Poll: How did human life come about?

Page 11 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
50,422
14,333
136
Originally posted by: Leros
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Crono
The Bible says we came from dust. Evolutionists say we came from rocks and gas. So why we we, who believe in the God of infinity, called stupid and are insulted? If evolutionists actually thought about it, they would realize that they're believing in a religion of death and no hope. It's no wonder so many people commit suicide. Belief in evolution by country.


The Bible says that people have been on earth for 4,000 years. Science proves that's false. The bible says the entire population on earth descended from 2 people. Science proves thats false. The Bible says that everyone except a single family was wiped out in a giant flood. Science shows that's false. The Bible is PURE CRAP. It's fake, it's fiction. Each and every day science shows just how truly offbase it is, but the truly weakminded desperately cling to each and every point that's been emphatically disproven. You can always tell a person has absolutely no clue about the real world when he relies on the Bible for his information. Grimms fairy tales are more grounded in reality than the bible is.

How dare you speak such rational thought in a thread about religion.

What rational thought? The only thing Gag showed there is that he's never even read it. For starters, it's not 4,000 years, it's 6,000 years. And the Bible never says it, not once. The idea was proposed by James Ussher, an Anglican Archbishop in the 17th century (which is why it's commonly called the Ussher Chronology). It's never been commonly accepted by religious scholars, and the only reason people know about it so much in America is because it used to be included with every KJV Bible, as that was the official translation of the Anglican church, and the most common text in most American Protestant denominations up until a few decades ago.

Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
 

Seekermeister

Golden Member
Oct 3, 2006
1,971
0
0
Originally posted by: So
You realize that nothing you said there was correct, except the bit about Jesus probably being a real person at one point. But that's plausible because the romans corroborated it.
It may difficult for some to accept, if they can only believe what science tells them, rather than being able to make their own decisions, but there is much more to prove the life of Jesus, disregarding the faith aspect. The Jews have been very much adversed to the concept and teachings of Jesus, and if He never existed, they would have denied His life...not just His teachings. Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.

 

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Originally posted by: So
You realize that nothing you said there was correct, except the bit about Jesus probably being a real person at one point. But that's plausible because the romans corroborated it.
It may difficult for some to accept, if they can only believe what science tells them, rather than being able to make their own decisions, but there is much more to prove the life of Jesus, disregarding the faith aspect. The Jews have been very much adversed to the concept and teachings of Jesus, and if He never existed, they would have denied His life...not just His teachings. Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.

I agree with you on the second part. Jesus almost certainly existed. But I find it cute that you're criticizing me for "only believing what science tells me". I mean, seriously, how can you criticize someone for accepting scientific facts (based on observable evidence), and then ask them to accept something on faith?
 

So

Lifer
Jul 2, 2001
25,923
17
81
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

Care to explain why the second statement is true? I'm not denying that Jesus existed, but I see no reason that the second statement is anything other than posturing.
 

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

Care to explain why the second statement is true? I'm not denying that Jesus existed, but I see no reason that the second statement is anything other than posturing.

Sure. I believe that the historical accuracy of Jesus is right on, at least from his birth and from when he started teaching. There are accounts of him outside the Christian faith, so I don't really see how there could be a debate on his existence. And if you can't understand that he did exist, I'm not sure how you could understand his teachings. If you believe that something is fictional, how can learn from it? Correct if I interpreted the quote wrong.

 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Originally posted by: So
You realize that nothing you said there was correct, except the bit about Jesus probably being a real person at one point. But that's plausible because the romans corroborated it.
It may difficult for some to accept, if they can only believe what science tells them, rather than being able to make their own decisions, but there is much more to prove the life of Jesus, disregarding the faith aspect. The Jews have been very much adversed to the concept and teachings of Jesus, and if He never existed, they would have denied His life...not just His teachings. Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.

Good to know that you're clairvoyant enough to attest to the mindsets of the entirety of the Jewish race and religion throughout all of history.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

And people like you wonder why you're so rarely -- if ever -- taken seriously.

