- 17,572
- 1,165
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2008
I wish I had time to actually read Silly Putty's comments
Son works on Niketalk.
Son works on Niketalk.
mehh..
- Thread in 'General' Thread starter Started by yngsimba.sneakershoebox,
- Start date
- 5,215
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
Completely unscientific explanation by me.
I think it is pretty unlikely. Why? We're roughly the size of animals that would have been preyed upon by the larger carnivorous dinosaurs with none of the physical abilities to even TRY to escape them. We're not fast. We have to constantly feed. We are not adept at climbing. We can't fly. We die without shelter (seriously, overexposure to the sun kills us.
Humans are only able to thrive on this planet because we don't have that type of threat.
- 2,127
- 13
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2011
Last edited:
- 5,215
- 118
- Joined
- May 18, 2009
Oh, and one really important fact i forgot to point out... we rely on FRESH WATER for survival.
Like seriously, it kills me when creationists say the Earth is "perfect" for human survival. Hell no, it isn't. If the Earth was perfect for humans, we'd be able to drink salt water, not get skin cancer from the sun, not be susceptible to disease or virus, and the earth itself wouldn't be constantly trying to kill us via earthquake, tsunami, hurricane, tornadoe, etc
But no, the Earth is perfect
Like seriously, it kills me when creationists say the Earth is "perfect" for human survival. Hell no, it isn't. If the Earth was perfect for humans, we'd be able to drink salt water, not get skin cancer from the sun, not be susceptible to disease or virus, and the earth itself wouldn't be constantly trying to kill us via earthquake, tsunami, hurricane, tornadoe, etc
But no, the Earth is perfect
- 5,870
- 9,374
- Joined
- May 20, 2006
Originally Posted by sillyputty
Are.
You.
Serious?
Science is not a "thing"...its the pursuit of understanding how something works.
Is the lack of an AIDS vaccine a failing of science?
I guess the introduction of Anti-retrovirals in the mid-90s means NOTHING to you.
We should have thrown our hands up back in the 80s when AIDS exploded (traced actually to the early 1900s in Congo) instead of trying to save lives. Its God's will at that point, right?
There are tons of things in medicine that work that we can't explain...but THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CANT figure it out sooner or later. We didn't even understand how Gram-Staining literally worked until the late 80s...and we had been using it for close to 100 years to identify and categorize bacteria and other microorganisms.
Perhaps you misinterpreted my response because you basically reiterated what I meant: "There are tons of things in medicine that work that we can't explain...but THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE CANT figure it out sooner or later." Sums up my exact statement which you questioned my seriousness on. Maybe "failing" was the wrong word. It's inability to explain something at a particular point in time due to lack of technology or human brain power doesn't mean that it won't be explainable sooner or later. Exactly. I'm not advocating whole-heartedly "believing" any and everything just because one day anything could theoretically be proved. All I'm saying is I would like to keep an open mind to the possibilities.
And please don't interpret this to mean that I want to keep open the possibility of some man in the clouds that deserves my worship, or any specific religious doctrine. I am speaking to science in general.
...Try to figure it out?
And what is your fascination with cytochrome C?
Whats your point?
The point is they have been trying to figure it out for awhile now, the origins of cytochrome C, how the body creates it.
Science can't just figure everything out is what I am getting at( but they will sooner or later, maybe). Not saying science
is wrong or that we should completely abandon it but it points to it's fallibility. I don't think it's the be all and end all.
Not to mention it's occasional bias, potential subjectivity, and the fact that it is limited by the human brain's level
of comprehension.
I didn't insult religious people.
I said that saying "god did it" was lazy and stupid. I didn't call you lazy or stupid. I said the IDEA was lazy and stupid, and I stand by that.
While I completely agree with the idea being lazy and stupid, calling someones ideas lazy and stupid
is an insult as well. Additionally, a factual statement can be an insult. Above all it is unnecessary to speak
to people in that manner. Ultimately that's your judgement call though.
If we can't explain something, we say "we don't know"
I don't know why our noses are angled the way they are. But thats not going to stop me from trying to figure it out.
Not being able to explain something doesn't mean that there is no answer. It just means that you have to keep working until you get it.
Agree with all the above. Based on your retractment below I think this is resolved.
I don't understand how the lack of knowledge at one point in time equates to the unknowable...
Not inherently unknowable, unknowable at the time due to our capabilities. Which I feel
could apply to some spiritual principles or what are perceived as such. Again, this
statement doesn't apply to a man in the clouds or jesus christ, etc...
Are you going to keep pushing the goal-posts further and further back with each advancement in scientific understanding? When we figure out the next big hurdle will you admit that there is one more thing that we don't understand? Will you just keep saying we don't know this one thing? What will you say when we figure it out?
