Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

Discussion in 'Religion, Beliefs and Spirituality' started by Alter2Ego, May 27, 2018.

  1. Soleil Starflare:

    Scripture says God is a spirit, as follows:
    "God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth." (John 4:24 -- New International Version)

    We are discussing organic life--not supernatural, spirit life; remember?

    The scientific evidence says organic life can only result from preexisting life. Deal with that.

    Alter2Ego
     
  2. Acewiza:
    Now, why am I not surprised that you decided to lap your tail and run--once you realized what you are up against.

    As they said in the film Forrest Gump: "Run Forrest, run!"

    Alter2Ego
     
  3. I don't believe in the supernatural. I believe in organic and inorganic - the things anyone could realistically touch, see, or feel.

    Also, just because science doesn't know how it happened yet, doesn't mean we won't find out somehow and change that hypothesis.
     
  4. Soleil Starflare:

    Your beliefs will not change reality. The reality is that without the supernatural, spirit God named Jehovah who breathed life into the first living things, life would not exist.

    Since the atheist insists there is no Jehovah, they are stuck with abiogenesis: organic life coming to life from non-life by itself. Abiogenesis was debunked as far back as 1859 when Louis Pasteur proved, by experiments, that life can only result from previously existing life.
    Now you are giving me a statement of blind faith, a behavior that atheists are fond of accusing theists of being guilty of doing.

    No modern scientists have been able to prove Louis Pasteur wrong. Stanley Miller attempted to create life in the laboratory in 1953--under controlled conditions--and failed miserably. The only thing Miller's experiments proved was that it requires an intelligent living being--Miller himself--to even ATTEMPT to create life.

    Alter2Ego
     
  5. Biological by products can occur from chemical bonds (IE urea).

    What we know for sure is that evolution is a fact. Some humans are born covered in primate hair, some with reptilian hearts or scales, some with tails. This is due to ancient recessive genes from our past evolutions deeply buried in our DNA but they can present themselves. It's called atavism.

    Atavism - Wikipedia

    "Genome Soldier..?"
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. OP is some kind of religious troll on a mission, ignore them, they'll go away.
    Every post made on gc is about religion(and everywhere else, google "Alter2Ego").

    Here's a few threads from elsewhere with the same name as this one...
    Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth
    Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth - Evidence for God from Science
    Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth
    Genesis Creation vs. Darwin’s Macroevolution Myth

    And to you Alter2Ego, you'll never "save" us atheists, we aren't the ones that need saving.
    All you're doing is wasting your time/life, and even pushing people away from religion with all your foolish and contradicting claims and rebuttals, especially since you keep dragging things on letting us explain things in detail with you being the only one who doesn't seem to understand things. Just because you use big words doesn't mean you know what you're talking about, your ape question proves you know nothing about biological evolution, you either didn't read anything about it or flat out deny everything you read. You definitely stick to your programming as designed, you really need to find a way to break free from it and the life of fear, go live a little, there's no god or hell to worry about, relax. (If you're a psychopath, I take that back, if you don't do good, god will punish you and send you to hell.)
     
    • Like Like x 3
    • Agree Agree x 1
  7. I thought it was common knowledge. You could easily get a subscription to just about any of the worlds biological journals and see for yourself. However, I suspect that you have already made your mind up on the matter, regardless of what the evidence supports.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Still waiting on that proof of God's existence OP.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Op
    Tell you what. Lets asume god does exist and that the bible stories are true....
    We all came from one insetuous family whos first friend was a talking snake....then we all got wiped out by a flood and came back from another insestuous family. Then a virgin gave birth to a man who can walk on water and revive himself from the dead.
    So everybody now wants to kill eachother over who has the best imaginary friend.
    Come on mate.
    Theres just too many things wrong with that story.

    Say we do all come from 1 family. How can we have blacks, whites, asians, orientals etc that all look completely different if evolution doesnt exist?
    Explain that one

    And on a more serious note,.
    I believe in the god eating penguin.
    Seeing as you cant prove he doesnt exist then by your owm logic he must exist.
    As weve now established the god eating penguin must exist, god cannot. Because obviously the god eating penguin ate him or he wouldnt have gotten that name.

    Sounds daft but its still more belivable than the alcoholic, zombie with telekinetic abilities that can move massive boulders with his mind.



    Sent from my SM-J330FN using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  10. I think the fact the religious believe a man built an ark big enough for 2 of every animal species (which by the way is not a diverse enough gene pool to repopulate a species) is enough for dismissal.

