Evolution v. Creation
- Thread starter Ethereal
- Start date
PART I:
These very specific circumstances are not so complex. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for fossilization to occur, the living species, upon death, must be buried before the bones erode, which I know for a fact takes an extremely great amount of time. How is the fact that dinosaurs are more populated going to help bones bury any faster, unless they are so populated that they are dying so quickly the bones are stacked on top of one another. Another thing, people say that more dinosaur fossils are found because of their large size, but my question then is: According to the process of fossilization, would it make it easier or harder for bones to fossilize if they are *bigger* in size. Remember, they have to be buried in order to be naturally preserved.
Well of course, but I'm going off of your own statement when you said: "what you people [...] don't get is that you don't have to not believe in god in order to believe in evolution." And so I posed the question, that if this is to be possible (for both to exist), then the Bible must be fake, and God must have started evolution. I know we're just talking about beliefs and not reality, but if both are to exist, the Bible would most certainly have to be false because of certain "miracles" depicted in the book that conflict with science and.. possibility.
1. My point was that, just because I don't subscribe to Atheism or Evolution, doesn't mean I know nothing about it -- just as you talked about your lack of religious practice meaning nothing about your knowledge on the subject.
2. When someone recommends something to me before commenting on the subject (in response to questioning), I assume he doesn't know how to answer my question, or he doesn't know the answers period, or he is ignorant of the subject - in any case, I do not want to read the book he did if that is the only way he can use the knowledge. When someone recommends something to me after having indulged in a discussion on the topic (whether we disagree or not), I often take his source into serious consideration, as in the case with Tenk, HERESY, and SOLO.
3. You said that, "it seems to you", or you guys (atheists), that I have no knowledge on the subject because of what I have already stated in this thread. Now I want all of you to listen closely; can you not see that Christians have been saying the same thing to you as a defense? Everytime you bash a god, prophet, or some biblical leader, you get this very same response that all of you have given to me. I see this and I can't help but think to myself, how are you any different. Sure, you "believe" in something else, but are you any greater of a person, intellectually and intelligently, if you are giving the very same answers as Christians? You say go read this book, they tell you to go read the bible. When you argue a point, they tell you that you are ignorant of the subject, just as you have done to me. I'm not trying to compare you guys to Christians just to piss you off, I really want you to realize this as a truth.
These very specific circumstances are not so complex. Correct me if I'm wrong, but in order for fossilization to occur, the living species, upon death, must be buried before the bones erode, which I know for a fact takes an extremely great amount of time. How is the fact that dinosaurs are more populated going to help bones bury any faster, unless they are so populated that they are dying so quickly the bones are stacked on top of one another. Another thing, people say that more dinosaur fossils are found because of their large size, but my question then is: According to the process of fossilization, would it make it easier or harder for bones to fossilize if they are *bigger* in size. Remember, they have to be buried in order to be naturally preserved.
Well of course, but I'm going off of your own statement when you said: "what you people [...] don't get is that you don't have to not believe in god in order to believe in evolution." And so I posed the question, that if this is to be possible (for both to exist), then the Bible must be fake, and God must have started evolution. I know we're just talking about beliefs and not reality, but if both are to exist, the Bible would most certainly have to be false because of certain "miracles" depicted in the book that conflict with science and.. possibility.
1. My point was that, just because I don't subscribe to Atheism or Evolution, doesn't mean I know nothing about it -- just as you talked about your lack of religious practice meaning nothing about your knowledge on the subject.
2. When someone recommends something to me before commenting on the subject (in response to questioning), I assume he doesn't know how to answer my question, or he doesn't know the answers period, or he is ignorant of the subject - in any case, I do not want to read the book he did if that is the only way he can use the knowledge. When someone recommends something to me after having indulged in a discussion on the topic (whether we disagree or not), I often take his source into serious consideration, as in the case with Tenk, HERESY, and SOLO.
