Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Is Evolution A Crazy Idea?

August 23, 2011 by  

Is Evolution A Crazy Idea?

While making a point about how stupid Americans are, Bill Maher once mockingly said, “Sixty percent of people don’t believe in evolution in this country.” Perhaps Maher should consider supporting Jon Huntsman, who recently tweeted: “To be clear. I believe in evolution and trust scientists on global warming. Call me crazy.”

You’re not crazy, Governor. In fact, I might just agree with you on both points. I, too, trust a lot of scientists on global warming, but they are the ones who have overwhelmed the scientific community with so much hard evidence against the theory of manmade global warming that the whole notion has become something of a joke.

As to evolution, we might have something in common there as well. I found it quite interesting to watch that shameless liberal mom in New Hampshire prompting her little boy to ask Rick Perry about evolution, to which Perry responded: “I hear your mom was asking about evolution. That’s a theory that is out there — and it’s got some gaps in it.”

I don’t have a religious dog in the evolution fight; so from a very young age, I came at the theory of evolution from an intellectual, commonsense point of view. Even though I was predisposed to believing in evolution, what I found when I began reading up on the subject was that virtually every book began with the premise that evolution was a fact. In other words, it appeared that the theory of evolution had been given a dispensation from the requirement to present evidence.

To my surprise, the more I read, the more evolution began to sound like something out of Aesop’s Fables. Inanimate matter “evolving” into an animal, and an animal evolving into a human being? It seemed to me to be an idea that required a size extra-large imagination.

As Guy Murchie pointed out in his book The Seven Mysteries of Life, an intellectual, long-standing argument for a random universe wherein a seeming miracle such as evolution could take place on its own is that, given enough time, anything — including the evolution of human beings from inanimate matter — is possible.

This argument, said Murchie, is based on the premise that if you could sit enough billions of chimpanzees in front of computers for enough billions of years, random chance would allow them to write all the great works of literature.

It’s a fascinating thought until you consider the mathematics involved. There are about 50 possible letters, numbers and punctuation marks on a computer keyboard, and there are 65 character spaces per line in the average book. Therefore, a chimp would have one in 50 chances of getting the first space on the first line correct.

Since the same is true of the second space on that line, the chimp would have one chance in 50 x 50, or 502, of getting both spaces right (meaning just the first two letters of the first word of just one of the great works of literature). For all 65 spaces on the first line, the figure would jump to 5065, which is equal to 10110.

How big is 10110? According to physicist George Gamow, said Murchie, it is 1,000 times greater than the total number of vibrations made by all the atoms in the universe since the Big Bang!

Conclusion: It doesn’t matter how many chimpanzees or how much time you allow, not even one line of one great work could come into existence through pure chance. Given that you are infinitely more complex than a single line in a book, what are the odds that you, with all of your billions of precise, specialized cells, accidentally evolved from “primordial soup” over a period of a few billion years?

Thus, evolution in a random universe — i.e., a universe without a Supreme Power Source — would appear to be a mathematical impossibility. When sold on the basis of “natural selection,” evolution seems to require a leap of faith that takes the brash arrogance of a Bill Maher.

As with such phenomena as wind and gravity, it would seem that the only way evolution could have come into existence is through the work of a Higher Power that is beyond human understanding. Not an old man in the sky, as atheists like to mockingly portray this Power, but an invisible, conscious source of power that man can never hope to comprehend.

The coup de grace for me was when I read a book in the mid-1990s titled Ever Since Darwin, written by Stephen Jay Gould, who was one of the world’s leading paleontologists and evolutionary biologists. Like virtually all pro-evolution authors, in Ever Since Darwin Gould discussed evolution in an a priori fashion — i.e., stated as a fact rather than a theory — yet, when he reached the last page of his book, he felt compelled to state the following:

I hope that… Darwin’s own work will permeate more areas of evolutionary thought, where rigid dogmas still reign as a consequence of unquestioned preference, old habits, or social prejudice. My own favorite target is the belief in slow and steady evolutionary change preached by most paleontologists… The fossil record does not support it; mass extinction and abrupt origin reign [my emphasis].

Gould’s admission that all known evidence suggests that most, if not all, species have suddenly appeared on Earth suddenly stunned me and gave me a great deal of respect for his intellectual honesty. It supported the scientific findings that Cro-Magnon man suddenly and mysteriously appeared, about 40,000 years ago, and populated the Earth “like a bolt of lightning.”

But, Cro-Magnon man’s sudden appearance aside, even if the theory of evolution were ultimately proven to be true beyond a reasonable doubt, there is still the problem of the billions of chimpanzees pecking away at computer keyboards for billions of years; i.e., evolution in a random universe would still appear to be a mathematical impossibility.

That being the case, a religionist has no reason to fear evidence that supports evolution. For it is almost certain that evolution, if there really is such a thing, is not powered by randomness, but by a Supreme Power Source that we can never hope to understand.

This should come as no surprise; because over the past several decades, the chasm between theologians and scientists seems to be narrowing toward a middle-ground belief that science is not in conflict with God, but, rather, is a gift of God.

Having said all this, it is also possible that a Higher Power created both animals and man in pretty much their present forms. The truth is that no one knows, but, to paraphrase Guy Murchie, you are the most improbable collection of molecules in the Universe. Whether you’re an atheist or someone who believes in a Supreme Being, the one thing on which we can all agree is that man does, indeed, exist. That fact alone is either a figurative miracle or a literal miracle; take your pick.

Now, you’ll have to excuse me while I put on my flak jacket and prepare for the backlash that is sure to come from angry readers who either view belief in a Higher Being as a sign of an irrational mind or believe that I’m an apostate for not sticking more closely to scripture. Or, to borrow from Jon Huntsman, just call me crazy.

–Robert Ringer

Robert Ringer

is a New York Times #1 bestselling author and host of the highly acclaimed Liberty Education Interview Series, which features interviews with top political, economic, and social leaders. He has appeared on Fox News, Fox Business, The Tonight Show, Today, The Dennis Miller Show, Good Morning America, The Lars Larson Show, ABC Nightline, and The Charlie Rose Show, and has been the subject of feature articles in such major publications as Time, People, The Wall Street Journal, Fortune, Barron's, and The New York Times. To sign up for his one-of-a-kind, pro-liberty e-letter, A Voice of Sanity, Click Here.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Is Evolution A Crazy Idea?”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • DaveH

    No, Robert, you don’t make me angry. You can believe what you want. All I ask is that you don’t try to force your beliefs on me or my children.
    The monkey on the typewriter is a terrible example, because to write that great American novel would require an extremely improbable sequence of events that I believe would be impossible. But if that monkey typed a word successfully and was made in some manner to know his success, then he would have a building block. The same way we all learn, a little at a time. Over time those successful building blocks could come together to present a much better probability of that novel.
    Before I get started, I want to say that it is entirely possible that intelligent beings from outside our world could have deposited the early people and animals on this earth. But that would not be a necessary event. However, then we would need to explain where those beings came from. Some of us don’t give a damn. We’re just happy that we are here. And it would end there.
    For those of us who do desire to ponder our creation, I think evolution is entirely likely. If you think it improbable, you might want to check out the various unusual varieties of man-bred animals, such as rabbits, or dogs, or cats. These breeds have been created intentionally by man in a very short time period relative to the age of this earth. If these wildly different breeds could be created in such a short period of time, why couldn’t all sorts of variations of creatures have come about naturally over the millions of years that this Earth has existed? And it is a fact that such very different animals as lizards and man have almost identical bone structures. Why is that? My Morman buddy likes to explain that by saying that any engineer tends to create structures that he is familiar with. Maybe, but I don’t buy it.
    First, a person needs to understand the theory of evolution. Most people think in terms of something like a lizard deciding to grow wings so that he becomes a “flying” lizard. That indeed, is pretty ridiculous. But the theory is that radiation or some such thing damages the creature’s chromosome when in embryonic stage, and the newly scrambled chromosome (mutation) results in a slightly (or not so) changed creature. So, the newly hatched lizard may have a membrane stretched between its hand bones and its body (a wing). And if that newly developed characteristic does not result in death (usually does) then that creature can go on to reproduce more of its own kind. Thus a new line of flying lizards has evolved. Much the same way breeders achieve their many different breeds. Each new line of creature comes from a slightly different older version of that creature, both of which can survive simultaneously or maybe one has a more survivable characteristic and thus supplants the other in nature.
    The monkey analogy would be more like if the evolutionists were saying that each new creature started randomly from a single cell. They aren’t saying that. They are talking about gradual changes similar to my flying lizard example.
    But if you think that fantastic, imagine how I feel about a supernatural being (or force) that just came from nowhere (or “always was” as my Morman friend likes to say). That, to me, is much more unbelievable and much more improbable.
    Look, Robert, I don’t care what you believe. In fact I’m glad there are religious people striving to better themselves. I can’t imagine where most people would learn good moral codes if not from religion.
    But I for one do not believe there is a god or an afterlife. And I see no reason for that to diminish our mutual respect.

    • People’s Rights

      One of Robert Ringer’s purposes is promoting Jon Huntsman.
      He’s Obama’s employee (An ambassador to China.)

      “NO FOREIGN POLICY, NO MATTER HOW INGENIOUS HAS ANY CHANCE OF SUCCESS IF IT IS BORN IN THE MINDS OF A FEW AND CARRIED IN THE HEARTS OF NONE.”
      Henry Kissinger

      • Capitalist at Birth

        How is he promoting John Huntsman? I interpret it as mocking John Huntsman.

        • Christin

          That’s how I read/saw it, too, Capitalist… mocking the candidate.

      • newspooner

        Using an inane quote ostensibly credited to Comrade Kissinger does not build credibility with patriots.

      • http://none bob jones

        Anyone who says they believe the scientists on global warming loses all credibility, unless he is talking about the thousands of scientists the media gives no air time to that dispute the admittedly falsified data the global warming alarmists have been dishonestly spewing for years. All they want is a global tax and total control over every aspect of everyone’s lives, forever,what could possibly go wrong there? Most people have figured out it is pure nonsense by now, and don’t need to be lectured by some jet setting millionaire with half a dozen mansions about how much toilet paper we can use, how we should ride a bike instead of driving a car, not waste water on showers and limit our power usage, while they use more in a month than any of us do in a lifetime. It is just about total control, and any politician professing a belief in global warming is either a complete idiot or a complete fraud. By the way these are the same scam artists who told us we were going into an ice age 30 years ago, when that failed to materialize they changed their hoax to global warming, when that was discredited they just called it climate change, ya, we get it, the climate changes, that is what it does if you haven’t noticed, get over yourselves.

        • denniso

          The evolution of life on earth is not random,like the monkeys trying to type any work of literature is,or romance novel for that matter. Evolution uses selection…the changes that work for the benefit of the animal/plant remain and those that don’t fade away. It is more like methodical building blocks being stacked and tried repeatedly.

          I like Ringer showing the nonsensical nature of the monkeys typing literature over enough time through pure chance,and giving us the numbers to show how silly it really is. The point is supposed to be that given an infinite amount of time anything is possible…but what is an infinite amount of time? You can never arrive at it since it goes on and on,by definition,so how would you ever get to a point in time when the monkeys would actually produce a Shakespeare play? You can’t,because like infinity there is no conclusion. It becoames pure nonsense,especially on any sort of human scale or even the time scale of the universe. It’s absurd and nonsensical and pointless.

          Ringer says a couple times that man will never understand this idea of God,who may have set evolution in motion or just plopped man down intact at one point in time. That sort of God is as nonsensical as the monkeys typing up Shakespeare. If we can’t grasp or understand that sort of God,then what’s the point of humans ‘believing’ in it/him/her? How can rational people believe in something they can’t understand? Isn’t that an obvious breach of basic logic? It makes much more sense to believe in a God that can be defined and understood,even if it’s still nonsense on a logical basis. We can say that there must be other life in the universe because of our increasing knowledge about the vastness and the discoveries of other planets. But we still can’t say it’s a fact that there is life out there just because we know the probability is good for it. So how can people say they are absolutely positive that a variously defined or undefined God exists?

