Evolution? Intelligent Design? God did it all in 7 days?

Abiogenesis and evolution are forever tied together,... WHY? Because you say so? Why do they have to be tied together?

The two are hopelessly tied together and cannot be separated. No matter how much evolutionary scientist like to try and decry that fact. You can't have one without the other. WHY? Because you say so? Why do they have to be tied together? Originally Posted by bojulay

When I read posts like yours and WE1911, it appears increasingly obvious that God was Man's worst invention.

There is plenty of evidence to prove that evolution is real. You just refuse to acknowledge ANY of it because to do so would force you to change your religious beliefs.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Moses existed of that Genesis is true. So why do you insist they we must prove it to be false?

Ancient lore is almost entirely man-made myths. Some American Indian tribes believed that the dry land rode on the back of a giant sea turtle. I'm sure you laugh at their beliefs. But why are the rest of us supposed to treat your mythical beliefs as facts to be disproven? Originally Posted by ExNYer

Some evidences for some forms of evolution, dose not prove
that evolution is the be all end all answer for all existence,
simple as that.

If you are trying to use that as a way to disprove the existence
of God, it can't be done.

Like I said before, not proof just theory.

There is plenty of evidence to prove that evolution is real. You just refuse to acknowledge ANY of it because to do so would force you to change your religious beliefs.

There is no evidence whatsoever that Moses existed of that Genesis is true. So why do you insist they we must prove it to be false?

Ancient lore is almost entirely man-made myths. Some American Indian tribes believed that the dry land rode on the back of a giant sea turtle. I'm sure you laugh at their beliefs. But why are the rest of us supposed to treat your mythical beliefs as facts to be disproven? Originally Posted by ExNYer

Yes, there's a lot of evidence to support evolution (and I do) but it need not interefere with religious beliefs, or at least Abrahamic religions if you do not take the bible literally.
But you are wrong about there not being any proof of Moses as there is archeological evidence of a Moses story including a pursuit through the sea of reeds (a misinterpretation resulting in the Red Sea story. There is also geologic evidence of a major flood event that took place in the fertile crescent (the area where cro-magnon man first appeared) that happened at a time that it could be the source of the Noah story. Proof positive? No. But it makes a good case for some kind of possible compromise.

When I read posts like yours and WE1911, it appears increasingly obvious that God was Man's worst invention. Originally Posted by ExNYer

If you have to ask that question you really are hopeless.

How are they not tied together?

Yes, there's a lot of evidence to support evolution (and I do) but it need not interefere with religious beliefs, or at least Abrahamic religions if you do not take the bible literally.
But you are wrong about there not being any proof of Moses as there is archeological evidence of a Moses story including a pursuit through the sea of reeds (a misinterpretation resulting in the Red Sea story. There is also geologic evidence of a major flood event that took place in the fertile crescent (the area where cro-magnon man first appeared) that happened at a time that it could be the source of the Noah story. Proof positive? No. But it makes a good case for some kind of possible compromise. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Just watch the two documentaries that I posted on this thread.

Some evidences for some forms of evolution, dose not prove
that evolution is the be all end all answer for all existence,
simple as that.

If you are trying to use that as a way to disprove the existence
of God, it can't be done.

Like I said before, not proof just theory. Originally Posted by bojulay

You obviously have no idea what a scientific theory is but this video should help you out. Please watch.

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=ItxVLu8J_d0

Yes, there's a lot of evidence to support evolution (and I do) but it need not interefere with religious beliefs, or at least Abrahamic religions if you do not take the bible literally. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Exactly! There are pleanty of very strongly religious people of all types who believe in evolution. And who help build upon what has been observed to build a better understanding of what really happened. And if you believe in god, how he/she did those wonderful feats.

Some evidences for some forms of evolution, dose not prove that evolution is the be all end all answer for all existence, simple as that.

If you are trying to use that as a way to disprove the existence of God, it can't be done. I never said evolution disproved the existence of God. But evolution and other sciences do disprove the myths in Genesis.

Like I said before, not proof just theory. You don't know what those terms mean, as they are used in science. Facts - observations - are used to support theories, which are EXPLANATIONS of how things operate in nature. Evolution is a vastly complicated explanation of how species come into being. It is an ongoing project that is constantly being refined Originally Posted by bojulay

Creationism has no place in a discussion of science.

Forgive me if this has been done before.

What say you? Originally Posted by timpage

Has to be evolution, cause you certainly aren't the product of Intelligent Design.

Here's an idea, presented by an attractive lady. From Scientific American:

http://myscienceacademy.org/2013/02/...uman-ancestor/

You are a little confused in your argument like most, first you seem to claim that evolution disproves God and then ask the question why can't we have both. And also make claims that are just rhetorical opinion.

Abiogenesis and evolution are forever tied together, clever little scientist
have tried to separate the two by saying they are totally different and
should not be put together as one, and people have bought into that
idea. Why did the scientist do that? Simple, they have no explination
what so ever of how abiogenesis occurred, given their present
ideas about evolution.

The two are hopelessly tied together and cannot be separated.
No matter how much evolutionary scientist like to try and decry that
fact. You can't have one without the other.

That brings you back to Dawkins space man theory.

Intelligent design is made apparent, they don't believe in God.
What else are you left with?

Now excuse me while I go watch the movie Signs.


ha ha ha ha Originally Posted by bojulay

Abiogenesis literally means 'not bigenesis'. The biogenesis part being from 'The Principle of Biogenesis' which holds that living things come only from living things. It's a substitute term for 'sponteneous generation'.

The fact is, we don't know. The theory of evolution wasn't carved in stone by Darwin, as my previous video shows. You can argue all you want, but the fact is there is more to learned, and we don't know what the final answer will be, and it's possible we never will. The process is exciting and fun. It will really be interesting when we locate life on other planets, and try to figure out how it started there. I hope something breaks like that while I'm still here to enjoy it.

Maybe they'll come down to earth and get you.

maybe they were fine just pushing the fucking wheel around... who the hell knows. its quite a large step to go from wheel to car don't you think? ...maybe early man couldn't figure out the carburetor ...or welding ...or maybe not one of them was a qualified design engineer. Originally Posted by JCM800

Hmmm but I guess it was just was a small step from the Wright brothers flying a plane to man building a shuttle that can reach space??

Hmmm but I guess it was just was a small step from the Wright brothers flying a plane to man building a shuttle that can reach space?? Originally Posted by wellendowed1911

you sir are a fucking moron