3. You said that, "it seems to you", or you guys (atheists), that I have no knowledge on the subject because of what I have already stated in this thread. Now I want all of you to listen closely; can you not see that Christians have been saying the same thing to you as a defense? Everytime you bash a god, prophet, or some biblical leader, you get this very same response that all of you have given to me. I see this and I can't help but think to myself, how are you any different. Sure, you "believe" in something else, but are you any greater of a person, intellectually and intelligently, if you are giving the very same answers as Christians? You say go read this book, they tell you to go read the bible. When you argue a point, they tell you that you are ignorant of the subject, just as you have done to me. I'm not trying to compare you guys to Christians just to piss you off, I really want you to realize this as a truth.
PART II:
Believe it or not, that is actually beside the point, which I will explain later.
Well, I can go to just about any website regarding evolution and find information about monkey's and ape's evolving into what we now call humans. I'm not saying that there were monkeys that directly evolved into humans, I know that it is much more complex then that. I know that there were different species of ape's, some of which evolved into things other then classified humans or hominids. I do not believe that this reflects on my knowledge on the subject. It was a bold, maybe too bold, statement to address another point. I do not believe that monkeys evolved into humans, but from my understanding, at one point in evolution, humans are linked to apes. If this is incorrect, then by all means, let me know. If you still don't understand what I meant, I'll put it this way: If A evolved into B, then B evolved into C, and C evolved into D, I would have said that A evolved into D, this not contesting the reality that they are not directly linked, rather to sum up the matter as I address another point. And I know that these species (A, B, C, and D) branch off into other species as they begin to evlove, but this is not what I felt was needed to make my point. Perhaps this was not a wise choice when talking to an evolutionist.
I'm sure there were millions of dinosaurs roaming the lands for millions of years. But are we going to sit here and say, "well that must be the reason why there are so many more fossils". It makes sense, sure, but it doesn't explain why early human ancestors are not found in greater numbers. From my understanding, the earliest hominids were found over 4 million years ago, and anthropoids dating back into the tens of millions of years ago. I want to see fossilized evidence on the actual evolving process. I want to see something inbetween the "before" and "after". Thats why I made such a bold statement with "evolving monkeys".
How is it that anthropoids came about in South America, when the continent drifted away from Africa over a hundred million years ago? They would have had to swin across the ocean.
I understand that it didn't go from monkey to human, that was not the point I was trying to make. I'm talking about anything in between an ape and a human. I'm talking about fossilized evidence of apes/monkeys evolving into anything different then their original form, let alone into humans. I'm not trying to debate the process of evolution, rather the fossilization. Monkeys could have evolved into snakes for all these questions are concerned.
Technically it would be a bit easier, because they are not as far beneath the earths surface as are dinosaur fossils. Besides, don't they have machines that look into the ground now?
You can ask any question you want, that is mainly what I am doing in this thread. If I was forced to answer this question based solely on evidence, I would say that evolution is a reality and that the existance of God is unlikely. I don't know what other theory there is, and the only reason I believe in a higher power is because, aside from evolution, you still have a big ball of mass to explain. Our consciousness, reality, simply existance alone is something that evolution nor science can ever prove. I do not believe there is a man in this world who can explain how evolution started, and when I say evolution, I'm talking about more then just living organisms. I'm talking about land, space, elements, etc. How far back in time can you go 2-0-Sixx? If you want to cinvince me, tell me where this universe come from. That is something that will forever linger in my mind, and combined with such fascinating coincidence, I would be a fool to denounce God because science disproved the Bible.
The funny thing is, I don't believe I have even begun to talk about evolution, but I have people telling me what I do and don't know about it. I may not know as much as you or some others on this board, but I have an understanding for the way things went down. You say this is a subject that I am not so intelligent on, well if thats the case, I believe thats all the more reason why I should be in this forum asking questions the way I am.
And now I am open to any sources you have for this. Not DNA, but how it proves evolution.
Since you brought this up, I might as well ask this question to you. You have named the reasons you oppose religion, and they are understandable, but I believe that without religion we would have chaos. Without the ten commandments, without the bible, without the notion that we must do right in order to get into heaven, what is going to keep humanity at peace? This ignorance that you are against, is the very thing that is preventing these Christians from becoming killers (were talking about your average church-goer, not Bush). Religion is a moral basis by which we raise our kids to do right by. Without this foundation, our children will have to rely on our own message on how to be humane in society. This is not possible in an age where your peers have more influence on one another then God, parents, or teachers.