Shouldn't we keep doing that? Should there ever come a time when we concede that we know enough? Either there are things we
don't understand (or scientists don't understand) or there aren't. I'm not talking about waiting for established scientific fact to be debunked.
I am more referring to the unknowns, the cytochrome C's of the world. I think we should always keep pushing the bar if there are
things we can't figure out. And when we do, great!
You're innocent until PROVEN guilty.
That means that you are charged with doing something, and the experiment, or trial, must establish the validity of the claim that you are guilty. Otherwise, you are free to go.
If the claim that you are guilty is not proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, then you are not proven guilty.
That is how science works. If I make a claim that the eye can see UV light then it is my responsibility to prove that claim. If I do not prove that claim then the claim is unsubstantiated and can not be accepted.
Yeah I should have saw that coming. My point is that you don't want the jury to have their mind made up
EITHER WAY before the trial begins. Maybe a bad analogy.
Creativity is spurned by manipulating what already exists.
Every invention is a build upon something that exists currently.
Name one truly novel innovation that is independent in both origin and structure.
Everything, comes from something else or some existing understanding. It builds upon prior entities.
Creativity is limited by reality however. You are limited by what you have and the resources you encounter and forms of capital at your disposal.
That's all fine and good but first and foremost there needs to be a drive to create or discover. Say if every scientist on the planet
was an atheist and they all took your point of view, they don't know if god exists but they don't believe so. Would science
ever even attempt to prove god? (humor me and assume that it was somehow possible to prove god with science) I mean would there
be a motivation to do the work? I think saying "I don't know but anythings possible" would foster more development than "I don't know, I
don't believe". You have to let various possibilities enter your brain for you to make any meaningful discovery. Again, this is not about a man
in the sky. You can substitute deep sea life for god if that helps illustrate the point any better.
If you assert that god creates everything and this is your form of creativity...then please, explain how you arrive at this answer and what implications that involves. Explain what processes are used and how this can be applied to other areas. Explain what you mean and how it changes things. Until you can support this notion, then your notion is not accepted.
I don't assert that god created everything. I have various different scenarios that seem plausible to me, some of which involve"god", some
of which don't. I'm with you, I don't know who or what created everything.
If you want to believe in your god, go ahead. I won't stop you. But until your god is proven to exist or has characteristics that can be accepted or measured in consistently verifiable ways, then your theory will remain unsubstantiated. It will not be adopted on the LACK of evidence, as will any other unproven or untenable claim. You can try for the rest of your life to prove your claim. I encourage you to do so. Never stop searching.
I don't have a god per se. I have a very broad scope of what could/should/would constitute a higher power, or "god". In my mind if an alien
life form had any hand in human development then they could be considered "god", however unlikely. I might be willing to consider some
form of energy as a "god". Sub-atomic particles could be "god". I could be "god"! Every humans collective conscious could be "god". multi-dimensional beings could be "god" Additionally, I am fully aware that these are unsubstantiated theories AT BEST. I would never expect someone to adopt them, nor do i adopt them myself. I would in no way classify these as my beliefs, merely possibilities that I ponder on from time to time.
But until you find that proof, it won't be accepted. Remember that. No one will take you seriously without evidence to support ANY claim you make. Any. Claim.
Nor should they. Fully aware and agree 100%, I don't take it seriously myself. As stated earlier, for me the biggest thing is keeping an open mind.
Is it technically wrong for me to assert that god does NOT exist? Yes. So I apologize.
Thank you! This is the main thing I was getting hung up on. If you just stated "I do not know but do not believe"
I think a lot of drama and criticism in your threads would disappear. That was a very good clarification. Completely
reasonable stance as well.
However, you do not KNOW that god does exist either. You do not KNOW this fact. You are an agnostic.
You do however BELIEVE that a god exists. You are a theist.
You are an agnostic-theist.
You do not know that a god exists, but you believe that one does.
Well I don't want to argue semantics but when you speak of beliefs, I tend to view that as absolute or conclusive. I consider
the vast majority of things of this nature to be possibilities, not any particular thing I "believe" as it were. I would correct you
to say that I am simply agnostic, with no particular belief but a consideration of a wide range of possibilities that include theist
and atheist ideals.
I didn't call anyone any of the aforementioned name, so don't make that mistake again. Thats a serious charge in these threads with Mods and I won't let you get away making those sorts of wild assertions. Especially if i'm going to be held to that standard.
You've called me personally both ignorant and foolish just in the past week.I can link you if you like. Or was it my ideas you
were criticizing? It seems, all along, that you didn't even really know what my ideas were, hopefully they are a little more clear to you now, perhaps that was my fault. Either way, I find it unnecessarily disrespectful, we can have a civilized debate without resorting to such language.
