I can say "evolution is unintelligent and the same with everyone who believes it", and all I'm succeeding in doing is insulting evolutionists and not proving a point. I'm surprised that this would come from an "omni-accepter" such as yourself. "Religion" didn't try to tell us anything. Maybe ignorant people that were part of a religion tried to tell us something, but that says absolutely nothing for religion itself. So don't peg religion for something that it didn't do. I could also produce an equally-strong argument for the other side. It would go something like; "It would appear to me that evolutionists are buying into media propoganda that says evolution is true. Blinded by their own proconceived notions of the universe, they run like chickens towards anything that smells like "evidence" towards their cause". I could do more, but it would be pointless without any substantial proof and it's full of loaded terms designed to make the other side look inferior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killu69 Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 well heres my view... So there are only three options concering how the world was created 1) The world was never created and has aways been here ( the world is eternal) 2) The world "created" itself (something from nothing) 3) Or something created the world (God imo) The problem with option number one is that the world is not eternal, and therefore could not have created itself. For something to be eternal "always been here" it cannot change, and the world changes everyday. Futhermore, the earth is losing its "energy" i.e changing(therodynamics is complicated but feel 2 pm if u want 2 know some more about it). Since something that is eternal cannot change we know that we world cannot have always existed as it is changing now. Option number is what most people call evolution. I really have no problem with evolution except for the fact that it is IMPOSSIBLE for something to come from nothing. And if you want to go down the "there was energy, or little atoms, or whatever else at the begining of the world" then i ask you where did that come from? We know that from the first option those atoms can not have always been there, or else they could have have changed (evolved) Well as i see it, since there are only 3 options and the first two have been proven false, by defalt we could accept number 3. However, the problem that most people have about option number 3 is "Where did God come from?" Even as a Christian it is a hard thing for me to understand and even harder to explain, and imo takes some faith to believe in. Since NOTHING has to be created can be eternal then God has got to "just always been there." These "arguments" for creationism are just the tip of the iceburg when it comes to talking about how the world began, and Id be happy to discuss it in futher people who might be interested in what i said. Dont get me wrong folks. I'm in no way against evolution, and i think that it could be the way God created the world. However, I believe that if evolution did occur it was because God created the "first substances" that sparked evolution. I wrote this really fast and my ideas my not be laid out clearly, so please in a nice way post on something that might be unclear and ill try to make it make sense. O and again feel free to pm me with any questions you might have about what i just said :wink: . [/u] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dusqi Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 However, I believe that if evolution did occur it was because God created the "first substances" that sparked evolution. As you know, creationism is all about how the universe was created in 6 days, with all the animals and humans set up in it ready to go. As opposed to evolution where life started off as single celled organisms and then diversified and became more complicated over billions of years with billions of trial and error tests. This post isn't about whether there is a God or not, it's about whether life (through a God, or lack of a God) started off through evolution or not. Your post simply addresses the problem of the beginning of evolution. In my opinion, the beginning of evolution is a philosophical question at the moment where religion can have something to say if it wants. But evolution itself is a fact. For it is the greyness of dusk that reigns.The time when the living and the dead exist as one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mhrobinson2 Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 im not christian im not aethist im not jewish im not muslim i do believe in god and jesus i do believe in "aided evolution" i do believe that the bible has been "edited" i do believe the bible is true i do believe some of the bible was fabricated i do believe in heaven i do believe in hell and thats all i have to say Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my_pet_worm Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 my friend( there are many different christian thoughts, this is one) said that if you believe in heaven or hell or dont think about it, you will go to heaven or hell. if you believe in evolution, god sends you to what you expect, an eternal sleep with no dreams. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
killu69 Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 However, I believe that if evolution did occur it was because God created the "first substances" that sparked evolution. As you know, creationism is all about how the universe was created in 6 days, with all the animals and humans set up in it ready to go. As opposed to evolution where life started off as single celled organisms and then diversified and became more complicated over billions of years with billions of trial and error tests. This post isn't about whether there is a God or not, it's about whether life (through a God, or lack of a God) started off through evolution or not. Your post simply addresses the problem of the beginning of evolution. In my opinion, the beginning of evolution is a philosophical question at the moment where religion can have something to say if it wants. But evolution itself is a fact. Not all people interpert the 6 days of creationism to be literal days as we know them now. And as for the part that evolution is a fact i would have to disagree. As even the leading advocates of it refer to it as a theory. There is not enough proof (not much at all actually) to confirm evolution as a fact. If your asking me as to whether animals evolve and such then i would of course agree with you, but I always though that evolution was the belief that we world evolved from nothing. edit-im going 2 bed for now but ill be sure to check this tomm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greatsilverwyrm Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 -stuff- There are a lot of contradictory and obfuscated ideas there.. I'd nitpick but you said you were in a rush and may need to explain more, so, could you? One thing that popped-out was that when you explained "option 1" it became the same as "option 2" and, just.. :-/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