Do I believe that this world would have been better off if religion was *never* created? Possibly.
Do I believe that we would be better off without religion right now? Absolutely not. If I was shown irrefutable evidence that proved God was not real, and the bible was fake, I would keep it to myself, and let religion be an influence in the human mind. In the grand scheme of things, without "thou shalt not kill", "thou shall not steal", the behavior one must posess to get into heaven, without all of these things, Iraq would look like paradise. I don't understand how you see a better place in this world without this moral foundation. Do you think the LAW is enough to maintain order in this country minus religion?
Believe it or not, that is actually beside the point, which I will explain later.
Well, I can go to just about any website regarding evolution and find information about monkey's and ape's evolving into what we now call humans. I'm not saying that there were monkeys that directly evolved into humans, I know that it is much more complex then that. I know that there were different species of ape's, some of which evolved into things other then classified humans or hominids. I do not believe that this reflects on my knowledge on the subject. It was a bold, maybe too bold, statement to address another point. I do not believe that monkeys evolved into humans, but from my understanding, at one point in evolution, humans are linked to apes. If this is incorrect, then by all means, let me know. If you still don't understand what I meant, I'll put it this way: If A evolved into B, then B evolved into C, and C evolved into D, I would have said that A evolved into D, this not contesting the reality that they are not directly linked, rather to sum up the matter as I address another point. And I know that these species (A, B, C, and D) branch off into other species as they begin to evlove, but this is not what I felt was needed to make my point. Perhaps this was not a wise choice when talking to an evolutionist.
I'm sure there were millions of dinosaurs roaming the lands for millions of years. But are we going to sit here and say, "well that must be the reason why there are so many more fossils". It makes sense, sure, but it doesn't explain why early human ancestors are not found in greater numbers. From my understanding, the earliest hominids were found over 4 million years ago, and anthropoids dating back into the tens of millions of years ago. I want to see fossilized evidence on the actual evolving process. I want to see something inbetween the "before" and "after". Thats why I made such a bold statement with "evolving monkeys".
How is it that anthropoids came about in South America, when the continent drifted away from Africa over a hundred million years ago? They would have had to swin across the ocean.
I understand that it didn't go from monkey to human, that was not the point I was trying to make. I'm talking about anything in between an ape and a human. I'm talking about fossilized evidence of apes/monkeys evolving into anything different then their original form, let alone into humans. I'm not trying to debate the process of evolution, rather the fossilization. Monkeys could have evolved into snakes for all these questions are concerned.
Technically it would be a bit easier, because they are not as far beneath the earths surface as are dinosaur fossils. Besides, don't they have machines that look into the ground now?
You can ask any question you want, that is mainly what I am doing in this thread. If I was forced to answer this question based solely on evidence, I would say that evolution is a reality and that the existance of God is unlikely. I don't know what other theory there is, and the only reason I believe in a higher power is because, aside from evolution, you still have a big ball of mass to explain. Our consciousness, reality, simply existance alone is something that evolution nor science can ever prove. I do not believe there is a man in this world who can explain how evolution started, and when I say evolution, I'm talking about more then just living organisms. I'm talking about land, space, elements, etc. How far back in time can you go 2-0-Sixx? If you want to cinvince me, tell me where this universe come from. That is something that will forever linger in my mind, and combined with such fascinating coincidence, I would be a fool to denounce God because science disproved the Bible.
The funny thing is, I don't believe I have even begun to talk about evolution, but I have people telling me what I do and don't know about it. I may not know as much as you or some others on this board, but I have an understanding for the way things went down. You say this is a subject that I am not so intelligent on, well if thats the case, I believe thats all the more reason why I should be in this forum asking questions the way I am.
And now I am open to any sources you have for this. Not DNA, but how it proves evolution.
Since you brought this up, I might as well ask this question to you. You have named the reasons you oppose religion, and they are understandable, but I believe that without religion we would have chaos. Without the ten commandments, without the bible, without the notion that we must do right in order to get into heaven, what is going to keep humanity at peace? This ignorance that you are against, is the very thing that is preventing these Christians from becoming killers (were talking about your average church-goer, not Bush). Religion is a moral basis by which we raise our kids to do right by. Without this foundation, our children will have to rely on our own message on how to be humane in society. This is not possible in an age where your peers have more influence on one another then God, parents, or teachers.
