Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Ancestor For All Animals Identified

47 posts in this topic

Posted

Umm, okay. :rolleye:

Do you really think a cosmic cop fashioned all the animals in his workshop, with special detail placed on us?

Then plucked a bit of rib meat out of a dude to make a chick, who then turned around and made a naughty, which caused us to be cursed with original sin, have painful childbirth, and fear snakes?

Then, Adam lived like 930 years, had a ton of sons and daughters, and got busy with the daughters to populate the earth.

Now it is time for MY eyeroll counselor! :rolleyes:

And all this happened like 7,000 years ago?

Okay, cool. Totally fine with me. I wish you all well.

BUT DO NOT MAKE FUN OF THOSE OF US SEEKING A SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION IF THIS IS THE BEST YOU CAN DO!!!!!!1111eleventyonecreationismisfun

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

People make me cry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Shut up, pvssy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It just makes me mad when a thumper rips a non-believer for getting his Bible stories mixed up.

So what?

The fact that the article states that the researchers are not definitevly referring to this find as THE 'adam' animal is a GOOD thing.

That is what GOOD science does, it leaves things open for interpretation, further study, and scrutiny.

Unlike the OTHER option, which pretty much says you'll never understand it, so stop trying. Take it on faith.

I can't stand the ridicule from those that won't even entertain the possibility that they could be wrong.

Heck, evolution could be wrong. Or not the ONLY way.

Any good scientist will admit this.

Stephen Jay Gould, a man I greatly admire, has said as much.

The difference is, at least the real scientist offers up the possibility, and will shake the hand of the person that proves creation and will change his/her mind the minute that happens.

If conclusive proof of evolution (I believe it to be there for you, others do not) is presented to the believer, they will still reject it.

Just not my style.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

"Come on, son! Hope on the Stupidosaurus!"

526893292_e95eb57c10.jpg

Do you really think a cosmic cop fashioned all the animals in his workshop, with special detail placed on us?

Then plucked a bit of rib meat out of a dude to make a chick, who then turned around and made a naughty, which caused us to be cursed with original sin, have painful childbirth, and fear snakes?

Then, Adam lived like 930 years, had a ton of sons and daughters, and got busy with the daughters to populate the earth.

Now it is time for MY eyeroll counselor! :rolleyes:

And all this happened like 7,000 years ago?

Okay, cool. Totally fine with me. I wish you all well.

BUT DO NOT MAKE FUN OF THOSE OF US SEEKING A SCIENTIFIC EXPLANATION IF THIS IS THE BEST YOU CAN DO!!!!!!1111eleventyonecreationismisfun

You both know what's sad? You are both under the impression that everyone that believes in creationism is an irrational idiot that takes everything at face value without having researched the issue. For me, that is not the case at all.

I have researched into the issues of evolution, creationism and more, and I have come to my own personal conclusion that science has not, and most likely won't, explain it all. Of course, none of us will know the answer until we die, but until then, I will have faith in my beliefs.

I know about experiments that have attempted to recreate the beginnings of the Earth. I know about their results, which are now questioned by many scientists based on the experimental atmospheric conditions. I also realize that there are many, many huge holes left to fill in. If science fills them, I will eat my crow. As the situation is currently, non-believers are placing their faith in the hope that science does fill them. I don't see that as being any different than the faith I have.

As for making fun, I believe if you re-read the thread, you will see that I was not the first to throw out the sarcastic "that's much more rational." So, Epi, please tell me again how I, the Christian, in the thread started making fun of people first.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It just makes me mad when a thumper rips a non-believer for getting his Bible stories mixed up.

So what?

The fact that the article states that the researchers are not definitevly referring to this find as THE 'adam' animal is a GOOD thing.

That is what GOOD science does, it leaves things open for interpretation, further study, and scrutiny.

Unlike the OTHER option, which pretty much says you'll never understand it, so stop trying. Take it on faith.

I can't stand the ridicule from those that won't even entertain the possibility that they could be wrong.

Heck, evolution could be wrong. Or not the ONLY way.

Any good scientist will admit this.

Stephen Jay Gould, a man I greatly admire, has said as much.

The difference is, at least the real scientist offers up the possibility, and will shake the hand of the person that proves creation and will change his/her mind the minute that happens.

If conclusive proof of evolution (I believe it to be there for you, others do not) is presented to the believer, they will still reject it.

Just not my style.

You and I see the same picture, how it was drawn, etc. but just see the last bit a bit differently. lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

It just makes me mad when a thumper rips a non-believer for getting his Bible stories mixed up.

So what?

The fact that the article states that the researchers are not definitevly referring to this find as THE 'adam' animal is a GOOD thing.

That is what GOOD science does, it leaves things open for interpretation, further study, and scrutiny.

Unlike the OTHER option, which pretty much says you'll never understand it, so stop trying. Take it on faith.

I can't stand the ridicule from those that won't even entertain the possibility that they could be wrong.

Heck, evolution could be wrong. Or not the ONLY way.

Any good scientist will admit this.

Stephen Jay Gould, a man I greatly admire, has said as much.

The difference is, at least the real scientist offers up the possibility, and will shake the hand of the person that proves creation and will change his/her mind the minute that happens.

If conclusive proof of evolution (I believe it to be there for you, others do not) is presented to the believer, they will still reject it.

Just not my style.