my_pet_worm Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 And as for the part that evolution is a fact i would have to disagree. As even the leading advocates of it refer to it as a theory. There is not enough proof (not much at all actually) to confirm evolution as a fact. no proof? 1) do you hiccup? thats proof 2) you have a collar bone? thats proof 3) look at the back of your hand,see the lines? thats proof why is this proof? 1) fish hiccup to get rid of water in there lungs(or whatever). we hiccup, but we dont swim, its a fish attribute. 2) collar bones for walking on all fours, and i cant see many humans doing that... 3) the lines is the result of scales, if we didnt have scales, it would be smooth thats proof Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehjl Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 And as for the part that evolution is a fact i would have to disagree. As even the leading advocates of it refer to it as a theory. There is not enough proof (not much at all actually) to confirm evolution as a fact. no proof? 1) do you hiccup? thats proof 2) you have a collar bone? thats proof 3) look at the back of your hand,see the lines? thats proof why is this proof? 1) fish hiccup to get rid of water in there lungs(or whatever). we hiccup, but we dont swim, its a fish attribute. 2) collar bones for walking on all fours, and i cant see many humans doing that... 3) the lines is the result of scales, if we didnt have scales, it would be smooth thats proof 3) those are actually lines from where your skin bends. You stretch and bend the skin a lot on the back of your hand also...y you have them at your elbow too. It just helps the skin be more flexable. P.S. My hand is smooth :D Dragon drops: D med x3, D Spear x2, Left Half x1, D2h x1Crawling Hands X4, Cockatrice heads X2, Basilisk head X2, Kurask head X1Support me in the drop race Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dusqi Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 And as for the part that evolution is a fact i would have to disagree. As even the leading advocates of it refer to it as a theory. There is not enough proof (not much at all actually) to confirm evolution as a fact. Gravity is also a theory. Would you jump off a bridge? Okay, some hard evidence. Look at this picture showing the evolution of humans from apes. Viruses like AIDS are passed down through generations by adding a DNA copy of themselves to the host's genome. So you'd have the information to make a human, as well as the AIDS virus information. However, not all viruses like this will cause death, some are harmless. Approximately 1% of human DNA is composed of these viruses which have added themselves to our genome (some 30,000 viruses). The arrows on the picture show when some of these viruses added themselves to our genome. All branches after the insertion point (those to the top right) carry the virus. Once a virus DNA has inserted itself into the DNA of an organism, it will be inherited by all descendents of that organism. Thus showing that we are descendents of apes. The chances of us randomly getting the same inserted viruses in the same DNA spots as monkeys, but no other organisms, are extremely low. This comes from: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc ... troviruses There are 29+ other evidences for evolution there. For it is the greyness of dusk that reigns.The time when the living and the dead exist as one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kop Posted July 3, 2005 Share Posted July 3, 2005 [ As for evolution, my main concern is, when is a species a species? How do you define a difference between two animals? As for those bird in the Gallepedos, how does slightly different beaks define a species? If they were different colours, would they be different species? So am I the same species as a human with different skin colour. No, I'm not racist, I'm just using this an example. There's a disparity there, and it can undermine the entire theory if someone smarter than me uses it. quote] Just to clear this up, and putting it as scientifically as possible, two animals are considered different species when they can no longer mate to produce fertile offspring. Basically if two animals can have babies theyre the same species. Personally I believe in a kind of mix between both creation and evolution, that God created the universe, and evolution is how God changes said universe. If you look at the big bang theory, where did this mass come from? What or who made it? If there was something that cause it, where did that come from? I see this as showing that god created the universe, and might possibly guide evolution. The "intelligent design" theory type thing. As for evolution, there are mountains of evidence. One obvious one is that in the fossil record, the layers of fossils that are in chronological order, show slowly changing organisms over time. Eventually these organisms end up looking amazingly different. Also, some animals have pieces of bone where it makes absolutely no sense, leading scientists to believe they must have evolved from another animal. For example, whales have tiny bones that resemble tiny leg bones, and serve no purpose. This shows that they probably evolved from another organism. Besides that, if you examine the arm bones of most vertebrates, you will see great similarities. For example, if you look at say the hands in a human bone, and the bones of a bat wing the way the bones are set up and the number of bones in certain positions match up. This is more evidence that we all evolved from a common ancestor. The greatest amount of proof is that we have seen creatures adapt to their environment, and so know creatures adapt. If we know this, we know that evolution can work. We know that it works, how it works, and why it works. Everything points to the fact that creatures evolve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now