Do I believe that this world would have been better off if religion was *never* created? Possibly.
Do I believe that we would be better off without religion right now? Absolutely not. If I was shown irrefutable evidence that proved God was not real, and the bible was fake, I would keep it to myself, and let religion be an influence in the human mind. In the grand scheme of things, without "thou shalt not kill", "thou shall not steal", the behavior one must posess to get into heaven, without all of these things, Iraq would look like paradise. I don't understand how you see a better place in this world without this moral foundation. Do you think the LAW is enough to maintain order in this country minus religion?
One more thing, I left a lot of your post out of my reply because I do not contest any of it. So if you don't see it in my post, then know that I understand what you said, and either I agree with it or I can not argue it. In this case, I agree with everything I left out. I didn't think I could fit the entire thing into one post. Thank you 2-0-Sixx for discussing this reasonably, like a man. Hopefully we can get a few more to follow, and who knows, maybe even someone more religious then me to ask questions.
I would also like to say that, the reason I am asking these questions is not because I don't understand evolution, but because I want someone to help explain the grey areas in my mind. I am a philosopher, I freaking *think* about life and everything having to do with it for hours and hours each day. These questions are things that I can not answer to myself. Therefore I seek enlightenment in the GOM forum, where I know there are others like myself. So if I ask you a question, and that means any of you, don't think I am telling you how it is, or trying to make you stumble in your words as you try to answer, it is really because... I want to know what you think.
I would also like to say that, the reason I am asking these questions is not because I don't understand evolution, but because I want someone to help explain the grey areas in my mind. I am a philosopher, I freaking *think* about life and everything having to do with it for hours and hours each day. These questions are things that I can not answer to myself. Therefore I seek enlightenment in the GOM forum, where I know there are others like myself. So if I ask you a question, and that means any of you, don't think I am telling you how it is, or trying to make you stumble in your words as you try to answer, it is really because... I want to know what you think.
I have to say that I can agree with much that is said here, but there are a few things I feel are not necessarily true. I grew up in a family that attended church every Sunday until I was a sophomore in high school. That year I took biology, where we studied evolution. My teacher, in the beginning, said to us, "For those of you who are religious, do not immediately discount this information that you will review. I find that evolution can exist with my beliefs as a religous person." Ever since this time, I have left the status of being "religious." But, I still believe in God, I still feel that I have a relationship with him; I do not believe I need a church to do this. With everything that could prove that a divine being is not possible, I do not think that the belief in it is wrong at all, because it does encourage morality. But then, I do agree with 2-0-Sixx on how religion can make people ignorant. We cannot completely disprove God. But yet, we cannot prove he is there. We can only have faith, or disagree. I really wish that people would step outside their "security blanket" of religion sometimes to see that science is real. I look at it like this: If I live a good and moral life believing in something that is wrong, and I do just end up in the ground, then I still win. And if I am right, I end up in heaven with my father.
when things are found all around the globe, in various weather conditions, you will have greater numbers of surviving fossils.
obviously you still don't know anything about evolution. What we consider a monkey or an ape now, has not always been a monkey or an ape. the ancestors of these animals were something different that what we see today. so of course they didn't evolve into anythinng other than their original form, because this is not their original form.
obviously you still don't know anything about evolution. What we consider a monkey or an ape now, has not always been a monkey or an ape. the ancestors of these animals were something different that what we see today. so of course they didn't evolve into anythinng other than their original form, because this is not their original form.
I don't buy the likelyhood of more fossils being present with a higher population, but you have a good point with mass extinction. A meteor hitting the earth and wiping out 90% of all life form could indeed cause a better number of fossils. Still doesn't explain the lack of early human fossils.
Still looking for the human ancestor fossils...
You know whats obvious to me, that you really don't know much about evolution. It sounds like you jumped on the bandwagon and had little research to reflect upon. What you think is an ape or a monkey is not what one actually is. There are many different species that date back a very long time. The word ape is generally refered to as any Quadrumana roaming the land. Most of what I said flew right past you, so I suggest that... DUN DUN DUN, you go read a book on evolution before you start "teaching" it. Sorry guy...
Still looking for the human ancestor fossils...
You know whats obvious to me, that you really don't know much about evolution. It sounds like you jumped on the bandwagon and had little research to reflect upon. What you think is an ape or a monkey is not what one actually is. There are many different species that date back a very long time. The word ape is generally refered to as any Quadrumana roaming the land. Most of what I said flew right past you, so I suggest that... DUN DUN DUN, you go read a book on evolution before you start "teaching" it. Sorry guy...
I’m not sure if you should even say A evolved into D, you should say D is related to A. As long as you don’t say, “We evolved from Monkeys” then I fine with it. With that said, we should no longer discuss this because it really isn’t that important.
[quolte]I'm sure there were millions of dinosaurs roaming the lands for millions of years. But are we going to sit here and say, "well that must be the reason why there are so many more fossils". It makes sense, sure, but it doesn't explain why early human ancestors are not found in greater numbers. From my understanding, the earliest hominids were found over 4 million years ago, and anthropoids dating back into the tens of millions of years ago. I want to see fossilized evidence on the actual evolving process. I want to see something inbetween the "before" and "after". Thats why I made such a bold statement with "evolving monkeys".[/quote]
Well, first off, why can’t we say that it must be the reason? You said it yourself; it makes sense, so why not agree with it? Remember, there were billions and billions of dinosaurs spanned over hundreds of millions of years. Compare that to only thousands of early man over a much less period of time and a much more isolated as in where they lived. Of course it’s going to be unbalanced.
Second, we do have fossilized evidence of the evolving process. Sure, we don’t have the large numbers like other species, but we have some! It doesn’t matter if we have thousands upon thousands of fossils or only hundreds or even in some cases, dozens. Why is this so important to you? What else can do these fossils that we have suggest?
Also, “evidence of the actual evolving process” is what we call transitional fossils. (Maybe that’s what you are saying?) Keep in mind that these transitions can occur in a small population, in a small area, and/or in a relatively short amount of time; when any of these conditions hold, the chances of finding the transitional fossils millions of years later goes down.
Well, from what I know these anthropoids were around something like 30-50 million years ago. I also know, that during this time, S.America and S.Africa were much closer, with thousands of tiny islands between the two. From what I have read, ancestral primates were believed to have “island-hopped” which is also very common with other species as well.
There are other ideas too. If I remember correctly, I believe there is an Antarctica theory- I believe at one time Antarctica and S. America were connected for some time. I’ll have to look into that…
You know, I’m not an expert on what kinds of expeditions they have around the globe. I only know what I have read and 9/10 times it’s about what has been found. I assume, now they are using machines and other high tech devices to make things like this easier. I have no idea how effective these tools are or what they are for that matter. What I do know Nitro, is that we are finding fossils all the time. I’m not sure what else you want, but it seems every time I read new articles on evolution, new discoveries and new evidence comes up. HERE is an article from just last month on a new discovery…a 365 million year old fossil that helps explain “fins to limbs.”
The problem with this particular discussion is that rarely do these kinds of articles mention how the fossil was found.
Well Nitro, you have to remember that Evolution does not explain how the universe started; it only explains how it changes. When I discuss Evolution, I try my best to leave out God. In my mind, it shouldn’t be that difficult for someone to believe in god and evolution. You can easily say, “Yes, there is a higher power, he created the universe and from there, we evolved”. Simple I think.
I was under the impression that this thread was going to mainly be about evolution on this planet. If you want to get into space, and stars and galaxies, that’s ok with me too because we can observe all of those things evolve as well.
You’re right…when I said you were ignorant on the subject, it wasn’t in insult and I wasn’t trying to tell you what you do or do not know. It was more of a statement. I said it because I truly believe that there are really only two kinds of people who don’t believe in evolution; religious and the ignorant. Maybe it’s a combo of the both, but you said it yourself, “If I was forced to answer this question based solely on evidence, I would say that evolution is a reality.”
Let me get back to you on this subject. There is some really good info I want you to read, but unfortunately I am at work.