I believe I addressed most of your post with my prior one. However, about pointing out that it was Adam's rib, it was meant in jest. I picked up the sarcasm in CH's original post, and I sent some back with mind. I could care less if a non-believer gets the story right or wrong. It doesn't make a hill of beans to me.

Also, if scientists can wait until creation is proven to accept it and change their minds, why can creationists not have the same attitude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I think believing that man was created from the rib of a thousand year old man who populated the entire Earth is irrational. In fact, I think that's the definition of irrationality. Obviously the point of this article isn't to point out a definitive answer to life's questions. But at least it's a meaningful response by people not content to regurgitate the same sad story thousands of times over just because it's what their parents and their parents before them were instructed to believe.

There's something very scary about someone who will disregard a theory backed by empirical, verifiable evidence because it doesn't fit neatly into a book or morals written by mortals thousands of years ago...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Just remember that you're standing on a planet that's evolving

And revolving at nine hundred miles an hour,

That's orbiting at nineteen miles a second, so it's reckoned,

A sun that is the source of all our power.

The sun and you and me and all the stars that we can see

Are moving at a million miles a day

In an outer spiral arm, at forty thousand miles an hour,

Of the galaxy we call the 'Milky Way'.

Our galaxy itself contains a hundred billion stars.

It's a hundred thousand light years side to side.

It bulges in the middle, sixteen thousand light years thick,

But out by us, it's just three thousand light years wide.

We're thirty thousand light years from galactic central point.

We go 'round every two hundred million years,

And our galaxy is only one of millions of billions

In this amazing and expanding universe.

The universe itself keeps on expanding and expanding

In all of the directions it can whizz

As fast as it can go, at the speed of light, you know,

Twelve million miles a minute, and that's the fastest speed there is.

So remember, when you're feeling very small and insecure,

How amazingly unlikely is your birth,

And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space,

'Cause there's bugger all down here on Earth.

/thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

You both know what's sad? You are both under the impression that everyone that believes in creationism is an irrational idiot that takes everything at face value without having researched the issue. For me, that is not the case at all.

I have researched into the issues of evolution, creationism and more, and I have come to my own personal conclusion that science has not, and most likely won't, explain it all. Of course, none of us will know the answer until we die, but until then, I will have faith in my beliefs.

I know about experiments that have attempted to recreate the beginnings of the Earth. I know about their results, which are now questioned by many scientists based on the experimental atmospheric conditions. I also realize that there are many, many huge holes left to fill in. If science fills them, I will eat my crow. As the situation is currently, non-believers are placing their faith in the hope that science does fill them. I don't see that as being any different than the faith I have.

As for making fun, I believe if you re-read the thread, you will see that I was not the first to throw out the sarcastic "that's much more rational." So, Epi, please tell me again how I, the Christian, in the thread started making fun of people first.

No, you played the "get your Bible stories straight" card, which, while not exactly a jab at someone, it IS certainly a way of belittling a person.

Look, go ahead and rip. CH is a big boy, he can take care of himself.

Just don't think if you DO play the Bible stories card, someone like me, someone well versed in both the faith based information AND the counterargument won't call you out and question your rationale AND potential hypocrisy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

I believe I addressed most of your post with my prior one. However, about pointing out that it was Adam's rib, it was meant in jest. I picked up the sarcasm in CH's original post, and I sent some back with mind. I could care less if a non-believer gets the story right or wrong. It doesn't make a hill of beans to me.

Also, if scientists can wait until creation is proven to accept it and change their minds, why can creationists not have the same attitude?

Ah, great question.

I submit to you that it is the very nature of the two different systems that make that impossible.

Now, fundamentalist evolution/natural selection/Darwinists might take on the characteristics of the fundamentalist religious person.

Maybe. Not sure. I know a few that seem so wrapped up in it it becomes their "religion".

But the fundie religious person is taught to not question. This is, in fact, a virtue. My guy Martin Luther pretty much told the faithful man to destroy his logic and reasoning, as it is his downfall.

So even faced with overwhelming evidence, that person would likely just say, nope, sorry I just KNOW.

Whereas the scientist is taught in the same instance to say, ok. Let's test it a bit more, but ok, that is good, let's accept that and go ahead from there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted

Ah, great question.

I submit to you that it is the very nature of the two different systems that make that impossible.

Now, fundamentalist evolution/natural selection/Darwinists might take on the characteristics of the fundamentalist religious person.

Maybe. Not sure. I know a few that seem so wrapped up in it it becomes their "religion".

But the fundie religious person is taught to not question. This is, in fact, a virtue. My guy Martin Luther pretty much told the faithful man to destroy his logic and reasoning, as it is his downfall.

So even faced with overwhelming evidence, that person would likely just say, nope, sorry I just KNOW.

Whereas the scientist is taught in the same instance to say, ok. Let's test it a bit more, but ok, that is good, let's accept that and go ahead from there.

Sadly, you are right in regards to fundamentalist Christians. They do not, and will not, view anything outside of their belief system. However, the problem is that so many non-believers lump all Christians into that category.

As for me, I am not like that. I have questioned, and I have sought answers. In fact, I continue to seek them. The answer for me is not blind faith. My belief is that, if I seek answers, they will provided in one way or the other. For me, my faith in God is strengthened by searching.

I am fine with the answer of "I just believe because I believe," but I want to be able to provide a different answer. I don't question my beliefs. I do, however, search for the substance for those beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites