Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.


Expand Messages
  • _Aoii_
    God already put the water in our glasses, proving his own existence, now we just have to open our eyes and see that. Gotta prove it first bub ...
    Message 1 of 217 , May 4 5:36 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      "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 :)
    • lemondead
      ... 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* ... Not reproduced in labs?
      Message 217 of 217 , Nov 21, 2002
      • 0 Attachment
        --- 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.

        Explain the
        > 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

        Explain how
        > 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
        new discoveries).

        > 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
        you want.

        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
        > wishes,<br>Jon

        You too. ^^


        Where little boys play at sports, grown men play at war. I, for one,
        will take no part in it.
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.