    First how do you acquire every species from every continent? Even if you spent an entire life time you would never be able to do that and species are still being discovered today.

    Second many animals are strictly carnivorous, they would have eaten eachother.

    "Genome Soldier..?"
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. And also just to throw another span er in the works.
    go do some research on ezekeils wheel. Read the patent discription then go find the interviews on youtube with the guys who worked with nasa to create it.....
    From the book of ezekiel...
    The highest comes to eziekel on his platform of wonder.
    Theres 2 massively weird things about this section...
    Number 1... why does god need a platform to get about?
    Number 2...
    Why the fuck was it built with omnidirectional wheels that can move in any direction without turning on their own axis that nasa has owned the patent to for 20 odd years?





    Sent from my SM-J330FN using Grasscity Forum mobile app
     
  12. Why would some Sky God give two tin shits whether we believe in It or not?
     
  13. I like how Sheldon's Mom shuts him up with her answer to this question on that one episode of the Big Bang Theory:

    Sheldon - "So then how did they feed the lions?"

    Mom - "With the floating dead bodies of non-believers."
     
    • Like Like x 2
  14. Insestuos. Everything mammal, (and reptilian I think) began with a pair of opposite sex, and all of their offspring are insestuos. What's your point?

    Races of people and their cultures from various parts of the world is hardly evolution. Even Darwin acknowledged a difference between evolution and adaptation.
    If fact, here's a little something from your own gods.
    Recent African origin of modern humans - Wikipedia
    I don't agree with the article in it's entirety, but they all seem to lean towards "modern" man originating somewhere.

    Got me, I've never heard of such thing.

    What alcoholic?
     
  15. An omnidirectional wheel made by NASA has absolutely nothing to do with the book of Ezekiel, or what Ezekiel described in his vision. You've been watching space alien documentaries.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  16. Oh good grief. I've seen children's picture books give a more accurate report than that.
    Genesis chapter 6. Go read the story then come back and ask questions.
     
  17. Do as I say, not as I do.. and I doooo not intend to back up my ignorant claims of scientific evidence with said scientific evidence.
     
  18. QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?

    • All life stemmed from simpler forms. Your question is loaded, it's like asking -- where did God come from so life could proceed? The simplest and earliest form of life was most likely a prokaryote, containing a structure akin to mitochondria. After incidental infolding, a nuclear membrane formed and produced a true nucleus and the domain eukarya. This is shown by the difference in reproduction between the two domains, with the simpler prokarya undergoing binary fission, and more genetic variability being seen with eukarya's sexual division adept for genetic recombination.

    QUESTION 2: "Survival of the fittest" is supposedly a feature of macroevolution; so why is the ape still here, co-existing along with humans, after humans supposedly evolved from apes?

    • Because there was no genetic drift or force that pushed the ape toward evolving into a Homo sapien. This question just shows how little OP knows about primates. "Ape"? What ape? What family of apes? At which point in history? Australopithecus? Homo erectus?

      Survival of the fittest is a FEATURE of evolution, not all evolutionary changes are spurred by gene pool changes solely to increase fitness. Genetic variability can happen rapidly, in the case of snail kite birds -- or it can happen very slowly such as seen in the goblin shark.

      The most important factors influencing allele frequency in a population are genetic drift, migration, mutation, natural selection, and artificial selection. Natural selection is only a part of it. Additionally, it is faulty thinking to imagine evolution or any gene pool shift as occurring in a linear manner. This is covered in any basic evolution or physical anthropology course.

    QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?

    • What? You think you can simply look at something and determine it's genetic evolution up to that point? Fossils need an ideal environment to be preserved for millennia, which is why they are so hard to find. There is much evidence among DNA testing that proves this. One very common technique utilizes genetic amplification and analysis by measuring GC% content. In doing so, it measures how similar the genetic code for two organisms is, by obtaining the percentage of concurrent nucleotide bases of guanine and cytosine to determine likability, in which 10% or less is deemed to be very alike.
     
    • Winner Winner x 4
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  19. #39 Frasier, Jun 5, 2018
    Last edited: Jun 5, 2018
    Not to mention Osedax worms break down bone quite quickly so it's likely they erased many thousands of marine fossils.

    "Genome Soldier..?"
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. This was in my face at all through public school. Proven scientific fact. Quized, tested, and graded. Are you saying the top scientists in the world got it wrong?

    [​IMG]
     
    • Like Like x 1

Share This Page