 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

Care to explain why the second statement is true? I'm not denying that Jesus existed, but I see no reason that the second statement is anything other than posturing.

Sure. I believe that the historical accuracy of Jesus is right on, at least from his birth and from when he started teaching. There are accounts of him outside the Christian faith, so I don't really see how there could be a debate on his existence. And if you can't understand that he did exist, I'm not sure how you could understand his teachings. If you believe that something is fictional, how can learn from it? Correct if I interpreted the quote wrong.
So is not doubting Jesus existed, but he's doubting whether he walked on water, turned water into wine, actually born on Christmas, those kind of things
 

xSauronx

Lifer
Jul 14, 2000
19,582
4
81
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

Care to explain why the second statement is true? I'm not denying that Jesus existed, but I see no reason that the second statement is anything other than posturing.

If you believe that something is fictional, how can [you] learn from it?

See: Parables of Jesus


 

dnuggett

Diamond Member
Sep 13, 2003
6,703
0
76
Originally posted by: Leros
Originally posted by: GagHalfrunt
Originally posted by: Crono
The Bible says we came from dust. Evolutionists say we came from rocks and gas. So why we we, who believe in the God of infinity, called stupid and are insulted? If evolutionists actually thought about it, they would realize that they're believing in a religion of death and no hope. It's no wonder so many people commit suicide. Belief in evolution by country.


The Bible says that people have been on earth for 4,000 years. Science proves that's false. The bible says the entire population on earth descended from 2 people. Science proves thats false. The Bible says that everyone except a single family was wiped out in a giant flood. Science shows that's false. The Bible is PURE CRAP. It's fake, it's fiction. Each and every day science shows just how truly offbase it is, but the truly weakminded desperately cling to each and every point that's been emphatically disproven. You can always tell a person has absolutely no clue about the real world when he relies on the Bible for his information. Grimms fairy tales are more grounded in reality than the bible is.

How dare you speak such rational thought in a thread about religion.


Or blatent missunderstanding of the bible.
 

dnuggett

Diamond Member
Sep 13, 2003
6,703
0
76
Originally posted by: Legend
Originally posted by: dnuggett
Amazing how many intelligent people got this one wrong.....

Are you inferring there's an known answer? Even if you take a purely scientific stance, ie what is measured and observed, you don't know. How do we know the known universe is all of it...that a "big bang" was the center of all the universe rather than just something local to us relative to an infinite amount of other space? Why does there have to be a beginning in time...doesn't it make sense for it to be infinite? How do we know that the life on earth definitely started on earth, and wasn't a result of something like panspermia?

I know there is an answer, yes.
 

Kirby

Lifer
Apr 10, 2006
12,028
2
0
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: nkgreen
Originally posted by: Vic
Call the Bible what you want, but at least read it or study it just once in your life if your going to exert so much effort into hating it. It might help prevent you from looking even stupider than the Fundies do.
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.



:thumbsup:

Care to explain why the second statement is true? I'm not denying that Jesus existed, but I see no reason that the second statement is anything other than posturing.

Sure. I believe that the historical accuracy of Jesus is right on, at least from his birth and from when he started teaching. There are accounts of him outside the Christian faith, so I don't really see how there could be a debate on his existence. And if you can't understand that he did exist, I'm not sure how you could understand his teachings. If you believe that something is fictional, how can learn from it? Correct if I interpreted the quote wrong.
So is not doubting Jesus existed, but he's doubting whether he walked on water, turned water into wine, actually born on Christmas, those kind of things

I don't think anyone, Christian or not, believes Jesus was born on Christmas. I believe the most commonly thought time was during summer.

And I was referring to whether one could understand his teaching, not necessarily believe them.
 

LeiZaK

Diamond Member
May 25, 2005
3,749
4
0
No poll option for me:

Human beings have developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life... God did not "guide" the process. However, the entity known as God, a collective conciousness connecting all of us with all of existence, did have a part...
 

Seekermeister

Golden Member
Oct 3, 2006
1,971
0
0
Originally posted by: So
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Originally posted by: So
You realize that nothing you said there was correct, except the bit about Jesus probably being a real person at one point. But that's plausible because the romans corroborated it.
It may difficult for some to accept, if they can only believe what science tells them, rather than being able to make their own decisions, but there is much more to prove the life of Jesus, disregarding the faith aspect. The Jews have been very much adversed to the concept and teachings of Jesus, and if He never existed, they would have denied His life...not just His teachings. Anyone that doubts the historical accuracy of the life of Jesus, wouldn't be competent enough to understand what He taught anyway.

I agree with you on the second part. Jesus almost certainly existed. But I find it cute that you're criticizing me for "only believing what science tells me". I mean, seriously, how can you criticize someone for accepting scientific facts (based on observable evidence), and then ask them to accept something on faith?
Forgive me, I merely used your post as a launching pad for my own. I was not accusing you of anything. I thought that it was just an expansion of your own. However, I could expand that to address what scientific "facts" are, but that would just be repeating things that I have said before.

 

bluemax

Diamond Member
Apr 28, 2000
7,182
0
0
For all those calling the Bible "fairy tales" I have only one thing to say regarding evolution and the beginning of all life;
"It rained on the rocks."

Now THAT'S fairy-tale magic!


I can't tolerate bad data, and the poor excuse of a theory "evolution" is shot full of holes, reckless theory, NO evidence or falsified evidence.

Makes me wonder what they're so desperate to prove that they have to make up BS to "prove" it?

...and I do SO love the bible-bashers who haven't got a clue what's even inside it.
(And those that have the slightest inkling have still barely scratched the surface.)


I'm a man of science. Truth is based on facts. History, science, evidence. Facts.
Creation has this, evolution does not. End of Line.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: bluemax
For all those calling the Bible "fairy tales" I have only one thing to say regarding evolution and the beginning of all life;
"It rained on the rocks."

Now THAT'S fairy-tale magic!


I can't tolerate bad data, and the poor excuse of a theory "evolution" is shot full of holes, reckless theory, NO evidence or falsified evidence.

Makes me wonder what they're so desperate to prove that they have to make up BS to "prove" it?

...and I do SO love the bible-bashers who haven't got a clue what's even inside it.
(And those that have the slightest inkling have still barely scratched the surface.)


I'm a man of science. Truth is based on facts. History, science, evidence. Facts.
Creation has this, evolution does not. End of Line.
creation has facts? the bible doesn't count as factual evidence...

And if you're a man of science, please go ahead and list out what parts of evolution is "full of holes". Not to mention how life arose and evolution itself is two different things.
 

Seekermeister

Golden Member
Oct 3, 2006
1,971
0
0
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Originally posted by: bluemax
For all those calling the Bible "fairy tales" I have only one thing to say regarding evolution and the beginning of all life;
"It rained on the rocks."

Now THAT'S fairy-tale magic!


I can't tolerate bad data, and the poor excuse of a theory "evolution" is shot full of holes, reckless theory, NO evidence or falsified evidence.

Makes me wonder what they're so desperate to prove that they have to make up BS to "prove" it?

...and I do SO love the bible-bashers who haven't got a clue what's even inside it.
(And those that have the slightest inkling have still barely scratched the surface.)


I'm a man of science. Truth is based on facts. History, science, evidence. Facts.
Creation has this, evolution does not. End of Line.
creation has facts? the bible doesn't count as factual evidence...

And if you're a man of science, please go ahead and list out what parts of evolution is "full of holes". Not to mention how life arose and evolution itself is two different things.
The list is very short, the entire theory is one big hole. I have asked others to outline the theory in an understandable fashion, and they have refused, so instead I will ask you to explain just one aspect of it, that you believe is most significant, solid and factual.

 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
Originally posted by: Mo0o
Originally posted by: bluemax
For all those calling the Bible "fairy tales" I have only one thing to say regarding evolution and the beginning of all life;
"It rained on the rocks."

Now THAT'S fairy-tale magic!


I can't tolerate bad data, and the poor excuse of a theory "evolution" is shot full of holes, reckless theory, NO evidence or falsified evidence.

Makes me wonder what they're so desperate to prove that they have to make up BS to "prove" it?

...and I do SO love the bible-bashers who haven't got a clue what's even inside it.
(And those that have the slightest inkling have still barely scratched the surface.)


I'm a man of science. Truth is based on facts. History, science, evidence. Facts.
Creation has this, evolution does not. End of Line.
creation has facts? the bible doesn't count as factual evidence...

And if you're a man of science, please go ahead and list out what parts of evolution is "full of holes". Not to mention how life arose and evolution itself is two different things.
The list is very short, the entire theory is one big hole. I have asked others to outline the theory in an understandable fashion, and they have refused, so instead I will ask you to explain just one aspect of it, that you believe is most significant, solid and factual.
That complexity can arise through small minute mutations in DNA given an extended period of time, many leading to dead ends but a few lineages survive, making up the diversity of life as we know it today.
 

Agman

Member
Dec 29, 2005
117
0
76
ok....I don't want to start a flame war or anything but to the people that chose the evolution with God not in the process or anything that does not involve God...I have a very simple question...where do you supposed that fist very basic life form came from?? Some might say well from matter from the Big Bang...If thats the case then I ask..where did the matter that caused the Big Bang come from?
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: Agman
ok....I don't want to start a flame war or anything but to the people that chose the evolution with God not in the process or anything that does not involve God...I have a very simple question...where do you supposed that fist very basic life form came from?? Some might say well from matter from the Big Bang...If thats the case then I ask..where did the matter that caused the Big Bang come from?

Theres no definite answer but scientists haven't resigned to just saying "oh well god probably created, let's stop here." What makes your creation myth any more credible than the Greek one?
 

Cerpin Taxt

Lifer
Feb 23, 2005
11,940
542
126
Originally posted by: Seekermeister

The list is very short, the entire theory is one big hole. I have asked others to outline the theory in an understandable fashion, and they have refused, so instead I will ask you to explain just one aspect of it, that you believe is most significant, solid and factual.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html#retroviruses

That entire section is filled with exactly what you're asking for.

 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: Agman
ok....I don't want to start a flame war or anything but to the people that chose the evolution with God not in the process or anything that does not involve God...I have a very simple question...where do you supposed that fist very basic life form came from?? Some might say well from matter from the Big Bang...If thats the case then I ask..where did the matter that caused the Big Bang come from?

Theres no definite answer but scientists haven't resigned to just saying "oh well god probably created, let's stop here." What makes your creation myth any more credible than the Greek one?
 

Seekermeister

Golden Member
Oct 3, 2006
1,971
0
0
MoOo,

That complexity can arise through small minute mutations in DNA given an extended period of time, many leading to dead ends but a few lineages survive, making up the diversity of life as we know it today.

If you consider this to be the most significant and solid data proving evolution, then you should do a better job of explaining it, not merely alluding to it. I am not certain about short term mutations, but they would prove nothing. What "long term" study has been done on this, and how long of a term was it? Although my list of questions is short, don't let that deter you from elaborating on the finer points.
 

Mo0o

Lifer
Jul 31, 2001
24,227
3
76
Originally posted by: Seekermeister
MoOo,

That complexity can arise through small minute mutations in DNA given an extended period of time, many leading to dead ends but a few lineages survive, making up the diversity of life as we know it today.

I you consider this to be the most significant and solid data proving evolution, then you should do a better job of explaining it, not merely alluding to it. I am not certain about short term mutations, but they would prove nothing. What "long term" study has been done on this, and how long of a term was it? Although my list of questions is short, don't let that deter you from elaborating on the finer points.
Why would short term mutations prove nothing? Obivously there can be no active long term study but fossil evidence has suggested a morphological continuity among phylogenies

Take a look at the QBeta RNA virus study for short term evolution

I dont make a distinction between micro and macro evolution, i think macro evolution is merely the accumulation of a long line of microevolutionary steps.

Which I could elaborate further but i gotta go to class. (molecular evolution coincidentally)
 
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |