Chimps, hairless.
- Thread starter BLOODY JESUS
- Start date
Easily refutable, why? Because there are indications that many fossils have formed quickly. Meaning it didn't take a million years for the fossil to petrify. Fossils that theorically speaking, are said to be millions of years old are now given a time span between 4000-10000 years old.
Also the earth is eroding to quickly, I thought the process takes millions of years, and what was once thought to be millions of years, has been reduced to thousands of years. If the world is millions of billions of years old, would the continents be more divided? The Ocean more saltier? More Helium gases in the atmosphere?
If you're going to use the Billion and Million year old Cave theories, just drop it, cause if you've been in a cave, or has examined one, you'd understand that in the right conditions Cave Matter forms real quickly.
Because you brought it up.
So what's the real world, believing in every theory with a 35% chance that it is true. Or Real Life Truth in our Biased news Media. Or textbooks, I'm a Christian, and each book is up for questioning, if no one questions anything then what's the use of learning or understanding others right? This world was meant to question things, although I don't question the bible in it's truest form, I don't mind when people question the bible, it allows me to tell them to understand for themselves the concepts, teachings, laws, precepts and statutes of the bible.
Yet if you've noticed how big Noah's Boat was, it's as big as a whole mountain, now go figure. If you believe your mom's great great great 14th great grandmother was a monkey or a rat go ahead, or some flashing lights that became eyes go ahead.
First off, it's damn well close. Secondly, according to many Evolution takes millions of year. So are Siamese Twin's Evolution? If so, that's a damn shame.
So do you think a Mutation is the same as evolution? I guess a retarded boy was a sign of evolution.
Yeah, if if I had a third ear, that would be evolution as well. Did you know how aids became and epidemic in America? Do you know which race attained it first, and do you know the conspiracies behind it? Not as far fetched as evolution but learn about it.
Quick enough to spot your grammatical errors. Quick enough to make a universe in 6 days, and rest on the seventh. Quick enough to let 6000+ years of History go by with a whiff. Quick enough to make a non-believer a believer. Quick enough to prove his existence in his believers, something atheists can't comprehend. Quick enough to throw you down the pits of hell.
Also the earth is eroding to quickly, I thought the process takes millions of years, and what was once thought to be millions of years, has been reduced to thousands of years. If the world is millions of billions of years old, would the continents be more divided? The Ocean more saltier? More Helium gases in the atmosphere?
If you're going to use the Billion and Million year old Cave theories, just drop it, cause if you've been in a cave, or has examined one, you'd understand that in the right conditions Cave Matter forms real quickly.
Because you brought it up.
So what's the real world, believing in every theory with a 35% chance that it is true. Or Real Life Truth in our Biased news Media. Or textbooks, I'm a Christian, and each book is up for questioning, if no one questions anything then what's the use of learning or understanding others right? This world was meant to question things, although I don't question the bible in it's truest form, I don't mind when people question the bible, it allows me to tell them to understand for themselves the concepts, teachings, laws, precepts and statutes of the bible.
Yet if you've noticed how big Noah's Boat was, it's as big as a whole mountain, now go figure. If you believe your mom's great great great 14th great grandmother was a monkey or a rat go ahead, or some flashing lights that became eyes go ahead.
First off, it's damn well close. Secondly, according to many Evolution takes millions of year. So are Siamese Twin's Evolution? If so, that's a damn shame.
So do you think a Mutation is the same as evolution? I guess a retarded boy was a sign of evolution.
Yeah, if if I had a third ear, that would be evolution as well. Did you know how aids became and epidemic in America? Do you know which race attained it first, and do you know the conspiracies behind it? Not as far fetched as evolution but learn about it.
Quick enough to spot your grammatical errors. Quick enough to make a universe in 6 days, and rest on the seventh. Quick enough to let 6000+ years of History go by with a whiff. Quick enough to make a non-believer a believer. Quick enough to prove his existence in his believers, something atheists can't comprehend. Quick enough to throw you down the pits of hell.
Stockton..a couple things (and I'm not debating/arguing anything):
(1) Carbon dating is not generally used to date fossils unless they are fairly recent, nor is it "damn well close" to being the best technique since "best" depends on what you're dating. Artifacts from archaeological sites are usually dated using carbon dating. Ancient fossils use other radiometric dating techniques.
(2) Your fossil logic: A fossil is defined as "the remnant(s) of a prehistoric organism". It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with either petrification or dating.
(3) The continents would not be more divided than they are now because they're constantly in motion. This means that the continents continually come together are split apart. Research the supercontinent cycle. It's pretty interesting.
(4) A "retarded boy" is not an example of evolution. Evolution occurs within a population. This is an example of variation. If, for some reason, his being retarded were beneficial to him and allowed him to to reproduce better than others and the external conditions which allowed for him to reproduce are still there for his offspring, then there is a chance his offspring will have the same success. Eventually within the POPULATION, those genes will become more prevalent and begin to dominate the outlook of the poulation. This trend will likely continue unless there is some sort of change that renders these qualities useless, in which case another beneficial mutation/variation will be required for the population to continue to survive. And when these changes occur, they will be occurring on the "modified" population and will have had a far different effect on this population than it would have on the original population since the "template" was changed. Now, add millions of years and countless cycles of this occurring and what do you get? The origin of species. Remember: natural selection works on the individual, evolution works on the population.
Anyway, I had nothing to do today and I thought this might make for a more interesting discussion for you guys.
(1) Carbon dating is not generally used to date fossils unless they are fairly recent, nor is it "damn well close" to being the best technique since "best" depends on what you're dating. Artifacts from archaeological sites are usually dated using carbon dating. Ancient fossils use other radiometric dating techniques.
(2) Your fossil logic: A fossil is defined as "the remnant(s) of a prehistoric organism". It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with either petrification or dating.
(3) The continents would not be more divided than they are now because they're constantly in motion. This means that the continents continually come together are split apart. Research the supercontinent cycle. It's pretty interesting.
(4) A "retarded boy" is not an example of evolution. Evolution occurs within a population. This is an example of variation. If, for some reason, his being retarded were beneficial to him and allowed him to to reproduce better than others and the external conditions which allowed for him to reproduce are still there for his offspring, then there is a chance his offspring will have the same success. Eventually within the POPULATION, those genes will become more prevalent and begin to dominate the outlook of the poulation. This trend will likely continue unless there is some sort of change that renders these qualities useless, in which case another beneficial mutation/variation will be required for the population to continue to survive. And when these changes occur, they will be occurring on the "modified" population and will have had a far different effect on this population than it would have on the original population since the "template" was changed. Now, add millions of years and countless cycles of this occurring and what do you get? The origin of species. Remember: natural selection works on the individual, evolution works on the population.
Anyway, I had nothing to do today and I thought this might make for a more interesting discussion for you guys.
http://archives.cnn.com/2002/TECH/science/12/04/coolsc.coolsc.mousegenome/
For you lazy people out there:
Mice, men share 99 percent of genes
By Marsha Walton
CNN
Wednesday, December 4, 2002 Posted: 4:05 PM EST (2105 GMT)
(CNN) -- When it comes to DNA, it turns out there's not that much difference between mice and men.
Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.
"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."
etc etc
Some of y'all out there really do amaze me with your extremist Anti-Religious views. I know that you do it because you love Science.......but for the love of Science, stop being do damned idiotic about YOUR OWN Scientific views, presenting bullshit as "Proven fact" when YOUR OWN Science would instruct you TO NOT DO SO.
For you lazy people out there:
Mice, men share 99 percent of genes
By Marsha Walton
CNN
Wednesday, December 4, 2002 Posted: 4:05 PM EST (2105 GMT)
(CNN) -- When it comes to DNA, it turns out there's not that much difference between mice and men.
Mice and humans each have about 30,000 genes, yet only 300 are unique to either organism. Both even have genes for a tail, even though it's not "switched on" in humans.
"About 99 percent of genes in humans have counterparts in the mouse," said Eric Lander, Director of the Whitehead Institute Center for Genomic Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts. "Eighty percent have identical, one-to-one counterparts."
etc etc
Some of y'all out there really do amaze me with your extremist Anti-Religious views. I know that you do it because you love Science.......but for the love of Science, stop being do damned idiotic about YOUR OWN Scientific views, presenting bullshit as "Proven fact" when YOUR OWN Science would instruct you TO NOT DO SO.