          • SC Murf

            denniso get over yourself. All one has to do is to look at the miracles around themselves, please open up your eyes. Have they found life on any other planet yet? NO. Here and right here is where God put man and woman. Man will be his own undoing, he considers himself to be god like and this leads him down the path of evil

            up the hill
            airborne

          • always right

            Sir, your argument is terribly flawed. You seem to beleieve that the value in God is determined by whether or not we understand Him and if we don’t we shouldn’t believe in Him. That would make us the final arbiters of God’s value. This sir, shows a level of arrogance beyond belief. you seem to feel that we’re in a position to judge God by whether or not our cognitive capabilities can grasp His Plan and His Greatness, even though he specifically said that we could not, thereby predicting your arrogance thousands of years before you existed. But let’s follow your line of thinking. I don’t understand liberal nor athiets (but I repeat myself) so therefore, you have no value, don’t exist & I shouldn’t beleive in you, right?

          • DaveH

            I’ll tell you what’s absurd, Denniso. It’s you Liberals, who in the face of vast experiential contrary evidence, still insist that Big Government is the solution to mankind’s problems.
            We can see the results of Big Government right next door (Mexico) and only a few hundred miles off Florida (Cuba). Still Ignorant Liberals insist that their Big Government agenda is going to work.
            For anybody who is not so far gone as Denniso, just look at this list of countries ranked by their economic Freedom. The Freest at the top, the Least Free at the bottom. Investigate those bottom countries and tell me anybody would voluntarily want to live in that kind of country. That’s what Big Government does for countries:
            http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking
            You can pick the individual country links to see how they got their ranking.

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            denniso,

            Evolution is a fact.The Christian and the Jewish God are silly myths.So are those bogus preachers.

            Evolution is both a fact and a theory. Biologists consider the existence of evolution to be a fact in much the same way that physicists do so for gravity. However, …

            http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            denniso

            Aug 23, 2011 · Attention Governor Perry: Evolution is a fact. Q. Texas governor and GOP candidate Rick Perry, at a campaign event this week, told a boy that evolution …

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/…perry-evolution-is-a-fact/2011/08/23/gIQAuIFUYJ_blog.html

          • Bob from SoCal

            OK Denniso,

            If there is nothing else out there, then tell me what are the millions of UFO sightings. What are all these people seeing?

          • Bob from SoCal

            Ok Coal Miner,

            If Evolution is a fact, show me all of the intermediate forms in the fossil record that Darwin said would exist if his “hypothesis” were true. Darwin said if these intermediate forms were not found to discard his theory. It looks to me like your faith is misplaced.

          • Alex

            The interesting thing with the missives of denniso and several other Personal Liberty contributors is that those which stray from the Fright Wing norm tend to be better written, better thought out, more reasonable, and, with the exception of my own, less hysterical.

            When the sheeple of the Right find cogent explosions of Reality in their Myth/Meme Minds they so often regard the writer as some sort of paid ‘instigator’ or ‘troll’, or that the submission has been copied and pasted into th PLD columns.

            Reading denniso (and the other bright writers from the Left) one can see clearly that nothing is ‘copied and pasted’ because they make continual reference to that on which they wish to comment. Does anyone get that?

            I am a Left Wing nut, to be certain, but a believer as well. HAA!!! And NO God would be angry with true Socialism and ANY God would abhor torture and Capitalism and environmental horror—imagine if YOU were God–what the hell would YOU say to Exxon? Come on!!

            Also, to those who say I am somehow “paid” for my writing, please find out whoever it is that is in charge of the checks—they need to get a hold of me!!

          • David M

            To bad Darwin on his death bed admitted evolution was a hoax, Darwin found God to be the creator of all things, after studying the human eye, Darwin cried out there is a God. Of course all the Prof. of the world fell for his hoax, and instead of being embarassed they continued the lie, much like global warming they all fell for that crap, to keep face they continue on,lying instead of admitting to the world thier intellectual morons.

          • Void1972

            Denniso
            If a problem child from an extremely demented and dysfunctional upbringing, extremely anti-American, anti-religion, anti-social mother, father and grand parents can “Evolve” into President of these United States of America, there must be a devil. Only pure and unimaginable evil could bring a thing like the obamanation into an office of such power.
            If evil on such a scale exist, and our current leaders prove it, then there must be a God. Everything in the universe is created from a positive and a negative. God and satan.
            This situation has occurred many times in the past, humans lose their faith, and put their trust in evil men. God just cleanses the world at times like these. If you don’t believe, just look at history. It always repeats.
            God is so real that only those who have “Evolved” into his being can understand truth.
            As far as monkeys writing a book, one never knows. If you told me in 2007 that a black radical communist, with no job experience other then extorting money from banks for the “commi community” and serving the most corrupt state in the union, would become president, I would have told you that
            it is more likely an ape could write Shakespeare before this obamanation would become President.
            One never knows the powers that are.
            God Bless America, and those who fight for her!!!!

          • Donald

            I find it interesting that nearly everyone agrees that climate change exists (goes on) but we have nothing to do with it. The last planet warming took place in the Middle Ages when there were a lot less people in the world. My view is that climate change exists, but it is made worse because of the fact that there are now about 6 Billion more people in the world than there were then. That plus the Industrial Revolution have ADDED to the problem of climate change even if human beings did not CAUSE it. After all there was not much smog in the Middle Ages and one could swim in largely unpolluted streams. In many ways we have fouled our own nest and should stop adding to the problem.

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            Bob from SoCal

            Wrong ,Read below
            Epigetic unraveled:
            Lady Hope lied.
            Charles Darwin’s daughter called his death bed confession not only a myth but down a right lie.

            “. He (Charles Darwin) waved his hand toward the window as he pointed out the scene beyond, while in the other hand he held an open Bible, which he was always studying.
            ‘What are you reading now?’ I asked as I seated myself beside his bedside. ‘Hebrews!’ he answered – ‘still Hebrews. ‘The Royal Book’ I call it. Isn’t it grand?’
            Then, placing his finger on certain passages, he commented on them.
            I made some allusions to the strong opinions . . . on the history of the Creation . . .
            He seemed greatly distressed, his fingers twitched nervously, and a look of agony came over his face as he said: “I was a young man with unformed ideas. I threw out queries, suggestions, wondering all the time over everything, and to my astonishment, the ideas took like wildfire. People made a religion of them.”
            Then he paused, and after a few more sentences on “the holiness of God” and the ‘grandeur of this book,” . . . he suddenly said:”She Lied.

            However Charles’ daughter Henrietta Litchfield upon hearing this had this to say.

            “I was present at his deathbed, Lady Hope was not present during his last illness, or any illness. I believe he never even saw her, but in any case she had no influence over him in any department of thought or belief. He never recanted any of his scientific views, either then or earlier. We think the story of his conversion was fabricated in the U.S.A. … …The whole story has no foundation what-so-ever.”

            And this from his son Francis.

            “Lady Hope’s account of my father’s views on religion is quite untrue. I have publicly accused her of falsehood, but have not seen any reply. My father’s agnostic point of view is given in my Life and Letters of Charles Darwin, Vol. I., pp. 304–317. You are at liberty to publish the above statement. Indeed, I shall be glad if you will do so.”

          • hicusdicus

            Bobfromsocal. What are all of these thousands of UFO sightings. It just means that thousands of people have smoked some good weed. You should try it. There could be some benefit in it for your thinking abilities.

          • Simian Pete

            denniso,

            Jesus Christ – God incarnate. There is a logical definition of God. “And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us…”. This is God in the time/space continuum – a definition of who God is and God at the same time. You can read about this in Gospel of John – starting in the first chapter …

            The Creator as defined in Genesis 1:1 – in the original Hebrew as the “Tev Aleph” characters at the end of the verse – defined as the “Word” in Johns Gospel, then further defined in John’s Book “Revelation of Jesus Christ” as the
            “ALpha Omega” – the defining “Word” who “tabernacled” in the “flesh” — aka Jesus Christ….

            So this is the logic , denniso, of the Creator’s existence and His definition of who He is …

          • Altaica

            Simian Pete-
            Only Christians believe Jesus was god. And I think that you need more than a document written by men, that contradicts itself everywhere, and was voted on by men (The Nicean council) as to what it contains is not really the most accurate source of proof. The Bible also states, “Greater things than I have done you will do.” This is a quote of Jesus’ words. If he was indeed the ultimate creator, then how would it be possible for us to do greater things them him?

            Everything that he has done as stated in the Bible are feats accomplish-able by the most skilled and powerful shamans (mystics, medicine men, etc). Also in the bible Jesus states that he is sub-oordinate to god, which means he is not wholly the creator, but a child of the creator as all are believed to be. I can buy that he was a great man, accomplished of many great feats, but that he is 100% your god I can’t. If that were so then he would not have made some of the assertions that he did. Like humans are want to, they put their heroes on a pedestal and worship them as a god.

            God made flesh in Jesus is not an absolute truth. That is a philosophy shared by some Christians. In fact many Christians believed as I do that Jesus was suboordinate to God and not god. Of course other Christians burned their fellow Christians at the stake even though it is a valid belief. (Encylcopedia of Heretics and Heresies by Crofton)

            In the end the Bible’s words contradict each other in so many places that it cannot be considered a reliable source of information. I am sure there are some truths within it’s pages, but the Apostles, read the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John. Cannot even agree on Jesus birth. The two Gospels that speak of it contradict each other so much that it makes your head spin. In addition to that you leave out the Gospel of Thomas, Mary, Philip, and Judas. The Nicean council also voted to leave out another of other books from the Bible. I see the Bible more as a published compendium of various authors works and interpretations of what was happening at the time. If 10 people witness an event and you ask each person what they saw you will get 10 different stories. As the bible is written by men recalling what they have seen it is inherently flawed.

          • Simian Pete

            Altaica,

            It doesn’t really matter… some believe, some don’t. It comes to a matter of Faith in the end. Where is Reason after the grave ? None of our mortal senses function after we are dead ! ?

            The Bible was written a long time ago, not completed unto the end of the 1st century. These writers acted as a sort of secretary for God. God helped them remember and the authors used their own language, common references and view of the cosmos. The meaning in what they said is important – indeed ! It just seems to me that it would be ABSURD not to accept the Bible’s meaning.

            The purpose is conveying a message to mankind. That includes communicating sufficiently to ancient man (with his limited understanding of science/technology). You would expect a more modern, scientific/technologically advance society would figure this out.

            The question for you Altaica, is hubris the reason why you don’t believe ?

            Hubris !

          • denniso

            You ask if it’s hubris that allows us non believers to not take the bible seriously as the word of any god. It’s not hubris,but rather our use of intellect and rationality that shows the bible to be just a flawed book written by some of the few slightly educated men of the time.

            Why did the omnipotent God need to use men to write the bible,over hundreds of yrs? Couldn’t he just snap his fingers,write a book in a second and really show the people,even nonbelievers,that he was indeed real? You people are living the biggest mass delusion in human history,and instead you absolutely think you have all the truth…of course that’s what delusion is.

          • simian pete

            denniso,

            “In the beginning was the Word (Logic)” .. John 1:1

            “all things(Reality) were made through Him” .. John 1:3

            “And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” .. John 1:14

            You can’t have Reason without Logic and Reality …

            You can’t have Reality without a Creator …

            All reality was created by Jesus Christ .

            Do you understand the argument ? God also went another step further to communicate with mankind. He was among us in a physical body. You say snap of His fingers ? Quite !

            Is it hard to accept Reason is based on the axiom of God’s existence ?

          • hicusdicus

            The most likely reason Altaica does not believe is because she is not stupid!

        • Don

          bob jones,, EXACTLY !!!!

