Re: DON'T WORRY
- "God already put the water in our glasses,
proving his own existence, now we just have to open our
eyes and see that."<br><br>Gotta prove it first bub
:)<br><br>"As is evolution"<br><br>Yep, so they're both big
assumptions. I agree with you. It's just that evolution is
more credible than creationism. More evidence to
support it, and scientists who've gone through lotsa
research, it sure as hell makes more sense than an old
dusty book that sez we got made from dirt. I'm not
denying the big holes we have in evolution though, and I
don't believe in it 100%. 30% maybe. Still beats
creationism though, more credible and all that.<br><br>"God
made man from dirt, and women from the mans' ribs, not
nothing. And the difference is God has the power to do
this, for he is the Almighty."<br><br>I'm just curious
as to why you believe this. Have you ever seen this
done? If so, when? If not, then why do you believe this
is possible? And where'd the dirt come from to begin
with?<br><br>And like I said, you gotta prove God exists first bub
:) Besides, doesn't this open up a whole new can of
worms? I mean, has God always been around? If so, what
has he been doing all this time? And why suddenly
decide to create a planet, with lotsa animals and stuff?
<br><br>"I think she used this as a statement saying she
sure as hell didn't come from nature evolving from
ANYTHING, and that she knows, as do I, that she came from
God, and oly God. "<br><br>Actually, the guy was a he
^^;, wonder why he hasn't posted in so long. Mayhaps
he meant what you say, but that very statement shows
a lot of ignorance about evolution, which is funny
since he was the one who started attacking it. I told
him to read, I don't know if he did. If you haven't
read about evolution, I suggest that you do. At the
very least you know more about what you guys keep
trying to disprove, yes?<br><br>Again, I'm rather
curious. Your statement begs the question, why do you
believe in god? How did you come to be convinced that
there was a god?<br><br>"When u ask an atheist where
the universe comes from, they answer that it was
there from the beginning of time. How is that
differen't then what Christians believe in God being there
from the beginning time?"<br><br>Very few actually.
First, the universe is not sapient and sentient,
conscious and intelligent. So it doesn't suffer from the
eternal boredom that comes into play when we have a span
of time as long as infinity. This also deals with
the problem of an intelligent being needing a reason
to create something(we assume that because it is
intelligent, it functions with reason). Secondly, the universe
has no characteristics of perfection, so there is no
tranquility of perfect being that is disturbed by the act of
creation. <br><br>This enough?<br><br>Cheerz :)
--- In teenatheistsoftheworld@y..., scorcher150 wrote:
Before I rebuke this guy's statements, I'd just like to say I'm new
to the group, from Missouri, and 14 years old. *waves*
> LoL.<br><br>Hey, have you looked at this "proof"
> for evolution? Explain abiogenesis. How did it occur
> in the wilderness of a hostile planet and yet can't
> be reproduced in million dollar labs by trained
> scientists? The odds against it are astronomical.
Not reproduced in labs? Scientists have passed electricity through
chemicals and gotten the basic materials for life. No, they have not
created life, but think about this: We have only understood
electricity for 300 years. The conditions on the young earth were
different: molten, hot, and a soup of chemicals. We have done fairly
few experiaments on the subject when compared to the MILLIONS of
years and TRILLIONS of lightening bolts that must of struck the
surface of the earth. Millions of years is a long time. You
underestimate the sheer amount of time that passed between the
formation of earth and the creation of life. The odds are certainly
less astronomical, anyway, than a guy with supernatural powers coming
into existence and decided to make a planet.
> beggining. Nothing blew up into something? Sounds like it
> takes more faith to believe in atheism than God to me.
*snort* That is laughable. What about your God? Where did he come
from? Didn't he bring something from nothing? The creation of life
was the converting and bonding of one element to another, perfectly
natural processes that change one type of something to another, and
you say that it is more likely for a being to come out of nowhere,
create the Earth, the universe, and life for some mysterious purpose.
> Explain how life survived when the sun would have been so
> much closer to the earth at the time.
The sun was not closer to the earth at the time in any signifigant
> mutations are positive.
Do you have a thing against change? Winning the lottery is good,
isn't it? If you fiddle with genes, things, both good and bad, can
happen. Some people, due to strange flukes of nature, are more
resistant to sunburn, others are more intelligent. The tiny
characteristics that separate us from our parents, caused by blips in
the genes and such, make a genetic make-up that is either superior or
deficient. Malfunctions can lie undetected for thousands of years.
Take AIDS for example. Most people are utterly devastated by the
disease. However, there are a few people who have been found in
Africa who are resistant. How? Genetics.
Explain how EVERY animal and plant
> in the world is perfectly adapted to its environment
> simply because of random, damaging mutations.
Not every animal is perfectly adapted. How come we have a blind spot
in our eye? How come corals are damaged by the slightest change of
water temperature, natural or otherwise? We don't see drastically
unadapted creatures because they don't survive. As time goes on, a
creature becomes more and more fit for their environment. Alligators
are an ancient species and are well-adapted. However, the mackaw
monkies in Japan (a relatively recent species) developed a fondness
for hot springs because they notice the cold, unlike polar bears.
> how transitional forms (i.e. wolf to whale) survived.
Again you underestimate the passage of time. A wolf didn't become a
wolf-whale in two days, two hundred years, or even two thousand
years. Transitional forms were not innefficient creatures. A bird-
dinosaur could run or launch themselves from trees to safety, not
quite being perfect at gliding or at running, but combined they are
enough to save. Gradually, very gradually, beasts that prefer and are
better at flying are more numerous and those that run dwindle. Flyers
mate with other flyers and produce animals that are even better at
gliding. Thus the dinosaurs make the lengthy change to birds.
> Explain how simbiotic relationships "evolved." Explain
> why there arent millions of fossils of evolution.
What are you talking about? If you dig into the fossil layer, you
find tiny bacteria, then muti-celled, then primitive sea life, then
more complex sea life, then animals that crawl from pool to pool,
then the first land creatures, etc. The fossil record is quite full
and there are indeed millions. Only a few gaps exist (such as the
missing link between apes and humans, which is rapidly narrowing with
> Explain why there are no transitional animals living
> today, if evolution does ideed take place.
Again, this is ignorant. What about mudcrawlers? have you ever seen
those? They are fish that can survive on land for a day or two, since
they have weak lungs and fin-leg things, when they crawl from pond to
pond as they dry up. If that's not transitional, I don't know what
Explain how a
> new species would populate an area, you would need to
> have both a male and a female with the exact same
> reproductive mutations to be able to breed with eachother.
That's not true. Mutations are not always drastic. They do not make
an animal sterile. Your mother, I should hope, differs in her genes
from your father and you are here, aren't you?
> I'll be looking forward to your response.<br><br>Best
You too. ^^
Where little boys play at sports, grown men play at war. I, for one,
will take no part in it.