Well Nitro, I have discussed this many times on the siccness.
First off, remember humans are social creatures. I don’t run around punching other humans in the face for the same reason apes don’t run around punching other apes in the face. Humans didn’t always have god. Other social animals don’t have god.
Think about it Nitro…I’m one of the most hardcore atheists you’ll ever come around, and yet I am very loving, compassionate, very emotional, I feel pain etc. When I do wrong and hurt someone and I know I fucked up, I feel horrible about it. I don’t need to believe in god to have good morals; it’s human nature Nitro. We’re not some insect like a spider or some shit that is alone its entire life.
Later, I’ll try and search for some of my older posts regarding this topic.
[quolte]I'm sure there were millions of dinosaurs roaming the lands for millions of years. But are we going to sit here and say, "well that must be the reason why there are so many more fossils". It makes sense, sure, but it doesn't explain why early human ancestors are not found in greater numbers. From my understanding, the earliest hominids were found over 4 million years ago, and anthropoids dating back into the tens of millions of years ago. I want to see fossilized evidence on the actual evolving process. I want to see something inbetween the "before" and "after". Thats why I made such a bold statement with "evolving monkeys".[/quote]
Well, first off, why can’t we say that it must be the reason? You said it yourself; it makes sense, so why not agree with it? Remember, there were billions and billions of dinosaurs spanned over hundreds of millions of years. Compare that to only thousands of early man over a much less period of time and a much more isolated as in where they lived. Of course it’s going to be unbalanced.
Second, we do have fossilized evidence of the evolving process. Sure, we don’t have the large numbers like other species, but we have some! It doesn’t matter if we have thousands upon thousands of fossils or only hundreds or even in some cases, dozens. Why is this so important to you? What else can do these fossils that we have suggest?
Also, “evidence of the actual evolving process” is what we call transitional fossils. (Maybe that’s what you are saying?) Keep in mind that these transitions can occur in a small population, in a small area, and/or in a relatively short amount of time; when any of these conditions hold, the chances of finding the transitional fossils millions of years later goes down.
Well, from what I know these anthropoids were around something like 30-50 million years ago. I also know, that during this time, S.America and S.Africa were much closer, with thousands of tiny islands between the two. From what I have read, ancestral primates were believed to have “island-hopped” which is also very common with other species as well.
There are other ideas too. If I remember correctly, I believe there is an Antarctica theory- I believe at one time Antarctica and S. America were connected for some time. I’ll have to look into that…
You know, I’m not an expert on what kinds of expeditions they have around the globe. I only know what I have read and 9/10 times it’s about what has been found. I assume, now they are using machines and other high tech devices to make things like this easier. I have no idea how effective these tools are or what they are for that matter. What I do know Nitro, is that we are finding fossils all the time. I’m not sure what else you want, but it seems every time I read new articles on evolution, new discoveries and new evidence comes up. HERE is an article from just last month on a new discovery…a 365 million year old fossil that helps explain “fins to limbs.”
The problem with this particular discussion is that rarely do these kinds of articles mention how the fossil was found.
Well Nitro, you have to remember that Evolution does not explain how the universe started; it only explains how it changes. When I discuss Evolution, I try my best to leave out God. In my mind, it shouldn’t be that difficult for someone to believe in god and evolution. You can easily say, “Yes, there is a higher power, he created the universe and from there, we evolved”. Simple I think.
I was under the impression that this thread was going to mainly be about evolution on this planet. If you want to get into space, and stars and galaxies, that’s ok with me too because we can observe all of those things evolve as well.
You’re right…when I said you were ignorant on the subject, it wasn’t in insult and I wasn’t trying to tell you what you do or do not know. It was more of a statement. I said it because I truly believe that there are really only two kinds of people who don’t believe in evolution; religious and the ignorant. Maybe it’s a combo of the both, but you said it yourself, “If I was forced to answer this question based solely on evidence, I would say that evolution is a reality.”
Let me get back to you on this subject. There is some really good info I want you to read, but unfortunately I am at work.
Well Nitro, I have discussed this many times on the siccness.
First off, remember humans are social creatures. I don’t run around punching other humans in the face for the same reason apes don’t run around punching other apes in the face. Humans didn’t always have god. Other social animals don’t have god.