          • eddie47d

            There is no exactly and the world is constantly evolving. Global warming is not absolute but the reality of what is going on around us is irrefutable. There may be other factors involved but to deny it doesn’t make for good judgement either.

          • vicki

            77 degrees in Aug here in Northern Ca. I think I may like this global warming.

          • JeffH

            vicki, which area are you in? I’m down in Fresno but was raised and lived most of my in the East Bay Area. California weather is tough to beat.

          • Kate8

            Vicki – I’m in Northern CA, as well.

            The temperature has been heavenly this summer. My peas are still producing!

          • Alex

            Reich Wingers always confuse ‘climate’ and ‘weather’.

          • vicki

            Alex says:
            “Reich Wingers always confuse ‘climate’ and ‘weather’.”

            Left wingers always confuse Government and God. What was your point?

          • denniso

            The country is experiencing the hottest summer on record,using average temps across all 50 states…Okla has been the hottest and also the highest average temps for them on record. Okla,Tx are still in a record drought and continuing heat wave. What will it take for the rightwing to accept that we are already experiencing global warming and climate change and that it will get worse? Do we have to resemble Mercury and Venus before that happens?

          • vicki

            Northern Ca is experiencing the coolest Aug in recent memory. When are liberals going to accept that global climate really does include the whole globe?

            More interesting when are liberals going to accept that man didn’t do it and playing around with the likes of CO2 instead of H20 (the big factor in heat absorption) is just idle toying with reality. Well actually an opportunity to grab power for bigger government.

            http://www.geocraft.com/WVFossils/greenhouse_data.html
            (For those interested in disenting opinion the search terms I used where
            “co2 vs h20 global warming” (no ” in google or start page)

          • vicki

            @JeffH Heart of the liberal beast. SF Bay Area.

          • hicusdicus

            When I was a toddler living in Oklahoma city the summer temperatures regularly hit 105 and in the winter the snow would remain intact on the ground for a month. So what is the big deal. Its just climate change that could reverse its self at any time. I wonder if somebody is trying to make money by causing hysteria?

        • http://selfhealinghypnosis.net Patricia

          Finally, the truth! How refreshing.

        • Bud Tugly

          Look at satellite photos of melting ice at the poles and melting glaciers. The evidence of climate change is obvious to anyone willing to pull their heads out of the dark and see.

          Climate change deniers are like those in the 1500s who could not accept the truth that the earth is not the center of the universe.

          Adam and Eve did not ride to church on dinosaurs 4000 years ago and were not likely to have been lured out of Paradise by a talking snake.

          There are many profound truths in the Bible, but literal interpretation is an insult top the intelligence that God gave us.

          • DaveH

            We’re not talking about Climate Change. We’re talking about Manmade Global Warming which is a hoax perpetrated by Leaders who by nature strive for more power. For some deep science read this:
            http://www.drroyspencer.com/research-articles/satellite-and-climate-model-evidence/

          • DaveH

            Of course Climate Changes. Nobody in their right mind would argue that it doesn’t. The question is how much effect does man have on that climate change? The amount, if any, has been greatly exaggerated by those Leaders seeking more power and perks at the citizens’ expense. Homogenic Global Warming is strictly a political football whose proof lies only with man-made fallible computer models. None of those models have produced projections that have actually been met years later by empirical evidence. For exhaustive references, see here:
            http://climatedepot.com/

          • Crispin
          • sybucket

            I don’t think any thinking person denies Global Warming, however the question is , is ManKind responsible? I say no, that it is a natureal occurance. I base my position on History. The Mini-Ice age in the 14th century, long before the industrial revolution. The Viking Sagas telling of sailing AROUND Greenland Circa 1000 ad, which they could not have done if the Ocean was frozen and then reinforced by the demise of the Vikings in Greenland when the world got cloder.

            ….And frankly, I don’t belive in God. I do believe in evolution, in what ever form it takes. WAAAAYYY to many people have died in the name of religion for there to be a God, unless he’s one peverse SOB who enjoys stiring the pot just for stiring the pot’s sake.

          • denniso

            It’s really pretty simple…we humans have the ability to tip the natural balance of gases in the upper atmosphere and create effects that are not ‘natural’ or slow. For those who chose to ignore logic and science and deny that humans can and have produced global warming,why don’t you examine why we are experiencing rising temps and melting glaciers and ice sheets…what natural mechanism is causing it? Do you not think that scientists have looked at all possibilities for a cause other than man? People like DaveH are forced to come up w/ the largest conspiracy theory in the history of the entire world for their denial to exist…almost all countries in the world are in on the hoax in order to further their individual lust for more power…wow!! sunspots,earth tilt,voodoo? Science has ruled out other possible causes for warming. We have been pumping trillions of tons of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere for more than 100 yrs…how could that not have an effect on the earth?

          • DaveH

            What is the most prevalent green house gas by far? Water vapor of course. What happens when the oceans warm? More water vapor of course. If the Global Warming Alarmists’ theories were sound, what would keep the water vapor and the resulting warming from increasing hand in hand until the earth was fried like a potato? Clearly there are complex mechanisms in place that prevent that spiraling occurrence. As I said, there are no empirical studies that are conducted AFTER the predictions of the computer models that match the results predicted by those models. If there were, you can bet that Denniso would be providing us with references to prove such. That’s a joke. Denniso never provides references because it would be much too difficult for him to find references to support his conjecture.
            Instead he must use the emotional manipulative Liberal tools of ridicule, double-speak, unsupported facts, and personal attacks.

            Denniso says “why don’t you examine why we are experiencing rising temps”.
            Well, I might if we were:
            http://climatedepot.com/a/9435/Oh-My-2010-tied-for-hottest-year-Relax-it-is-purely-a-political-statement–Even-NASAs-Hansen-admits-it-is-not-particularly-important–Prof-mocks-hottest-decade-claim-as-a-joke

          • DaveH
          • DaveH
          • DaveH

            The man largely responsible for bringing some reality to the Homogenic Global Warming table:
            http://cei.org/expert/christopher-c-horner

          • Bob from SoCal

            Mankind contributes less than 1% of the the Earths’ Greenhouse gases. If mankind shut down all polluting industries on the entire planet, the Earths’ climate would hardly know the difference. You global warming freaks give mankind to much credit.

          • Jay

            Whether most scientists outside climatology believe that global warming is happening is less relevant than whether the climatologists do. A letter signed by over 50 leading members of the American Meteorological Society warned about the policies promoted by environmental pressure groups.

            “The policy initiatives derive from highly uncertain scientific theories. They are based on the unsupported assumption that catastrophic global warming follows from the burning of fossil fuel and requires immediate action. We do not agree.” Those who have signed the letter represent the overwhelming majority of climate change scientists in the United States, of whom there are about 60. McMichael and Haines quote the 1995 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is widely believed to “prove” that climate change induced by humans has occurred.The original draft document did not say this. What happened was that the policymakers’ summary (which became the “take home message” for politicians) altered the conclusions of the scientists.

            This led Dr Frederick Seitz, former head of the United States National Academy of Sciences, to write, “In more than sixty years as a member of the American scientific community … I have never witnessed a more disturbing corruption of the peer-review process than the events that led to this IPCC report.”

            Policymaking should be guided by proved fact, not speculation. Most members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change believe that current climate models do not accurately portray the atmosphere-ocean system. Measurements made by means of satellites show no global warming but a cooling of 0.13°C between 1979 and 1994.5 Furthermore, since the theory of global warming assumes maximum warming at the poles, why have average temperatures in the Arctic dropped by 0.88°C over the past 50 years?

            http://www.bmj.com/content/316/7138/1164.1.full

          • William

            For millions years CO2 concentration was under .25% then for 150 years
            it rose to .4% and you say it is natural? And for last 100 years level of ocean has risen for about 7″. Yes at the Carbon period air was hardly breathable and it was much hotter then now but significant changes usually took many thousands years. Changes today are too fast to
            be natural. As for evolution – today world could be result of evolution
            but it does not explain where universe came from. As about creator – where is creator came from.

          • David M

            Hey global moron, did you know that one volcano eruption produces more pollution than all of man can create in a 100 years? So with that said, God has made this earth able to clean itself, no matter what, B.P oil spill was cleaned up by nature not man. So go find a hole to stick your head in like an orafice of the body.

          • Jay

            Volcanos, oceans, earthquakes, stars all produce co2′s, and in massive amounts. Meaning, high levels of co2′s are critical to the life of the planet, and all life on the planet. The left-wing, environmentalists, who have been totally duped by the power structures, posing as legitimate scientist, would like nothing more to reduce co2 level to the point of starving the planet, and all life on the planet, to extinction! We can reduce man-made co2′s to zero, but no doubt mother nature would be sure to make up for the difference. It seems the left-wing double talking, scientifically ignorant, and politically driven donkeys fail to note Providential fore-thought. Ha!

          • denniso

            Volcanos are not a significant source of CO2, the oceans absorb CO2 rather than produce it. You people who continue to deny climate change don’t know what you’re talking about…you don’t read the science because you don’t understand it,yet you feel entitled to challenge what the scientists say. Do you challenge any other science that you can’t understand? String theroy? Special Relativity? General Relativity? Big Bang? It’s the rightwing clueless class that is playing politics w/ the science at the bidding of corporate America,who don’t want to see their massive profits decrease if they are forced to stop filling the atmosphere w/ crap. Pathetic,self serving fat cats…

          • Jay

            Carbon dioxide (CO2)

            Volcanoes release more than 130 million tonnes of CO2 into the atmosphere every year. This colorless, odorless gas usually does not pose a direct hazard to life because it typically becomes diluted to low concentrations very quickly whether it is released continuously from the ground or during episodic eruptions. But in certain circumstances, CO2 may become concentrated at levels lethal to people and animals. Carbon dioxide gas is heavier than air and the gas can flow into in low-lying areas; breathing air with more than 30% CO2 can quickly induce unconsciousness and cause death. In volcanic or other areas where CO2 emissions occur, it is important to avoid small depressions and low areas that might be CO2 traps. The boundary between air and lethal gas can be extremely sharp; even a single step upslope may be adequate to escape death.

            CO2 trapped in depressions can be lethal to people and animals
            When a burning piece of cloth is lowered into a hole that has a high concentration of CO2, the fire goes out. Such a condition can be lethal to people and animals.

            Air with 5% CO2 causes perceptible increased respiration; 6-10% results in shortness of breath, headaches, dizziness, sweating, and general restlessness; 10-15% causes impaired coordination and abrupt muscle contractions; 20-30% causes loss of consciousness and convulsions; over 30% can cause death (Hathaway et. al., 1991).

          • hicusdicus

            Global warming was caused by Al Gore opening his mouth to explain to us why we need carbon taxes.

          • Kate8

            Jay – That’s why we have trees and plants.

          • Altaica

            sybucket-

            If you read Numbers I would say you hit the nail on the head. But I don’t personally believe in the Christian/Jewish/Muslim God myself, and that is one of the reasons why. To me and all loving creator would not give support to the killing of thousands in their name.

          • denniso

            Jay,and other climate science deniers…there is something like 750 BILLION tons of CO2 released into the atmosphere and absorbed by plants and the ocean per yr. So,if volcanos spew 130 MILLION tons,let’s do the math…that means that volcanos spew .025% of the total amount of CO2. I rest my case! That’s why reading and learning science is important,so that a single number can be put into perspective and not used out of context.

            Here’s a good link about the skepticism on climate change and why human activity is relevant.Do yourself a favor and read it…it won’t hurt you!

            http://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm

          • Matt Newell

            Climate change CAN BE made by man! It is NOT the carbon dioxide that causes it though — it is mans way of changing his environment that does cause the changes. The current example (which may be what is causing everything going on right now) is the Three Dams project in China. If you make a BIG body of water it will adsorb and release heat much differently than the land that was originally there did. This causes the wind movements to change how they circle the Earth. This in turn causes the winds to adsorb and release water differently then it previously did. Thus we have cooler weather in some places and drought in others. The cause is the changes made on the other side of the world. Multiply this by the number of things man is doing to improve his environment and we DO have man made climate change. But how could the high priests make any money if it is being caused by Governments? It can’t, so they make it caused by common gases which people exhale and plants use to grow (shows you how stupid people are to not realize this is a scam when the facts are right there in front of them).