I just think its pretty improbable that the god of the bible, quran, etc exists in the form that they say it does. Until a case is presented to sustain those claims then I won't believe in them.
I agree 100%. I don't see how any logical human being could find it probable. As I said, I like to keep an open mind but those particular "beliefs"
are probably the furthest from the things I consider plausible possibilities.
I didn't belittle anyone.
I didn't insult anyone.
I didn't make fun of anyone.
Furthermore if you're THAT concerned with the validity of my arguments, why don't you spend more time addressing the content of my points and not their context.
I realize that it may not have been your intention, nor do I particularly care what you say about me or my ideas. I care
more about fostering a healthy, mature debate. I think it would enhance the presentation of your content if you tried
to be a little more aware of the context it may be received in. But that's JMHO
- 29,687
- 20,950
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
But it WAS an accident. Evolution, in its awesomeness and randomness, pits the smartest and strongest against anyone or anything else that will go extinct. Humans got damn lucky that we evolved when we did, taking advantage of a landscape with no carnivores larger and smarter than us.
Call it empty if you want, but I dont have to worry about an answer to why we're here. We just are. The world/circle of life/coexistence works in the way it does due to millions and millions of years of evolution. I also believe it's incredibly vapid to believe that us, human beings, were "put here" for a purpose. To assert that our existence is so special that we, above anything else in history, deserve something beyond what we have right now is asinine to me.
- 1,661
- 81
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2011
And you're giving a lot of credit to something you have no evidence for. I criticize believers for blindly accepting the doctrine of one belief out of the thousands that exist without anymore evidence than the others.
sillyputty
Banned
- 3,634
- 21
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
OK...I'm going to say this as nicely as possible...but with the intention of hoping that you take the initiative will educate yourself or seek more information.
You are ignorant.
You have not shown that you know anything of benefit about basic science and nearly everything you say is FACTUALLY inaccurate or flat out wrong.
I want to help you. Not insult you. But I must be honest with you. To do otherwise would be a disservice to you.
There.
Now...
If we can talk about something RANDOM?
You what random is? Random is your very chance of birth. Random...isn't that "random" at all. Its all probability. Thats all it takes.
Do you know how many sperm cells your biological father must have wasted before and after the moment of your conception? Billions...maybe trillions of individual cells. And you are the ONLY one that made it. The. Only. One. God didn't pick you. You were the fastest sperm. You weren't even one of the attack sperm cells that we know of. You probably weren't even the fastest one to the egg. You were the only one that made it THROUGH the outer layers of the ovum. Then you grew. You grew in such a way that you avoided the many complications that millions of babies face. You managed to be born. Free of defects. Free of congenital diseases. Free of developmental problems. Free of heritidary disease. You survived your birth. Your umbilical didn't get wrapped around your head. Your mom was able to give birth to you in a country where the infant morality rate isn't over 20%. You were able to be breast fed. You grew up in a country that didn't even allow you to work before you were 15. You are a member of the majority of the ethnic composition of your particular country and you have certain social rights that many others don't have.
You are the result of chance, after chance, after chance...and this is not enough for you to realize?
You are an insignificant bag of floating chemoorganotropic chemistry. There are about 7 billion others just like you. You live on a tiny floating rock in the observable universe of a vast and ever increasing size. Your skin is soft. You can't fly. You can't move that quickly. Your eyes have gotten worse with each generation. Your body can't digest the foods that are currently available to you as efficiently as they once could. Your hearing is not that great. You can't detect magnetic pulses like other animals. You can't hold your breath. Your air composition has to be nearly consistent or you suffocate. You can't live in a wide range of temperature conditions. You require a vast amount of nutrients. You don't produce all of the vitamins your body even needs to make its own blood. Without the bacteria in your gut you would die. Your immune system is unable to stop most threats. You are a member of a species that remains undeveloped for nearly 20 years.
You are imperfect.
You are not special.
You are not unique.
You are not favored.
It is the very "random-ness" you assault that allows you to have your genetic make up, the environment you grew up in that developed your character, and your success in school that has led to your very situation right now.
That is all random. That is what chance is.
There was no divine will in this.
Prove it.
The whole evolution thing leaves so many gaping holes in life and really renders life as an accident.
Chemistry favors the lowest possible energy state. Phospholipid bilayers will spontaneously form in aqueous environments. Random elemental formation has been proven to occur in the high pressures and unique environments of the stars. Every element of your body was forged in a star emitting high energy long before it was recombined into you right now.
Life is an accident. Death is not uncommon. Things live and die all the time. You being more aware of your own existence doesn't change this fact.