Think about it Nitro…I’m one of the most hardcore atheists you’ll ever come around, and yet I am very loving, compassionate, very emotional, I feel pain etc. When I do wrong and hurt someone and I know I fucked up, I feel horrible about it. I don’t need to believe in god to have good morals; it’s human nature Nitro. We’re not some insect like a spider or some shit that is alone its entire life.
Later, I’ll try and search for some of my older posts regarding this topic.
We’ll, lets take religion away from the world just for amount. No more Osama (muslims) vs. America (Christians). No Pakistan vs. India. No Israel vs. Palestine. No Hitler vs. Jews. No terror in the Philippines, no terror in Malaysia, no terror in the mid east, etc. etc. etc. I don’t think religion has done any good for humanity. It has only caused conflict. (I know this inst the purpose of religion, but that’s reality).
P.S
Sorry for the delay, my mind has been focused on Iraq lately.
Also, check the page before this one.
P.S
Sorry for the delay, my mind has been focused on Iraq lately.
Also, check the page before this one.
Why you keep changing your name?
Umm, evolution caused the holocaust? lol, that doesn't make any sense.
You have to remember that atheism is simply a lack of a belief. It doesn't tell people to do anything. You're not going to see an atheist say, "I did this because I'm an athiest", unlike religions where they are told to do something or motivated to act in a certain way. You can't point to an atheist bible and say "look, right there under 2-0-Sixx 5:9, 'jews are bad'" or "it says here in
2 Darwin 18:6 that we must smite our enemies with comfy chairs and thus triumph over the infidels".
Umm, evolution caused the holocaust? lol, that doesn't make any sense.
You have to remember that atheism is simply a lack of a belief. It doesn't tell people to do anything. You're not going to see an atheist say, "I did this because I'm an athiest", unlike religions where they are told to do something or motivated to act in a certain way. You can't point to an atheist bible and say "look, right there under 2-0-Sixx 5:9, 'jews are bad'" or "it says here in
2 Darwin 18:6 that we must smite our enemies with comfy chairs and thus triumph over the infidels".
Nitro, I forgot to mention that I am also a member of three different atheist message boards. You might think that is full of chaos and hatred and trash talking people but all of them are quite the opposite.
I have never once been insulted on any of the sites. The overwhelming majority of the communities are against the Iraq war and war in general. The majority are very peaceful individuals and want world peace. Abortion is about even, just like everywhere else. Most of the are humanitarians…they get angry when human rights are violated etc.
I have never once been insulted on any of the sites. The overwhelming majority of the communities are against the Iraq war and war in general. The majority are very peaceful individuals and want world peace. Abortion is about even, just like everywhere else. Most of the are humanitarians…they get angry when human rights are violated etc.
Darwinisim= Survival of the fittest. According to Nazi doctrine, Jews were less-fit and therefore subhuman and worthy of extermination. The whole concept of Darwinism and Eugeneics didn't cause the Holocaust, but gave the perpetrators the scientific justification that they needed to commit their crimes. And, according to Darwinism, they were, indeed, justified in what they were doing.
Killin in the name of...
The largest massacres ever by the government of its own people, in raw numbers and in terms of per capita percentages, came from "atheistic, communist" governments.
(With the exception of the Turkish massacre of Armenians)
One could say without Communism, or those pretending to practice it, we could have avoided anywhere from 110 to 200 million deaths worldwide.
"But Mao and Stalin didn't practice True Communism".
Hitler didn't practice true Christianity (He was actually into the occult)
The Crusaders didn't practice true Christianity.
Al-Qaeda/Osama do not practice True Islam.
The largest massacres ever by the government of its own people, in raw numbers and in terms of per capita percentages, came from "atheistic, communist" governments.
(With the exception of the Turkish massacre of Armenians)
One could say without Communism, or those pretending to practice it, we could have avoided anywhere from 110 to 200 million deaths worldwide.
"But Mao and Stalin didn't practice True Communism".
Hitler didn't practice true Christianity (He was actually into the occult)
The Crusaders didn't practice true Christianity.
Al-Qaeda/Osama do not practice True Islam.