        • Altaica

          to Simian Pete

          The question for you Altaica, is hubris the reason why you don’t believe ?

          No, the reason I don’t believe is because the bible contradicts itself constantly. The reason I don’t believe is because I know the bible was written by men, edited by men and voted on by men as to what it would contain. The imperfection of man has made the bible a mishmash of stories that often contradict each other require a lot of comparing and contrasting to find the commonalities and discern where the message is and what is the point and what is someone inserting their bias. By doing this research and comparing and contrasting it is painfully clear just how much of the bible mirrors and takes from other religions. Much of the Bible mirrors or parallels the Sumerian mythos so completely that it is clear that the work is a monotheistic view of a polytheist religion that came before it.

          Hubris as you say is something that all humans are capable of, you included. It is hubris that makes the Christian faith say they are the only true religion and the only path to walk. Yet the very first commandment states “Thou shalt have no other Gods before me, for your god is a named Jealous and is a jealous god.” This very commandment indicates, in as you say your gods own words, that there are more gods then him. If there are other gods, then there are other beliefs that are just as viable as your own. By the very admittance, he cannot be the ONE, because he acknowledges other gods. He may well be the creator of your lineage of humans, but he is not necessarily everyone’s. There were gods around before him, and sons and daughters of gods. There are gods that are older then him. By the admission to that he is jealous he admits he is flawed. If he was the one true creator would he not be without flaw?

          So, Simian, you see, I cannot believe an inherently flawed god is the sole creator of all life. Do I believe that the god exists? I believe many deities exist. While I believe these beings influenced our world and our people, I do not believe they are the ONE. They are subordinate to the one, including your god. The Divine Creative Energy is what I believe in. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only transformed. Energy must have always existed following this proven law of science. Therefore a sexless power, that of energy brought forth the spark to all life. From that power we were given some of that energy for it must have been transformed in order for us to have it and have our spirit/ soul which is expressed as an energy. Energy is natural, neutral, balanced. There is no good/ or evil. There is no one or the other. It is pretty sound that energy exists. I have not heard anyone say that energy does not exist. One only need to think and fire the energy between your neurons to see the validity.

          Not hubris, natural balance is the reason I do not worship you god. I give my praise and love to a higher power, a balanced power, that of the very core of nature. I was able to find my truth without another person telling me what to believe. All I need do is look at the world around me, reflect and meditate and it becomes very clear. You are welcome to believe as you do and continue to follow Jealous. That is the path you feel is right for you.

          I will follow my path. After all, 60,000 years of human life is a better track record than 6 to 8,000. “I came upon two paths in the wood and I set upon the road less traveled” A line of a poem that sums it up.

    • Keno

      Dave,
      I don’t think anyone disputes the idea of evolution or change within a species–all we have to do is look at all the different breeds of domestic dogs which, I’m told, are all descended from the grey wolf.

      (Then again, behind all of these dog breeds was an intelligent designer, i.e. the dog breeder.)

      My problem is with the whole macro-evolutionary thing (amino acid => single cell => multi-cell => invertebrate => vertebrate => intelligence).

      While I see the reasoning behind the idea of micro mutation-as-an-evolutionary-mechanism, I don’t see it working in reality. In other words, it’s only in the comic books that getting blasted by radiation turns you into a superhero; in the real world you just get cancer and die.

      • Altaica

        Keno,
        A better example would be the domestic cat. It is the only species acknowledged outside of humans to have domesticated itself. The Siamese cat breed came about with no human interaction. As there were no wildcats for the cats to breed back to it developed the pointed coloration we are familiar with. The points protect the extremities by allowing the animal to absorb more heat in the more vulnerable areas. Another example is the Maine Coon. This is another breed of cat that evolved on it’s own to suite the environment. Those that know the breed know that it has large snowshoe like paws, a thick double layer coat and these are big cats. Both breeds developed independently of human intervention, but in response to their environments.

        • Bob from SoCal

          The fact is that they are still just cats.

          • William

            Average time to create a new species – about 11 million years

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Intelligent Design?

        • DonnieB

          Ah, the First Cause argument. Who designed the Designer?

          • TML

            Indeed

          • Bob

            The who designed the designer question is based on flawed logic. God created time. We are constrained by time. We think that everything must reside within time. God is outside of time and is not bound by it. He does not have a beginning or an end like we do. We have a hard time imagining anything outside of time. That question is very hard for us to understand the answer.

          • TML

            @Bob – I like that you are trying, but the question is actually based on very sound logic. Intelligent Design BEGS the question “Who designed the designer?” “What caused the first cause?”

          • Kate8

            TML – Who designed the designer?

            You think you get around that question by eliminating the idea of a “First Cause” or a “Supreme Intelligence”?

            It still doesn’t answer when or how life first began. If life just always was, then you would have to allow that there could be a Creator Who Always Has Been, Is Now, and Ever Shall Be. The two concepts are not separable.

            If you hold that we were star-seeded, which I find entirely likely, you still come back to the same question. We live in a Universe teeming with life, and the nature of Life is to grow and expand. No matter how far back you go, the question is not answered.

            What if all life forms were encoded at their inception to be as they are? What if we didn’t evolve, but were simply created differently?

            What if ancient cro-magnan were a prototype themselves or, perhaps, chimera? Science is now in the process of creating chimera. Since species cannot cross-breed in nature, they must be created by genetic manipulation. They are, therefore, abominations to nature.

            If you want to know how something works, observe how anything works. All things are geometry, and follow the same patterns, repeating from the smallest to the largest, from smaller than an atom to larger than a universe, all in perfect, impossibly-designed precision.

            Our bodies, our cells, have intelligence. They respond to OUR signals. Thus, to them, we are as gods. Does it not follow that we, as intelligent beings, also respond to a Larger Intelligence?

          • TML

            @ Kate8 – “You think you get around that question by eliminating the idea of a “First Cause” or a “Supreme Intelligence”?”

            I’m not sure I completely understand your question. I haven’t tried to get around any question. If someone wants to claim a supreme intelligence as the designer, then naturally it begs the question, “who designed the designer”. If the one making the claim can not answer this, that isn’t my fault. I haven’t tried to get around anything. I seek the answers by asking the questions.

            “It still doesn’t answer when or how life first began.”

            I agree. That is entirely up for debate.

            “If life just always was, then you would have to allow that there could be a Creator Who Always Has Been,… No matter how far back you go, the question is not answered.”

            We agree again. If one believes life or the universe just simply “is” or has always existed… it would be no different than accepting that a god just “is” … with no questioning. In retrospect… if you believe that life had a beginning, then it may be entirely possible to answer the question of when and how.

            “We live in a Universe teeming with life”

            While I certainly believe that could be true, and find it folly to suggest that life doesn’t exist elsewhere… we have, to date, found no other life outside of this planet.

            “Our bodies, our cells, have intelligence. They respond to OUR signals. Thus, to them, we are as gods. Does it not follow that we, as intelligent beings, also respond to a Larger Intelligence?”

            I guess at this point we would have to define what you mean by “intelligence”, before I could properly answer.

          • Kate8

            TML – LOL. I don’t expect any answers from you. None of us have answers to these questions, but only theories, because, at this point in our existence, these things are unknowable.

            Yet, in our arrogance, we make pronouncements which are borne of nothing but complete lack of understanding, as if our beliefs had any meaning at all.

            Have you ever gazed up into the night sky, and got an idea of just how small we are, how totally insignificant, in the scope of things?
            Have you felt the awe, thinking about the mysteries of the vastness of our universe, and considered that the stars you see are vastly bigger than our own sun, and millions of miles away? Maybe billions?
            I find that gives a bit of perspective.

            “God” cannot be known with the mind, but only through the spirit. Our mind is attuned to the physical world. How do we know we are spirit? Well, that is something to which we must be attuned, also, or we have no sense of it. Frequencies…

            When you listen to the radio, you hear the station to which you are attuned, but that does not mean that the others do not exist. You just have no awareness of them.

            Beliefs are of the mind, and they are as many and varied as there ideas which the mind can generate. It is when we realize that the answers to our questions will only come through an open heart which can resonate with the higher realms that we get an idea of how utterly clueless we are.

          • TML

            @ Kate8
            “I don’t expect any answers from you.”

            If you are not interested in my answers, then why are you questioning me? Or are you just here to preach, and expect me to just listen?

            “None of us have answers to these questions, but only theories, because, at this point in our existence, these things are unknowable.”

            No argument there.

            “Yet, in our arrogance, we make pronouncements which are borne of nothing but complete lack of understanding, as if our beliefs had any meaning at all.”

            I don’t believe that to be the case in every instance. We do make pronouncements based on patient and exact observations of the phenomenon. This is not arrogance; however, I do not deny that some will take these observations and wildly jump to conclusions, on occasion. “Beliefs” are not necessarily based on logic or reason of any kind.

            “Have you ever gazed up into the night sky, and got an idea of just how small we are, how totally insignificant, in the scope of things?
            Have you felt the awe, thinking about the mysteries of the vastness of our universe, and considered that the stars you see are vastly bigger than our own sun, and millions of miles away? Maybe billions? I find that gives a bit of perspective.”

            Yes… but perspective is the key word there.

            ““God” cannot be known with the mind, but only through the spirit.”

            Why not? And how do you know this of the “unknowable”? What you suggest is that one must abandon all reason, to accept your notion of God.

            “How do we know we are spirit? Well, that is something to which we must be attuned, also, or we have no sense of it. Frequencies…”

            Ah… I see… you’re questions are meant to be rhetoric.

            “It is when we realize that the answers to our questions will only come through an open heart which can resonate with the higher realms that we get an idea of how utterly clueless we are.”

            Listen to what you just said… “When we realize that the answers to our questions will only come through an open heart… …we get an idea of how utterly clueless we are”. How can you expect to get the right answers, if you don’t first ask the right questions? Confidence, doesn’t come from having all the answers… it comes from being open to all the questions.

          • vicki

            God knows that when I meet him/her that I am going to ask that question (from whence did you come? :) )

            None the less I have 2 paradigms to help understand the concept of unknowable. First off until very recently the idea that all of creation is vibration was thought to be new (actually old) age fantasy. However we now have theory that seems to support the assertion that all really is vibration (see string theory).

            Now for the examples of unknowable. Think about your next or just previous dream. There you are in a world (for me it is just like this one) with laws of physics etc. People and animals and things to interact with. Even friends and lovers.

            Go up to one of them and prove the existence if RL. If you find yourself lucid dreaming you can perform miracles for them but how would that prove the existence of 3+ dimensions totally not part of the 3 dimensions (or 4 etc) of the world you created in your dream.

            If any of you have played VR (virtual reality) Games or even MMO type games (World of Warcraft, Everquest etc) Log into the game and go up to an NPC (non player char) and prove to him/her that RL exists and that they are nothing more than software bits in a computer somewhere.

            Ignore for the moment that the NPC could not comprehend what you are saying.

            For a third example go watch the movie “the thirteenth floor”.
            http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0139809/

          • Kate8

            TML – Wow. You are a nasty creature, aren’t you?

            It’s called CONVERSATION. I wasn’t asking questions of you expecting that you would know the answer. You don’t. I don’t. This I do know. But I find it fun to exchange ideas with those who have vision, and who aren’t completely focused strictly on the tangible.

            Silly me. I should have known better. I won’t make the same mistake again.

            Have a nice rest of the day.

          • Bob from SoCal

            An eternal being does not need a designer, or a creator it is eternal.