The universe doesn't care about you. Its out to kill you. The moment you step outside you are being bombarded with massive amounts of radiation that are slowly eating through your cells and rendering parts of your body useless. The foods you eat and the air you breathe create free-radical oxygens that contribute to cellular degradation. Your cells after completing mitosis encounter a shortening of their telemeters that lead to cancerous conditions.
You don't exist for any reason but simply that you exist.
You guys are essentially saying we're here for NOTHING.
Yep.
Scary huh?
Its the uncertainty that scares you. Its NOT having answers that scares you. Its the fact that there might be something you don't understand that scares you.
I see it as a challenge, not as a fear of the unknown. We push the boundary. You run from it.
It makes others feel good. It allows societies to collaborate and build stuff we can enjoy before we die. It helps to pass the time. It secures partner bonding and develops relationships needed to selectively confer genetic status during mating.
Emotional responses to a wide range of stimuli.
Whats your alternative then? Whats your purpose? To praise an invisible "god?" A futile endeavor in my eyes.
Live for the sake of living.
Life itself has no purpose, besides what you make of it.
Everything that we see coexist in a way that everything is connected like a chain. The circle of life. Everything has purpose. To justify our existence as an accident is empty to me.
Humans couldn't exist without the cyanobacteria that utilize inorganic chemicals to produce the oxic conditions that allowed the previously anoxic earth to exist. This is true.
However, the dependence of other species only exists to confer that existence to other forms of life...not any "purpose" there is no "calling" of bacteria...it is only the interdependence of one form of life on another. Some forms can't live without other forms.
Lambs don't LIVE to be eaten. Lambs only live because they eat other things. Thats the point. Understand the distinction.
And? Becoming knowledgable is how we improve the well-being of others that live along-side us.
We have a heart to pump the blood coursing through our body.
Our heart is the result of evolutionary pressures in failed examples of hearts.
There are thousands of babies born every year with heart defects. Those are the results of mutations or other developmental errors. Had the environment selectively preferred those heart forms, then those babies would have lived to transfer those "defected" hearts to other babies and so on. That is how the heart came to be. Its not in its current form because of a design...its merely the best design that worked. The reason we see so many hearts that have the same shape and formation is because those who had other forms died off and didn't get to confer their genetic composition to lead to the formation of other amorphous hearts.
Your tongue is relatively bland in comparison to other species with a wider range of chemoreceptors and sensitivity to taste.
Also, most taste is observed by the nose, in humans at least.
Most birds and almost all Bees can see ranges of light outside of the range of human vision called the "visual light" spectrum in the electromagnetic continuum. Some birds can see below that spectrum in the Infrared region and many bees can see UV light. These implications allow them to see many flowers or other fruits in ways that we can't imagine.
Relatively speaking, human noses suck.
Dogs can smell thousands of times more accurately and sensitively than humans can.
It is also theorized that earlier humans may have had a more acute sense of smell.
You speak so highly of "purpose" without defining it.
You're better than living only for the sake of a god.
You would rather get on your knees and chant magic words and believe in stories that are unsubstantiated than to take the time to say "I don't know" more often and really challenged what you know to arrive at more accurate truths.
Is it really crazy that humans and dinosaurs walked at once?
Yes.
I can't express how absurd this is that you are even trying to make this point.
How did you escape elementary school science classes? Did you ever take field trips? How can you be serious about this?
Dinosaurs have been dated to 65+Million years ago.
#*%# Sapiens have no evidence of being on the planet before 100-150K years ago.
No.
Its fossilized blood. Not red, running blood. It has remnants of genetic information within the bones. We can study these samples and learn more about the chemical composition of those animals
Prove it.
And no they haven't.
Other species of the #*%# genus have predated HomoSapiens by hundreds of thousands of years with relatives closer and closer to chimpanzees and other great apes.
There is also evidence that various regions of people have traces of Denisovian and Neanderthalsis DNA within them. Both illustrate that HomoSapens had sex with and had offspring bearing trace elements of both.
Are you seriously saying that you have evidence to counteract the entire field of Anthropology?
Really don't tell me you're about to make this grave mistake.
Also the bible describes creatures that sound like dino's. 2000+ years ago and not 65 million.
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins, And his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron. (Job 40:15â1[/size][/font]
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]
Big tails. [/size][/font]
Deodar Cedar tree Height: 40-70 feet
About the length of those tails right?
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]
I mean I guess one could say "Well maybe they found fossils back then". But for the notion that the bible is wrong because it doesn't mention dino's is off.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica]
[/font]
Bruh.
Look.
I didn't know things were this off with you.
Dinosaurs in the bible? 2000 years ago? Son. For real?
Like...For real?
How old are you? Seriously. I really need to know this.
Dude, the Romans would have written about them. The Egyptians would have written about them. The Native Americans would have left note about them. The Sumerians? The Greeks? The Chinese? The Pacific Islanders? The norse? Ancient Africans?
The "Deodar Cedar Tree" you referenced isn't even found in the middle east where most of the biblical MYTHOLOGY is said to haven taken place. So how can it refer those those stories? Its found in a portion of the world were most of the religious people were HINDUs.
Enough. Is. Enough.
The bible does not have any dinosaurs in it.
The bible does not talk about dinosaurs.
The bible does not have any scientific or factual basis to it.
On top of that, tell me where our understanding is wrong.
Since you're going to refer to ONE poorly written book in the history of mankind rather than the MILLIONS of texts written to the contrary with combined billions of hours of dedicated research and inquiry spanning both biochemistry, physics, geography, anthropology, and linguistics as well medicine.
Are you telling me that the work of paleontologists around the world can be explained by a vague verse of a book written over a period of 1600 years about a mythical creature?
Tell me why no dinosaurs have never been dated earlier than 2000 years. Where is YOUR evidence?
- 88,417
- 47,516
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
finally a religion thread
wish we could sticky this lol
antonlavey
Banned
- 28,210
- 847
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
I don't consider myself an atheist either Frank, everytime you call me an atheist the term technically applies to you as well hypocriteOriginally Posted by FrankMatthews
Originally Posted by AntonLaVey
Just thought I'd highlight that sentence just so everybody else sees how dumb and hypocritical you sound---Religious people themselves look for evidence in most situations as long as it does not apply to their own religion--They even use their own religion as "EVIDENCE" of the lack of existence of other Gods.
Again with the insults. Let's say I am in fact dumb, what do insults accomplish other than stroke your ego for being smarter?
What does what religious people do have to do with our convo? Did you think I was religious? Not sure I follow your point. The highlighted
statement goes double for religious people. How exactly am I hypocritical now?
I dunno are YOU the other other kind of atheist? Isn't everybody on this planet and atheist?Are you the other type of Atheist?
I don't consider myself an atheist if that's what you are asking.
If you like me to discuss possibilities, I could create a thread dedicated to human imagination, I suspect the thread would still offend religious people
I really don't see why you keep bringing up religious people. The crux of your argument seems to depend on a religious person being
on the other side of it. Are you capable of discussing possibilities, seems you only deal in absolutes?
Putty and I are building a church dedicated to Spiderman in Sudan, and passing out Bible Comics---Scientists cannot prove that out there somewhere spiderman does not exist, so I'm going to dedicate my life to worshipping it like he does exist
Is this a response to something I said? Cause I never advocated worshiping or proclaiming existence as fact in any post of mine. Am I supposed
to agree that that sounds dumb? The concept of worship is clearly an ego-based, human idea.
Let's all ignore "reality" and evidence and go about our lives like things we haven't discovered actually exist---
Wait what? Just because we haven't discovered it yet means it doesn't exist? I think most scientist will agree there
are a number of species in this world that have not been discovered. Do they therefore not exist? It's debatable that they
don't but not solid fact, metaphysically speaking.
Also, why are you such an angry person?
Last time I checked, this thread is about religious debate--that's why I asked if you wanted me to create a thread about unicorns Frank
The word EXISTENCE according to your logic has no place in the English language and hold no meaning---think about what you're saying
Basically what you're suggesting is that we completely scrap the word "existence" from the English language and say everything exists----these things are a possibility, time travel is a possibility, aliens are a possibility, but they do not "exist" in our reality without evidence Frank
Angry? no condescending? Maybe
antonlavey
Banned
- 28,210
- 847
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
Chemistry favors the lowest possible energy state. Phospholipid bilayers will spontaneously form in aqueous environments. Random elemental formation has been proven to occur in the high pressures and unique environments of the stars. Every element of your body was forged in a star emitting high energy long before it was recombined into you right now.
Life is an accident. Death is not uncommon. Things live and die all the time. You being more aware of your own existence doesn't change this fact.
The universe doesn't care about you. Its out to kill you. The moment you step outside you are being bombarded with massive amounts of radiation that are slowly eating through your cells and rendering parts of your body useless. The foods you eat and the air you breathe create free-radical oxygens that contribute to cellular degradation. Your cells after completing mitosis encounter a shortening of their telemeters that lead to cancerous conditions.
You don't exist for any reason but simply that you exist.
You guys are essentially saying we're here for NOTHING.
Yep.
Scary huh?
Its the uncertainty that scares you. Its NOT having answers that scares you. Its the fact that there might be something you don't understand that scares you.
I see it as a challenge, not as a fear of the unknown. We push the boundary. You run from it.
It makes others feel good. It allows societies to collaborate and build stuff we can enjoy before we die. It helps to pass the time. It secures partner bonding and develops relationships needed to selectively confer genetic status during mating.
Emotional responses to a wide range of stimuli.
Whats your alternative then? Whats your purpose? To praise an invisible "god?" A futile endeavor in my eyes.
Live for the sake of living.
Life itself has no purpose, besides what you make of it.
Everything that we see coexist in a way that everything is connected like a chain. The circle of life. Everything has purpose. To justify our existence as an accident is empty to me.
Humans couldn't exist without the cyanobacteria that utilize inorganic chemicals to produce the oxic conditions that allowed the previously anoxic earth to exist. This is true.
However, the dependence of other species only exists to confer that existence to other forms of life...not any "purpose" there is no "calling" of bacteria...it is only the interdependence of one form of life on another. Some forms can't live without other forms.
Lambs don't LIVE to be eaten. Lambs only live because they eat other things. Thats the point. Understand the distinction.
And? Becoming knowledgable is how we improve the well-being of others that live along-side us.
We have a heart to pump the blood coursing through our body.
Our heart is the result of evolutionary pressures in failed examples of hearts.
There are thousands of babies born every year with heart defects. Those are the results of mutations or other developmental errors. Had the environment selectively preferred those heart forms, then those babies would have lived to transfer those "defected" hearts to other babies and so on. That is how the heart came to be. Its not in its current form because of a design...its merely the best design that worked. The reason we see so many hearts that have the same shape and formation is because those who had other forms died off and didn't get to confer their genetic composition to lead to the formation of other amorphous hearts.
Your tongue is relatively bland in comparison to other species with a wider range of chemoreceptors and sensitivity to taste.
Also, most taste is observed by the nose, in humans at least.
Most birds and almost all Bees can see ranges of light outside of the range of human vision called the "visual light" spectrum in the electromagnetic continuum. Some birds can see below that spectrum in the Infrared region and many bees can see UV light. These implications allow them to see many flowers or other fruits in ways that we can't imagine.
Relatively speaking, human noses suck.
Dogs can smell thousands of times more accurately and sensitively than humans can.
It is also theorized that earlier humans may have had a more acute sense of smell.
You speak so highly of "purpose" without defining it.
You're better than living only for the sake of a god.
You would rather get on your knees and chant magic words and believe in stories that are unsubstantiated than to take the time to say "I don't know" more often and really challenged what you know to arrive at more accurate truths.
Is it really crazy that humans and dinosaurs walked at once?
Yes.
I can't express how absurd this is that you are even trying to make this point.
How did you escape elementary school science classes? Did you ever take field trips? How can you be serious about this?
Dinosaurs have been dated to 65+Million years ago.
#*%# Sapiens have no evidence of being on the planet before 100-150K years ago.
No.
Its fossilized blood. Not red, running blood. It has remnants of genetic information within the bones. We can study these samples and learn more about the chemical composition of those animals
Prove it.
And no they haven't.
Other species of the #*%# genus have predated HomoSapiens by hundreds of thousands of years with relatives closer and closer to chimpanzees and other great apes.
There is also evidence that various regions of people have traces of Denisovian and Neanderthalsis DNA within them. Both illustrate that HomoSapens had sex with and had offspring bearing trace elements of both.
Are you seriously saying that you have evidence to counteract the entire field of Anthropology?
Really don't tell me you're about to make this grave mistake.
Also the bible describes creatures that sound like dino's. 2000+ years ago and not 65 million.
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]Behold now, Behemoth, which I made as well as you; He eats grass like an ox. Behold now, his strength in his loins, And his power in the muscles of his belly. He bends his tail like a cedar; The sinews of his thighs are knit together. His bones are tubes of bronze; His limbs are like bars of iron. (Job 40:15â1
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]
Big tails. [/size][/font]
Deodar Cedar tree Height: 40-70 feet
About the length of those tails right?
[font=Arial,Helvetica][size=-1]
I mean I guess one could say "Well maybe they found fossils back then". But for the notion that the bible is wrong because it doesn't mention dino's is off.[/size][/font]
[font=Arial, Helvetica]
[/font]
Bruh.
Look.
I didn't know things were this off with you.
Dinosaurs in the bible? 2000 years ago? Son. For real?
Like...For real?
How old are you? Seriously. I really need to know this.
Dude, the Romans would have written about them. The Egyptians would have written about them. The Native Americans would have left note about them. The Sumerians? The Greeks? The Chinese? The Pacific Islanders? The norse? Ancient Africans?
The "Deodar Cedar Tree" you referenced isn't even found in the middle east where most of the biblical MYTHOLOGY is said to haven taken place. So how can it refer those those stories? Its found in a portion of the world were most of the religious people were HINDUs.
Enough. Is. Enough.
The bible does not have any dinosaurs in it.
The bible does not talk about dinosaurs.
The bible does not have any scientific or factual basis to it.
On top of that, tell me where our understanding is wrong.
Since you're going to refer to ONE poorly written book in the history of mankind rather than the MILLIONS of texts written to the contrary with combined billions of hours of dedicated research and inquiry spanning both biochemistry, physics, geography, anthropology, and linguistics as well medicine.
Are you telling me that the work of paleontologists around the world can be explained by a vague verse of a book written over a period of 1600 years about a mythical creature?
Tell me why no dinosaurs have never been dated earlier than 2000 years. Where is YOUR evidence?
LOL @ RKOYou gotta be kidding me, and these people expect me to take them seriously
They call other animals by specific names and refer to every single species of dinosaur as behemoths?
- 8,961
- 1,116
- Joined
- May 12, 2008
the last couple of pages were good reads. its refreshing to read about actual earth and life rather than bringing up fables and their inconsistancies in hopes that the theists can read in between the lines to think more lol.
- 1,623
- 36
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
On a spiritual tip, what do you guys think about the Flower of Life, and the theories behind that?
- 3,209
- 12
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2008
About time there was an official thread for this.
I'll read through properly when I have time, but from skimming over the last couple of pages I'm astonished that anyone would genuinely believe humans and dinosaurs co-existed ...I mean it's 2012 for Christ's sake!
I'll read through properly when I have time, but from skimming over the last couple of pages I'm astonished that anyone would genuinely believe humans and dinosaurs co-existed ...I mean it's 2012 for Christ's sake!
- 21,601
- 10,211
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2007
Will read the whole thread later. Skimmed the last 3 pages. Good stuff in here so far.
I personally don't believe in god. I don't take my lack of religion that seriously. I want to grow mentally as much as i can and i feel like religion limits that. Just has too many confines for me.
I personally don't believe in god. I don't take my lack of religion that seriously. I want to grow mentally as much as i can and i feel like religion limits that. Just has too many confines for me.
- 4,812
- 640
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2011
Good stuff sillyputty
- 4,837
- 215
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2010
I'm special, I don't give a damn what sillyputty says.
- 4,812
- 640
- Joined
- Jun 10, 2011
What I have a problem with is the fact that those who do believe in a higher being, are mostly ridiculously closed minded and don't want to hear any
other view points
To them if its not god doing it then no one is doing it
We as a people don't give ourselves enough credit. Hard work and dedication is what gets us as a people to where we are today. Not someone upstairs who has the map to our lives
and supposedly knows what when and how we are going to do everything. Its just not realistic.
What really troubles me is the time I did spend growing up in a christian church and atmosphere I was always told that god is why I have food in my mouth and clothes on my back and that I should thank him
But what about the child that was just born who will never be able to walk or live a normal life because they were born with some type of disease. I just don't think its fair that "god" chooses who
is born healthy and who is not. I just ask those who do believe in god why does your god make a child who hasn't been on earth long enough to sin suffer? What did that child did to anyone?
The only conclusion that I can come to is that there is no god but its just the result of the world and what it has become because the earth we live on is not perfect and we do not help by damaging it even further.
other view points
To them if its not god doing it then no one is doing it
We as a people don't give ourselves enough credit. Hard work and dedication is what gets us as a people to where we are today. Not someone upstairs who has the map to our lives
and supposedly knows what when and how we are going to do everything. Its just not realistic.
What really troubles me is the time I did spend growing up in a christian church and atmosphere I was always told that god is why I have food in my mouth and clothes on my back and that I should thank him
But what about the child that was just born who will never be able to walk or live a normal life because they were born with some type of disease. I just don't think its fair that "god" chooses who
is born healthy and who is not. I just ask those who do believe in god why does your god make a child who hasn't been on earth long enough to sin suffer? What did that child did to anyone?
The only conclusion that I can come to is that there is no god but its just the result of the world and what it has become because the earth we live on is not perfect and we do not help by damaging it even further.
- 29,014
- 4,130
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2004
I left out half of it that contains words like "especially when" and "often" and "usually". And left in the only absolute sentence in the definition.Originally Posted by yngSIMBA
Oh, ok.. If you're gonna join the argument, please do so with some respect my man..
You went and found a single definition of the word religion that will fit your argument, and you conveniently leave out half of it..
From the same source...
[h2]re·li·gion[/h2]
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,
especially when considered as the creationof a superhuman agency or agencies,
usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing amoral
code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Problem?
antonlavey
Banned
- 28,210
- 847
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
I don't, I said those CAN be their set of beliefs... Point being those are a set of beliefs.Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11
I left out half of it that contains words like "especially when" and "often" and "usually". And left in the only absolute sentence in the definition.Originally Posted by yngSIMBA
Oh, ok.. If you're gonna join the argument, please do so with some respect my man..
You went and found a single definition of the word religion that will fit your argument, and you conveniently leave out half of it..
From the same source...
[h2]re·li·gion[/h2]
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,
especially when considered as the creationof a superhuman agency or agencies,
usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing amoral
code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Problem?
Types message, sends message, message goes through, I believed the message would go through, the belief in computer science and technology are my set of beliefs and my religion.
I click play on youtube, song comes on, I believed the song would come on, those are my atheistic beliefs.
sillyputty
Banned
- 3,634
- 21
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2011
I don't, I said those CAN be their set of beliefs... Point being those are a set of beliefs.Originally Posted by fraij da 5 11
I left out half of it that contains words like "especially when" and "often" and "usually". And left in the only absolute sentence in the definition.Originally Posted by yngSIMBA
Oh, ok.. If you're gonna join the argument, please do so with some respect my man..
You went and found a single definition of the word religion that will fit your argument, and you conveniently leave out half of it..
From the same source...
[h2]re·li·gion[/h2]
noun
1.
a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe,
especially when considered as the creationof a superhuman agency or agencies,
usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing amoral
code governing the conduct of human affairs.
Problem?
Believing in the the Big Bang has no bearing on the status of the question of "god"
They are completely separate questions. Its not: "Believe in god or believe in the big bang"...this is an example of a False Dichotomy. There are more than two answers to the comparison, as the two choices aren't directly related.
The notion of the "Big Bang" was actually postulated by a Jesuit priest who actually was a physicist...but its amazing what happens when the mind works with the evidence, and not the conclusion of "god did it"... Jesuits are rather liberal in their definitions of "god" so it can be said that their stance allowed them to make such conjectures overtime.
Issac Newton, as brilliant as he was, was very religious...because of his faith, whenever he encountered things that were on the verge of challenging the existence of god, he completely abandoned them and didn't seek any further. His faith precluded him from taking the time to investigate greater claims.
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,295
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
Its funny how these idiots are supposed atheists and spend a good part of their time on Niketalk defending their idiotic views.
This dude sillyputty posts about other topics JUST to meet his quota to be able to talk about HIS favorite subject, atheism, and how flawed and completely wrong it is.
He is seriously a pest and a grievance to the community. He contributes nothing further than his mechanical argument often repeating the same, tired, public school science curriculum terminology in every rebuttal. It's weak, and exposes the shallowness of western education and his own personal intellect.
You and those who think like you are a waste of human intelligence and the epitome of the same hypocrisy you claim to be so critical of by declaring yourself an 'atheist'.
It makes it even worse when you perceive yourself to be more intelligent than others when you couldn't be MORE wrong.
So why don't you do us all here on NT a favor and kill yourself and find out. Your annoying as hell.
This dude sillyputty posts about other topics JUST to meet his quota to be able to talk about HIS favorite subject, atheism, and how flawed and completely wrong it is.
He is seriously a pest and a grievance to the community. He contributes nothing further than his mechanical argument often repeating the same, tired, public school science curriculum terminology in every rebuttal. It's weak, and exposes the shallowness of western education and his own personal intellect.
You and those who think like you are a waste of human intelligence and the epitome of the same hypocrisy you claim to be so critical of by declaring yourself an 'atheist'.
It makes it even worse when you perceive yourself to be more intelligent than others when you couldn't be MORE wrong.
So why don't you do us all here on NT a favor and kill yourself and find out. Your annoying as hell.
antonlavey
Banned
- 28,210
- 847
- Joined
- Oct 13, 2008
I like to thank Yahweh for all the success I've had till this point in my life. And to my fellow men who have not experienced the same level of success, tough luck. Everything happens for a reason.
I am a slave to Yahweh and atheists eat children on their spare time and no amount of education, thinking or good deeds can change that.
YAHWEEEEH YAHWEEEEH!!!!
I am a slave to Yahweh and atheists eat children on their spare time and no amount of education, thinking or good deeds can change that.
YAHWEEEEH YAHWEEEEH!!!!
- 2,390
- 17
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2008
For all I know some guy on mushrooms wrote the bible
Facts>Fiction
People are afraid to question religion
Stories don't make sense
Facts>Fiction
People are afraid to question religion
Stories don't make sense
b smooth 202
Banned
- 10,295
- 106
- Joined
- Dec 21, 2004
Suspended.