          • Bob from SoCal

            Hello TML,
            Where your argument about not being able to know God falls apart, or that it is impossible to know God is that God reveals himself to us. Just because you are to blind to see what is in front of you don’t discredit the rest of us.

          • denniso

            If we create a God that is ultimately unknowable,can do anything we say it can,is not bounded by any laws of the universe so is outside time,then there are no questions to be asked… because this super God takes care of everything,answers all questions and needs no creator. A pretty handy God,much more so than the rather paltry ones of the Greeks and Romans who had flaws and foibles. This new God wraps up everything neatly,partly because we have made it also unknowable…we can’t even know what it knows because it is so beyond us mere humans.

            On the other hand,if we try to make this God even a little bit logical,we quickly run into problems w/ it. That’s how the believers get around all questions…a total lapse in logic.

          • vicki

            Denniso writes:
            “On the other hand,if we try to make this God even a little bit logical,we quickly run into problems w/ it. That’s how the believers get around all questions…a total lapse in logic.”

            You can no more make God logical than you could make the big bang. Logic is a tool of our minds that helps us to understand all that is (God’s wonderful and aweful creation)

            If you bother to look up this thread you will find where I offer 2 / 3 paradigms that logically explain how it can be that God is unprovable and unknowable.

            They are not proofs but patterns of thought that help explain concepts including but not limited to other sets of 3 dimensions that have no geometric intersection with the 3 we think of as “real”.

          • hicusdicus

            The only thing god created was a bunch of morons who can’t agree on anything and can’t get along with each other.

      • Daniel

        I agree. Evolutionist claim to be scientists however, in order to continue their beliefs, they have to totally ignore Newton’s law of thermodynamics which paraphrasing, Every chemical reaction when completed reverts to the next “lower” order (not higher.) So how does that LAW support the notion that everything moves up the scale to a higher order?

        • DonnieB

          Another True Believer. He mis-applies the Law of Thermodynamics to fit his needs. Mr TheRealBob, you should try reading some science NOT your pastor mangling the words of scientists throughout the world.

          Gravity is a theory as well. Anyone of you care to claim that gravity isn’t real just because it a a theory? Science certainly is not perfect but it is the best way to understand the natural world around us.

          Although I tend to agree with many of the statements from Personal Liberty Alerts, claims of a magic Sky Daddy (BTW which one of the 10,000 – 20,000 gods do you believe in?) is not something that a reasonable person should take ‘on faith’. But then again, that is all you have when you make these claims of knowledge. Mr Ringer is trying to have it both ways saying Jon Huntsman believes in God (I assume that too) and that he can believe in Evolution too. It is difficult to see how one can compartmentalize one’s belief in the supernatural and claim to believe in the natural world.

          I do agree with the the global warming skeptics. The politics are undeniable. There are hucksters and shysters everywhere. Science is not blameless either. Some people like having that money come to them because they make public statements of belief regardless of the veracity of their arguments.

          Even religion has given up on many of their claims that “God did it”. Does any TV preacher says that God creates lightening or the Earth is the center of the Universe anymore. Religion has been on its heels since real science began. More scientific discoveries will require them to retreat to the position of “God of the smaller and smaller Gaps”.

          • SC Murf

            God our heavenly father gave us free choice of which we use every day. All that choose to believe that there is no God are using their free choice, but your disbelief does not change the fact one bit that God is. He will not make you believe cause that isn’t the way He wants you, but on the day of judgement it will be over, no more choice, you have already made yours

            up the hill
            airborne

          • TML

            @SC Murf – So you don’t believe in pre-destination? And if so, how is that compatible with free choice?

          • ggsully

            DonnieB you are actually wrong. It is the Law of gravity, the not the theory of gravity. Science 101 would tell you that a theory is an idea that has yet to be fully proven, where a law is proven. Now, just because it is a theory does not mean that it is not true, just not proven. I think this is the bigger point. You could say that belief in God is a theory as well.

          • vicki

            “It is difficult to see how one can compartmentalize one’s belief in the supernatural and claim to believe in the natural world.”

            There is no need to compartmentalize. Just because man has tried to limit the natural world does not mean that the natural world will fit into that tidy box. Supernatural like magic is merely natural and not yet understood.

            The existence of evolution is not proof that God does not exist. God (if exists) would be perfectly capable of creating the laws that govern the interactions that we see as evolution.

            For me in fact the existence of evolution, the existence of such an array of “just so” laws that work together to allow life as we know it to even exist argue strongly in favor of the existence of God.

            The full and glorious nature of this being is beyond my current comprehension but that does not stop me from wondering about it and exploring all that is.

          • Kate8

            Vicki – I agree. Regardless of how we came into being, it doesn’t invalidate the existence of a Supreme Intelligence Who established such perfect order and set the Laws of the universe in motion.

            I find it fascinating how it is found that certain sounds done on sand and metal shavings cause them to organize into specific shapes. This shows how frequencies cause substance to react geometrically, taking form and forming shapes. Every thing vibrates with its own unique frequency.

            God SPOKE form into existence.

            I KNOW that Divine Intelligence exists. I can’t prove it to anyone, as it must be discovered by each person responding to the call of Spirit. It can’t be taught, learned or discerned by the mind. It’s inexplainable.

          • Bob from SoCal

            Hey Donnie,
            You just said that the argument that the 2nd law of thermodynamics being ignored by biologists is a fraud, without supporting your statement. It is true that all other sciences support the 2nd law, except for evolutionists.

        • eddie47d

          The Bible teaches that the earth is 4,000 years old .Some say 6,000 years old. Maybe that is when present day man arrived by the hand of God. That still doesn’t explain the thousands of dinosaur bones and evidence of man that has been found. Dating back hundreds of thousands of years and possibly millions of years. Somewhere man evolved from a slouching hairy creature to a mostly hairless, upright talking being that we are now.Faith is terrific and shouldn’t be discouraged but so many shun the thought that the earth is much older. Closed minds seldom produce positive results whether on the beginning of man or even global warming.

          • Bob

            I find closed minds on the side of “there is no God”. The Bible does not teach that the Earth is 4k or 6k years old.The 8k figure is based on a flawed reading of the Bible. Genesis states a lineage of mankind. It says that one man was the father of another and gives the number of years. If we add those up, we come to a figure of 6k years. The flawed reading comes in where we read that father is translated as father is as father today. They meant ancestor of. So that could mean father or great, great grandfather. It probably meant that the man listed was the most prominent of that time in the lineage. There were others that were left out. Matthew talks about 14 generations from Abraham to David. That is about 1,000 years. That number was inclusive, so it was actually 13. So 1,000 divided by 13 is about 77 years between births. Some of the people were left out.

            The bottom line is that the Bible is read wrongly. People take things out of context.

          • Altaica

            Not to mention that the Sumerian race existed longer than 6000 years ago as did the Native American and other races. Archeology and History shows that the year count to be incorrect. I take that 4 to 6000 yr estimate to be the historical range of that belief system.

          • Altaica

            It’s a tendency of people to take things out of context. I am sure we are all guilty of it at one point or another whether intentionally or not. Quotes from scientists are taken out of context and twisted around at least as much as religious works are.

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            eddie47d, denniso Karolyn and others

            Have you read this book,its dirt cheap.
            Deceptions And Myths Of The Bible By lloYD M Graham (Paperback )
            published by Citadel (2000)
            0806511249 • 9780806511245 Price $0.67

          • Bob from SoCal

            Hey Eddie,
            You should look up “Hydroplate Theory”, it may broaden your perspective.

          • denniso

            Coal miner…I own a copy of the book. It’s good…

          • eddie47d

            Bob-SoCal;I Read a little on Hydroplates but don’t get the full grasp of it. Walt Brown does give us something to think about and I’ll have to dig into it further. Al Gore brings up important information also but he is constantly shot down. It’s important to look at all versions of the changing world.

      • alex

        i believe in evolution, when the sperm enters the egg it evolves into a human being if of course the egg and the sperm came from a human

        • hicusdicus

          Evolution, the egg and the sperm evolved into a human. Now there is a god argument for abortion.

    • Lamar Carnes

      Misconceptions about Christians abound. Certainly all groups, atheists, agnostics, religous folks, etc., have within their ranks crazies out there. But that doesn’t mitigate against the person or groups dogma or core belief system which is what “all” should be dealing with rather than a person solely, due to my former thoughts.

      God and Christ never ordered His people to “force” any religious concepts on anyone outside of the faith itself. Dialog, arguments, propositions, speaking publically etc., are all natural human activities on any given subject and certainly activities a Christian engages in with others. But, if a person doesn’t want to hear or engage “no force” nor any “obligation ever exists” that a person has to hear, believe or engae in. Having said that, those who oppose do not either have the right of “forcing” another to stop speaking, writing, engaging in public debate or dialog on their issues. So, departure of one party from the venue where such activity is taking place has to also take place if one is disturbed. In otherwords it goes both ways! The wrongness if when Government or anyone “forces” one are the other to not be allowed to have the “freedom” to engage their own self in their own activities relating to whatever they are doing in this realm of thought. Laws which force a religious concept or venue upon another and laws which prevent a religious concept or venue taking place are both wrong. Only a law which would state “both” have repsonsibilites to “seperate” from one another if they are not willing to dialog or engage in hearing, seeing, or reading such matters at hand. But to attack the precepts or activities of either party would be wrong. Today, I find it seems more “opposition” from anti-Christian groups or people against allowance of the Christians to conduct their affairs publically but none toward the other groups which wish to conduct their affairs openly thus offending the Christians! So to stop this intolerant, biased attitude toward “one” group there must be some type of consensus between the two that “one” must not be offensive to another in a forceful manner nor should one group be able to have legal support over the other in terms of funds or promotions. We have a mixed problem going on today because our tax monies, support by legal authorities etc., are offending Christians who pay taxes and who expect equal treatment from legal authorities but are not being able to receive funds or public support on the same level playing field as the other groups Somehow to stop all of this inequities we must work to stop either side for profiting tax monies or legal elected type or governmental type support of one or the other. Private work by all has to be upheld as healthy and good for a society. Tolerance has to work both ways! Calling any opposition “hate speech” is entirely reflective of ignorance or just plain desires to “stop” any dialog or challenges of a train of thought or acitivity. That is not humane or advisable because if followed to its logical end after some time no one would ever be able to see or learn if something is factual, helpful, truthful or whatever since no challenge could be given on any issue! That leads to a closed dictatorial society run by just a “powerful” few! i don’t think that is what any person would really want!

      • Brian

        Outstanding discourse Lamar. I agree with all you said except the very last. A dictatorial society is EXACTLY what some powerful few want!

      • Altaica

        My opinion on religion is it has no place in politics or other government run programs as those are state run and by separation of church and state means religion should not be involved. As of late I have heard some very disturbing things going on. Schools are forcing one religion’s views on one another. Governors are saying prayer is the answer to political problems. I am all for freedom of religion and debating and learning to understanding one another, but when an authority tries to force their view on others that is wrong. Having a state wide and state supported prayer day for Christians is contrary to separation of church and state. I am not a Christian, I don’t want my tax money going to another religion’s activities. They are tax exempt and have their own money. Now if the Church wants state provided events, then they can give up their tax exempt status and pay in. I say any religion that wants to integrate with the state needs to give up tax exempt status. Otherwise they need to keep their religion to their families, and religious communities instead of forcing it on others. I feel like it is forced down my throat when the government purports it. I would feel the same way if they said Thank Allah, or Thank Yahweh or Thank Shiva or any other deity. It has no place in government and it should stay that way. I have my own religion and I don’t want my political incumbents trying to force theirs on me. I want them to deal with political issues not religious ones.

        • TheRealBob

          It is ok with you when a malignant, powerful and evil governemnt rams the lies of evolution down our throats, but is not ok when Christians try to see that the truth gets told? You are one sick, twisted puppy Altaica.

          • eddie47d

            There was nothing sick or twisted about Altaica’s comment. Now on the other hand you certainly wanted to control her thoughts.If you or I believe in the power of God that is beautiful. God also gave her a mind to think of other possibilities.

          • DaveH

            We could end this controversy peaceably by ending public schools and putting the education of our children in private hands. The Atheists could have their children educated in non-religious schools and the Religious people could have their children educated in religious schools. That way, nobody would be ramming either religion or evolution down anybody’s throat. But Big Government doesn’t want Peace. It wants Power.

          • Altaica

            There certainly are religious schools out there to teach kids in the philosophies and beliefs of ones religion. My home town had a private catholic school where the catholic kids all went, and a public school where everyone else went. I see nothing wrong with that. People send their kids to private schools of other types and home school their children as well. I know I would have been quite irate if as a Methodist youth I was forced to go through and be forced to be taught the catholic way. Science is not a religion and we do our best, at least those of us that are honest and not in it for the money, to present the facts and be objective. I’m not sick and twisted as you say. I am voicing what I see and have experienced. Science is part of academics, it has given us medicine, vehicles, air conditioning, computers and a methodology in which to explore things. Having a basic understanding of the various academics makes us more well rounded and more capable of making decisions for ourselves. We are required to learn some math, some science, some history and a lot of English. Religion however changes from culture to culture were academics have a wide range. The same math and science is taught throughout most of the advanced world.

            I am no longer Christian, a lot of that had to do with the hypocrisy, hate and contradictions I endured at the hands of my fellow Christians while I was a Christian.

            I am also not an atheist. I believe in spirit and soul. I believe we all have a piece of the divine energy within us. I moved myself to a more nature based religion because it was honest. I couldn’t live in a life that preached loved thy neighbor while at the same time those same people were stabbing me in the back and giving me hate. You believe your God is there for you just as I believe my totems and spirit guides are there for me. We each have a different path to walk. I was not truly happy until I found my path. This is the road meant for me and I would not trade it for anything.

            You want to know what happens when religion goes into schools and is forced? I don’t want to see the oppression of any of the religions. The myriad of religions all painting different pictures makes the world a better place. Don’t you think if government out religion into schools it would control it, force one view down people’s throats and mangle it? I certainly do. I don’t want my religion forced on anyone nor theirs on me. I am quite happy to debate peacefully and learn and teach for those that wish the same, but if it was in the schools it would take away the freedom of religion that we all have in this country. I’m not willing to give up my rights without a fight, and I am sure most of you here aren’t as well. It’s those rights that allow us to debate these things.

          • Bud Tugly

            Evolution is not a lie. Get real, Real Bob.

        • Old Henry

          Altaica:

          Just where in our Constitution does it mention “Separation of church and state”?

          As a matter of fact our Founers mentioned God frequently and built our Constitution and our nation on Christian principles.

          When you take God out of our matters of state you end up with the mess we currently have.

          • DonnieB

            Would you care to argue that the US is a “Christian Nation”? I think that Thomas Jefferson has a bit more insight than you.I am sure that you have heard of “wall of Separation” and certainly is not in the Constitution but neither are a number of things that do no use the exact words but which understand them to mean.

            There are many things that are not in the bible but the religious claim that ‘is God’s Will”.

          • DaveH

            I tend to take the Constitution literally. The Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment reads “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof”.
            There is no such thing as Separation of Church and State. Only in the minds of Socialists who have traditionally hated the competition that Religion offers to their own belief system (Progressivism).
            Here is an exhaustive treatment of the Establishment Clause:
            http://blog.mises.org/10342/re-establishing-peace-and-good-order/

          • alex

            it is truly amazing to me the number of people in the U.S. that do not understand the english languge , the constitution says congress shall make no laws prohibiting the free exerise of religen yet we have many laws doing just that

        • Cawmun Cents

          The Constitution states that(congress)shall make no laws promoting one religion over another,or prohibiting the exercise thereof.,IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND STATE.

          Of course it helps if you read the Constitution instead of letting your marxist college proffesors translate it for you.

          -CC.

          • Kinetic1

            Darn that Marxist Thomas Jefferson!

          • DaveH

            From “Re-establishing Peace and Good Order” (link in my previous comment):
            “The Supreme Court re-interpreted the establishment clause as something very different, requiring a separation of church and state, supposedly based on Thomas Jefferson’s letter to the Danbury Baptists. However, that transformation cannot be justified.
            Using Jefferson’s phrase in a letter as an authoritative legal interpretation of the First Amendment is highly questionable. Jefferson was not even in America when the Constitution was written. The letter was written a decade later, and was personal and private, rather than a attempt to rewrite the meaning of the Establishment Clause (How many other cases of phrases in private correspondence overriding explicit Constitutional language can you think of?)”.

          • Altaica

            In essence that is separation of church and state. If a politician were to use their religion as the basis of a law they are in fact endorsing an establishment of religion which you have just stated they shall not do.

          • Kate8

            Altaica – Calling for public prayer by a politician (while I find somewhat laughable) is hardly forcing religious beliefs on anyone. You have the choice whether to participate. And politicians have the same rights to religious expression as anyone.

            If I knew of a politician who was sincerely calling for prayer to Almighty God to heal our land, I’d be overjoyed. It’s a lot better than what most of them do, considering that they are wholly corrupt, immoral and luciferian.

            I do object to government shoving Darwinism down the throats of our children, and indoctrinating them into the joys of the gay lifestyle and sexual deviance. Not to mention turning them into socialists, and forbidding them from even speaking of God, making every effort to stamp out all sense of their faith.

            The person above who stated that Christ did not advocate pushing His Teachings on anyone is correct. He said, “My sheep hear my Voice”. Trying to convince a scoffer He called, “Casting pearls before swine”.

          • Altaica

            Here’s your separation of Church and State:
            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

            It does refer to the establishment clause and is just a simplification of remembering what that stands for.

            CC-

            Marsist Jesuits? Sisters of the church marxsist? Good to know it happens to all religions. You don’t know a darn thing about my teachers whether they were marxists, capitalism, conservative or liberal. But I am sure Sacred Heart University, a Jesuit College would be happy to know you just called them all Marxist. Since you are applying labels I’m gonna give you one of my own, and that is the title of bigot, because you are unable to look at all the evidence and use logic, instead you go with a discriminatory platform.

            Kate8–I don’t have a problem with the politician asking people to pray, I have a problem with tax money being used to provide for this event but there is not public tax money being used for every other organization having their activity. I think this should have been provided for by the religious community that wanted to participate not by taxpayers who wanted nothing to do with it. By using taxpayer money for a religious function you are in effect forcing the people to participate because you are taking their money for it.

            And the big part of forcing religion is a prayer in a graduation ceremony should be provided for in a moment of silence allowing each participant to decide what they what to do, pray, reflect, fidget whatever. But by saying the Lord’s Prayer out loud they forced it on the students that did not want to participate and went against the ruling that they would not verbally recite the Lord’s prayer. I would feel this way if I was still a Christian. A graduating student requested not to have the lord’s prayer recited during his graduation ceremony because he was not Christian, this should have been respected as it was a public school not a religious school. The facility recited the prayer forcing their religion on him and thus violating his rights. Prayers do not need to be spoken allowed and everyone could have had their opportunity during a planned moment of silence which would not trample on anyone’s rights.

        • http://personallibertydigest vincent joiner

          Separation of Church and State is not in the Constatution. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, OR prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech,

          • Alabama red neck

            THANK YOU for this true statement, but so many people believe OUR OWN
            GOVERNMENT WOULD NEVER LIE,,,,,,WELL JUST ASK AN INDIAN

          • Altaica

            Which if they are supporting their religion in their law making or the agenda of a religion they are violating. That is what is meant by separation of church and state, it is a simple way to phrase that quote.

          • Altaica

            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separation_of_church_and_state_in_the_United_States

            And there is a good explanation of how the first clause relates to the idea of separation of church and state.

        • Louie

          No one is forcing their religion on you by saying a prayer. And no organization/person should be tax exempt unless everyone is.

          • Bob

            It is interesting that the same people who scream for separation of church and state, who don’t want anyone to pray in public at a school graduation etc. ignore the rest of the first amendment – or prohibit the free exercise thereof (religion) and also about freedom of speech.

            The first amendment intended for us to have the freedom of speech and religion. They didn’t want us to have an official church denomination to rule the country. They certainly didn’t want to have church be separated from all discourse and from schools.

          • DaveH

            There should be NO taxes on organizations of any kind. Only People should pay taxes.

          • Altaica

            The point about the praying is they included it as part of the graduation ceremonies thus forcing it on the students that wanted no part of it. There is nothing wrong with each student choosing for themselves whether they wish to pray or not. The problem occurs when public employees force the entire ceremony to stop and observe their religions prayer. That is not acceptable. A moment of silence would have been appropriate to allow those students that wished to make their prayers in silence. When I was raised a Christian we didn’t go out in public and spout our prayer, it was for church and for private at home.

          • Altaica

            Yes you have the freedom of religion so long as you are not forcing your religion on another. If you are doing that then you are violating their freedom of religion to not worship the way you do. I don’t want to be forced to endure anyone’s religious ceremony if I am at a public event. I don’t need to go and spout a prayer out loud for the world to hear to validate my religion and I feel violated when someone of another faith forces me to participate in their religious ceremony by performing it in a public function. You do understand what I mean by public function right? A function that is for all peoples of a society for all to enjoy and run by governmental authority. I.e. School, political meetings like town meetings, court proceedings, etc. These are government run institutions and as such should not endorse any one religion. Putting the Lord’s prayer into that function is a clear violation of the First clause as they are supporting the Christian establishment. How would you feel if every school in the country decided to include Muslim prayer in every graduation ceremony? You’d be outraged. Put the shoe on the other foot, walk a mile in another person’s shoes. Pull yourself out of your religious mindset for a moment and look at it from the outside and ask, would I want to sit through their religions doctrines in my life. What if I had to swear on the Koran in court and they wouldn’t let me. What if before every town meeting everyone was told to rise and praise Vishnu for bringing everyone there today. What if fanatics in the streets were calling for our laws to call for the murder of the rape victim to save the honor of the family. What if you could only marry within you class of birth and you were told you could never rise above it. There are a lot of religions out there, and I respect people’s rights to chose what path they walk, and in the mutual respect we should all share we should not be forcing others in events that are for all to adhere to the doctrines of one. That is a horrendous violation of our respect and love of one another. It is a selfish act to force another to participate in something you want to do and they don’t. Do you like it when you are forced to watch a movie you don’t like, or sit through any event that you have any interest in? I am sure most of you would say know. If this respect happened we wouldn’t even have to worry about the instances happening because each would go to their respective religious communities and engage and not force others. We have a beautiful world, full of many different people, places and religions. If people stopped killing and fighting over each other for the side of the giant multifaceted gem they can see and look for a moment at all the wonders and views there are maybe we would have a more balanced, enlightened and peaceful society.

        • Alabama red neck

          iT IS VERY EASY to understand being a Christian…The problem today
          is that everybody who that is not a christian can tell everyone else
          how one should be….Yes, and let me just ask this question and i will
          be looking for an answer….THE BIG BANG JUST DID NOT HAPPEN…MY
          QUESTION IS WHERE DID ALL THAT STUFF OUT THERE COME FROM TO CAUSE THE
          BIG BANG??????//

          • eddie47d

            I grew up in the church and still attend every week.Religious folks do indeed look down on non-Christians as evil unworthy afterthoughts. I saw those experiences at least in the 1950′s- 70′s. They explicitly told you how to feel and think and no other thinking would be tolerated. Some of the older churches wanted to censor thought back then and demanded total obedience rather than having an enlightened mind. That is what the Muslims still teach in our present day and the punishment can be severe for wandering out of their faith.I now feel more at peace with myself and the folks in my church and other churches that I meet are far more tolerable of each other.

          • Altaica

            I say believe as you will. I believe that energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed as science states so therefore energy as always existed. I plug that into my own religious views of the Great Creator or Divine Energy and believe the universe came from the Divine energy of which we all have a part.

          • Jay

            eddie, why do you have to make such sweeping generalizations? Not all religious folks look-down on non-Christians. Do you? Btw, to make sweeping generalization with respect to an organization, or a people, is a true definition of racism!

          • eddie47d

            I see it right here Jay and even you make broad statements labeling all Liberals as do several others. I see broad statement against Atheists also from others.

    • Vagabond

      well DaveH you write an interesting post. but I didn’t know that man created rabbits and dogs. what about cats? I am 75 years old and as long as I can remember there have been dogs cats and rabbits. as a matter of fact as a smal boy I used to go with my uncle to check the rabbit boxes each morning to get the rabbits. then he would skin them and Gmom cooked them for dinner. so just when did man create dogs and rabbits? I would wrather go through life beleiving as I do that there is a God and a Heaven than to live my life as ans athies and die and discover there is in fact a Heaven and a Hell. by the way maher is just anothe IDIOT I never watch him he was on Hannity or Oriely one and I knew then I didn’t care for him,

      • Altaica

        Vagabond,

        Man Domesticated Dogs (From wolves) and rabbits for their own use. Dogs can breed with wolves because of the fact that they are distant cousins. As for cats, man did not domesticate them, they domesticated themselves. That is why out of all the domestic species they are the closest to their wild kin and can go feral more easily and survive without us. Some species have the ability for us to selectively breed individuals that have favorable traits to get them to work with us. We as humans have been doing that for thousands of years. The monk Gregor Mendel (Considered father of genetics) demonstrated selective breeding through his pea garden. He later went on to become the abbot of his monastary. Selective breeding and evolution do not mean you can’t have a faith. They are explanation of steps to get from one point to another. Like a road map.

      • DaveH

        Vagabond,
        Did I say man created rabbits, dogs, and cats? Here are my exact words — “check out the various unusual varieties of man-bred animals, such as rabbits, or dogs, or cats”. The operative phrase being “man-bred animals”. If you’ve been to the Fair you’ve probably seen the bewildering array of rabbits that have been created by people using selective breeding techniques.

    • http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/religion/is-evolution-a-crazy-idea/?eiid&rmid=2011_08_23_PLA_P11649115&rrid=387607000&replytocom=526568#respond CaseyPhillips

      Your “theory of evolution” would require one species to change into another species and there has been no evidence of this. Until you can submit a piece of evidence, it is not considered science, but rather just a idea.

      • Altaica

        Changes are gradual and you aren’t going to be able to find a fossil for every change. They have however found an intermediate fossil between birds and dinosaurs clearly demonstrating the change from dinosaur to bird. The information is out there you just have to look.

      • Mac

        Wait a minute – whose theory of evolution requires one species to change into another? I don’t see Darwin or anyone else suggesting that.

        • Dennis48e

          For life to have evolved from single cell creatures to modern animals it would have to evolve from one specie to another.

        • Glickt

          There is a difference between “microevolution” and “macroevolution”. Microevolution is variation with a rigit type. “Macroevolution: is from single cells to men,

          The most accurate word to describe this boundary is “kind”. There are roughly several dozen of these “kinds”. The major boundaries are living and non-living, plants and animals, animals and humans. An example of a “kind” with be a “cat” versus a “dog”. Within the “kind” there could be various from one species to another, again, within strict limits.

      • DaveH

        Species are being created and disappearing from this earth on a regular basis. Don’t expect me to exhaustively prove that to you, Casey. You will have to do your own homework on that if you’re interested.

    • Polski

      So here you have the conflicting theories. Evolution, you take a rock with iron in it, throw it into the water, and 50 million years later you have LOVE BOAT. Or, God, who creates everything. So I have a problem with both. Needless to say, there are a lot of questions about the LOVE BOAT theory that no one can answer, well, no one has lived 50 million years (well, no one has admitted it, anyway). And then God. God “always was”. Now what does that mean? So we get back to the basic problem. No one KNOWS anything. And what with everyone being a smarty pants, no one will ever know anything. As far as this kind of article, everyone can think what they want. Merely writing an article does NOT force anyone to believe anything.

      • Jana

        Polski,
        I understand where you are coming from,(I don’t agree) but as you so very well stated,
        ********
        “everyone can think what they want. Merely writing an article does NOT force anyone to believe anything”*************

        If more people had this attitude, there would be so many less arguments.

    • CJP

      RE: “… you might want to check out the various unusual varieties of man-bred animals, such as rabbits, or dogs, or cats. These breeds have been created intentionally by man in a very short time period relative to the age of this earth. If these wildly different breeds could be created in such a short period of time, why couldn’t all sorts of variations of creatures have come about naturally over the millions of years that this Earth has existed?”

      Two points in reply : 1) These examples are, as you note, man-bred, in other words, bred by an intelligent being. Their creation requires intelligence. Intelligent design, if you will. 2) In these cases rabbits beget rabbits, dogs beget dogs, and cats beget cats. How is that evidence for evolution of one type of animal into another type?

    • Old Henry

      Radiation damaged the lizard’s chromosones DaveH? Nah, it was the Republicans. Most likely The Sarah’s ancestors.

    • Roy Major

      Although I am a believer in a Creator, I find your treatise more rational than most of my fellow believers.
      What most Bible believers don’t realize is that the Bible creation story does not say how or how long creation took. There is no logical attempt to prove the existence of God. It is only the story of a faith community where God reveals who God is.

    • http://tuftsmarathonchallenge.com Donald R. Megerle

      DaveH: So….you do not believe in God or the afterlife? Sad….Do you honestly believe that ‘life on earth’ is it?….I believe that after you ‘pass away’ you will arrive at the foot of our creator and say, ‘Huh…I wasn’t expecting this!!’…Read Moody’s book ‘Life After Life’…published in 1976….it was the beginning of extraordinary research that lead to:

      Evidence of the Afterlife: The Science of Near-Death Experiences

      Personal review of this book:
      RN for 24 years…moving evidence…February 16, 2010
      By Cynthia R. Lignar (Chester, CT)

      As a Registered Nurse for 24 years, and in having cared for many critically ill and dying patients, and in also caring for my father whom I lost to cancer in 1998, I found comfort in Dr. Long’s research that there is an event that occurs at the time of dying and/ or into clinical death. I find it inspiring and hopeful that a member of the medical community, with belief in his mission and determination to fulfill it, has listened to his patients, widened his data collection research to a global level, and taken on the task of analyzing these profound experiences to share with the world. Although it is a huge leap for Dr. Long, or anyone, to pronounce that he has uncovered actual evidence of the afterlife, it is quite difficult to deny consistency of the experiences across age, culture, geographic location, sensory limitations, etc. The consistency is amazing, and if the reader is paying attention, the experiences and data presented moves one to contemplate that our consciousness, even though our physical senses and/or beliefs may tell us otherwise, does not end at the time of death. Thank you Dr. Long.

      • DaveH

        You know, Donald, I have mixed feelings about explaining my beliefs. It most certainly is more comforting to think there is life after death, and I really have no interest in trying to deprive you of that comfort.
        So I will leave it at that.

        • Gary

          WELL SAID!

    • Nancy Butler

      Dave, you mention the selective breeding of dogs. And yes, they might change the characteristics of that animal, but they never can change the dog into a cat which would be required to change one species into another as is suggested by evolution. This being true, the variety of species on this earth would have had to evolve from their their own kind from the very beginning.

      • DaveH

        The concept of species, Nancy, is a complex one. I always thought that species were distinguished by their inability to cross-breed, but apparently it is much more complex than that according to this article:
        http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/species/

        Yes, I do certainly believe that one species can evolve from another.
        I see no reason to believe otherwise. There are a lot of misconceptions about Evolutionary Theory. I think most people think of it like an animal sees an attractive niche, so then evolves to fill that niche. No, that isn’t the case. What happens is a random mutation occurs at the embryonic level. The DNA becomes mis-coded and some new feature appears or some old feature disappears. For instance there are people with six fingers, and there are people with four fingers. Sometimes the new feature is inconsequential and if it doesn’t interfere with mating it can be passed on to future generations. Sometimes the new feature is fatal, so that mutation disappears from the gene pool. Sometimes the new feature is beneficial and actually gives the “mutant” an advantage over existing members of the species.
        I think the latter is the rarest of the three types.

        • Walt G

          It’s true that some creatures “evolve” with characteristics that prove to be beneficial. For example, in England, there were grey moths, and light colored moths in the dim distant past when the air became so polluted from the constant burning of coal in homes. The ubiquitous presence of soot on trees and bushes made the light colored moths susceptible to being easily picked off by birds. The grey ones blended in better with the sooty color of the trees, therefor their particular genetic make-up allowed for them to be better adapted to survival during that time.

          But that’s not really evolution at all. What it is, is natural selection of the fittest to live, under their living conditions at the time.

      • Altaica

        Nancy,

        different species can reproduce and create viable offspring. This is dependent on how closely related they are on the evolutionary tree. A domestic cat is one species of cat with many subset breeds, i.e. coat variants. The Serval is an entirely different species of cat. It is not domestic, it is wild. It is a small cat that lives on the african plains. What happens when you breed these two separate species? You get a cat that is partially domestic and that has the spotted coat of the serval and larger build mixed with the genes of domestic. In other words you get a hybrid of the two species. This hybrid is indeed viable and is breed back to others of it’s kind of to either of the parent species to create more. The Savannah is a very popular exotic cat that many want for their pets. You can very easily find information online about them.

    • patrick H.T. paine

      “To conquer, first divide!”

      Proposition: Is evolution a crazy idea? Argument: Since I can demonstrate that a billion chimps with keyboards randomly pecking away FOREVER would not produce all the great works of literature,
      ergo! Conclusion: Evolution IS a crazy idea!

      K.U. and Intelligent Design

      Perhaps most troubling of all, Darwin’s theory of evolution
      tells us that life existed for billions of years before us, that
      humans are not the products of special creation and that life
      has no inherent meaning or purpose.

      Is this accurate? While the first two claims are correct, the
      third is not! Science has no way of demonstrating that to
      be true at the moment and unless a complete Theory of Everything
      can be hypothesized and verified, which would include
      what actually existed before the big bang and how this
      universe arose from it, no such claim could ever be made.

      So the last here is an assumption which on its face is
      completely irresponsible and both sides are guilty of it
      although the “empiricists” should know better, as well as
      those “pretending” to be empiricists.

      Creationism’s latest embodiment is intelligent design (ID),
      a conjecture that certain features of the natural world are so
      intricate and so perfectly tuned for life that they could only
      have been designed by a Supreme Being.

      While I imagine this conjecture has a certain amount of appeal
      to the theistically desperate the conclusion is actually
      counter intuitive and contradictory. The claim is even
      stronger proof of the validity of evolution, for once
      complex life evolves, any variation which can fill a niche,
      survive, reproduce and adapt, will continue. That some
      of these adaptations are pretty amazing gives proof to
      the power of the mechanism of D.N.A. and it’s inherent
      combinatorial variability.

      What science has demonstrated thus far:

      1.) The building blocks ( amino acids ) are easily produced.
      ( Miller, Urey )
      2.) That while the odds of life arising from D.N.A directly
      are extremely improbable, an R.N.A scenario reduces them to
      ( 4! x 5! ) or 2880 to 1, making it almost a certainty on
      this planet.
      3.) That evolution works in both directions, simple
      to complex, and simple to simpler.
      4.) That simple life can exist almost anywhere including
      the vaccuum of space.
      5.) That once complex life arises it is very difficult to
      extinguish it. ( there have been nine mass extinctions on
      this planet, yet complex life has rebounded each time )
      6.) Complex life, is not as complex as believed. The Human
      Genome Project has determined that roughly 30,000 genes are
      responsible for us, rather than the 100,000+ predicted.
      7.) We share much of our code with other species from
      chimpanzes, to pigs, to blowfish.

      So the science behind evolution seems pretty secure and
      hopefully the theistically impaired will adapt to it
      and move on to the crux of the matter. The Catholic
      Church did in fact apologise to Gallileo, after
      a few hundred years, so there is precedent.

      Meanwhile it would be helpful for empiricists and those
      aligned with them to “render to the empirical, that which
      IS empirical”…….

      In an August interview with National Public Radio, Republican
      Senator and ID supporter Rick Santorum stated exactly what he
      believed those implications were for evolution. Asked why he, a
      politician, felt compelled to weigh in on what was essentially
      a scientific debate, Santorum replied:

      “It has huge consequences for society. It’s where we come from.
      Does man have a purpose? Is there a purpose for our lives? Or are
      we just simply the result of chance? If we are the result of chance, if we’re simply a mistake of nature, then that puts a
      different moral demand on us. In fact, it doesn’t put a moral
      demand on us.”

      Does it? The logical argument does not seem to be here
      and the conclusion therefor is unsupported and questionable,
      in fact, as stated, it would appear confused, since we
      are directed from “a different morality” to “no morality”.

      The “latter” extreme is no doubt for effect, but the choice
      of different is “interesting” because the question that
      arises for me is; Different how and for whom?”

      By adding morality to the equation, Santorum is giving the
      scientific theory of evolution a religious message, one that
      does not come on its own, said Kenneth Miller, a biologist at the University of Colorado.

      Like Santorum, Miller is a devout Roman Catholic, but he believes
      evolution can only explain how life arose and how it diversified.
      Why there is life at all is another question entirely, one that Miller believes is outside the realm of science.

      Lawrence Krauss, a physicist at Case Western Reserve University
      in Ohio, expressed a similar sentiment. “The questions of purpose
      are not part of science,” Krauss said. “How you interpret the results of science is up to you, and it’s based on your
      theological and philosophical inclinations.”

      This is precisely correct for the moment anyway and the real
      crux of the matter, although it must be pointed out, that
      the “philisophical inclinations” include the “theological
      inclinations”, since the former is a subset of the latter.

      What is driving “intelligent design” and why scientific knowledge
      is viewed as the “villain”, while philisophically neutral on
      these questions, is that science has produced nothing “in favor”
      of them, while demonstrating the absurdity of various claims
      that were “included” as various theologies were rising to
      prominence.

      That much of this absurdity persists should be embarrassing,
      but I imagine the reasoning here for some might be that,
      if they refuse to yield on these points, they will not have
      to deal with the ultimate questions and assumptions posed here.

      What is most unfortunate, however, is that many who have accepted
      the “empirical” evidence have also bought into wrongful
      assumptions regarding “purpose and morality”……..thereby
      enabling the “theologically impaired” to continue to
      avoid the issue and forcing the burden of nihilism where
      it need not be borne and in fact, does not exist.

      There is a large range between “different” and “none” but
      you have to willing to go there to examine and comprehend it.

      Theology has no philisophical monopoly, in fact, it does not
      even have an advantage, although theologists have no clue
      that what is bearing down on them is their worst possible
      nightmare. That Theology, or any Mystical Belief System,
      is not only self contradiction but ultimately IMMORAL.

      For Them, the END is indeed…… NIGH!

      “Do not ask for whom the bell tolls……..”

      • Altaica

        Good post! I do know that there are morals in nature as well. If you have a society there are rules in that society, it’s moral code. One need only observe meerkats to see that they have a complex social structure. They have rules and punishment. Morals are something a society determines to protect the group and cast out those that are harmful to the group.

    • always right

      DaveH, a couple of comments here. For you, there is no afterlife as I don’t know if “burning in hell for eternity” can be considered an “afterlife”. Good thing you don’t believe in one. For us there is though. Next, your theory is all well and good except for one minor problem. Even knowing what we know, like how to splice genes, we just don’t seem to be able to get chemical mixes to turn into life. Why is that? And lastly, even if your thinking didn’t start with the mentioned ‘a priori’ idea, from where did the universe come; the universe that just happened out of nothing to provide the non-living building blocks that evolved into you, the smartest life form in the universe? Do you seriously beleive that everything evolved from nothing by random chance?

      • DaveH

        You need to change your name.
        Most of your posts are wrong. This one included.
        Always says “Good thing you don’t believe in one [hell]“. It so happens that I have known NO religious people personally who come close to my rigid level of morality. It seems I live other peoples’ religions even better than they do, though I am Atheist. So I need not fear Hell even though there is no such thing.
        You think we’re the “the smartest life form in the universe”? Certainly not yourself. But anybody who would make such a statement is undeservedly arrogant. We have no idea what’s out there.
        And I have no idea how the Universe got here. Neither do you. It is necessarily endless, something that is way beyond our finite brainpower to conceive. Certainly way beyond your brainpower, Always.

        • Altaica

          I don’t know if this would appeal to you, Dave, but I am reading a very good book that poses theories on the presence of intelligent life besides ourselves and their influences on us. “Gods, Genes, and Consciousness, nonhuman intervention in human history.”

      • Altaica
    • Walt G

      Dave, slight mutations improve nothing. Serious mutations destroy. We are still ruled by genetics. A dog is a dog is a dog, a horse is a horse is a horse. Regardless of the variations within a specific “kind” of living soul, their genetics allow them all to interbreed. Horses, in spite of differing characteristics, always produce more genetically related horses. As do dogs, and every other animal “kind.” Even if some might go slightly outside the rule, as in producing a mule, mules are quite incapable of breading their particular variation.

      • DaveH

        See my response to Nancy, Walt.

      • Altaica

        A dog is a dog and a wolf is a wolf, but the two are related, the former a descendant of the latter and can and does reproduce to create hybrids that can reproduce. A cat is a cat and a serval is a serval. They are two distinct species, but they can be interbred and produce viable offspring that also reproduce, they produce the exotic known as a Savannah. Interbreed-ability is entirely how closely related the two animals are on the tree of life. If their ancestors deviated two far back the offspring will be two different to produce offspring that can then reproduce.

    • http://reasonstream.blogspot.com Hitch

      No evolution is not the best game in town.
      And no, it isn’t backed by the evidence.
      Only micro evolution – minor variation and adaptation – is supported by the evidence.
      Macro evolution – great changes creating entirely new taxonomic families – has zero support in evidence. There is none.
      Experiments with fruit flies and E. Coli (over 50,000 generations) has produced nothing but more fruit flies and more E. Coli. Only minor adaptations have been observed.

      DaveH. (as so many other dupes) says a lot of perfectly ridiculous things.

      “All I ask is that you don’t try to force your beliefs on me or my children.”

      Well Davey hows about I require the same from you since evolution is being crammed down the throats of the young and the old with vehement fanaticism. All resistance is met with firing of teachers, career persecution, black balling and witch hunting.

      And this we are all forced to pay for through taxes! Take a hike Davey you make the rest of us with brains sick. Your whole system is sick and you believe a pack of materialist lies.

      cerebus23 says the same thing and the same logic applies – shove not your Darwinian codswallop down my throat.

      If you’re stupid enough to believe that nothing created everything for no reason (atheism has no other choice) and that frogs magically evolve into handsome princes by the kiss of selection (a mere filter) then you are already certifiable.

      How can we know this?

      DNA is an information molecule. It’s information is highly organized and algorithmic – it does something with purpose, it isn’t gibberish.

      Biological information is instructions. It has syntax, semantics and purpose. It is anything but random and no such information can arise without intelligence.

      No more than languages arise without intelligence. It is literally impossible for such information to exist without intelligent origin.

      There is little intelligence in Darwins materialist origins myth.
      Precious little indeed.

      Darwins theory has already failed and the only reason it’s still being shoved down the throats of the whole bloody world is religion. That’s right the religion of atheism, materialism and fanaticism therein.

      The real evidence, if accepted, would have buried Darwins inane fairy tale long ago were it not for atheist fanatics like you.

      • DaveH

        Hitch,
        If you had any “brains”, you could just confidently state the facts. You don’t, so you resort to personal attacks.
        I would gladly dress you down, Hitch, but my comment would have the side-effect of hurting other good religious peoples’ feelings, and I have no desire to cause them pain because you insist on acting like a jerk.

        • Buster the Anatolian

          Put a sock in it Dave apparently you can dish it out but you cannot take it.

      • Altaica

        Hitch—I think you need to learn some real science and not listen to lies proclaimed by Creationists with an agenda and mail order degrees.
        Most of those creationists haven’t ever attended a lab in their life. They profess to know everything which they cannot. This comes out of a phobia that science is here to destroy their faith. This is not the case. Science is a means to understand the inter-workings of the world around us. It is a methodology. Another disturbing trend I have found with the creationist camp is taking things out of context and performing psuedo-science. They do not follow proper procedures and frankly the lies they perpetuate are immoral. Lets see them attend a real university, go for several years, muck around in waders in ponds and collect egg sacs, etc. They way they talk and act they know nothing about the field of Biology and went goes into it. I can speak with first hand experience because I am a Biologist. I have waded in ponds and collected specimens. I have conducted experiments. And guess what, it was a Jesuit University- the very Christians that are considered the scholars that provided my education and my degree. If you feel threatened by science perhaps you should instead look at your illogical fears. We don’t care what you believe and we aren’t here to destroy your belief system. We are just trying to understand the world as it is and the processes that happen. Does understanding how your tv work dispute where it was made? No. So get over your unfounded fears and if you truly want to be enlightened, if you truly want to think for yourself, get out there and see all that is around us. If you God created everything wouldn’t it stand to reason that science is here for a reason. For Creator’s sake stop thinking we’re the borg and trying to assimilate you. That’s what religion and government is for not science!

        How about you pick up a real, peer reviewed scientific article, and I don’t mean popular science and Discovery (although they wet the whistle) I mean the American Journal of Science or any of the other equivalent. Make sure you have a science textbook on hand so you can look up all the terminology you don’t understand.

        Science is not a religion. Religion is a belief in a supernatural something. Science does not deal with supernatural but with that which can be tested and observed. It is a process of academic study and should be taught. If you feel science has no place in our schools then it should also have no place in your home either. Go back to living in caves and gathering your food because even agriculture arose out of scientific understanding.

        Also, you like so many I have heard spout this, atheist is not a religion, it is the lack of a religion. An A theist does not believe in the supernatural. A means without or not. Saying an Athetist is a a religion is like saying that something that is asexual reproduces having sex. I think this misunderstanding is due to a strange misconception and misunderstanding of the origin and building of words. Or because many religious people have trouble relating to things outside of their sphere of understanding, which is religion. It is rather disturbing that so many of the religious community improperly label various things a religion that are very clearly not.

    • http://unknown DawnL

      why?
      if evolution is the only explanation for life as we know it, where are the examples of things evolving now? Surely, if life evolved, it is still evolving and for it to have evolved in the time frame of the life of earth (measured I believe in billions, which is not much given the immensity of time)then it must be an energetic, fairly rapid, constant process, yet, even as our knowledge of species increases, there is no evidence that any of them are currently or have recently evolved from anything to something else.In every case of so called evolution from primitive to complex, the primitive remains…saying life comes from slime mold is wondrous considering that slime mold still exists…where are the new things evolving from it now?
      If the theory of global warming is accurate and the planet is rapidly changing, where are the adaptations that the theory of evolution states should be occurring?
      Has evolution switched off? If it has, why?
      Look, I’m not saying evolution is not a viable theory to explain some of what we understand about the rise of species and the similarity between certain things. I am only saying that it is not a TOE in regards to what and why of life on this planet or any where else.

      I protest the invincibility of the Theory of Evolution. It may be part of the answer but it is not THE answer.

      • patrick H.T. paine

        “To conquer, first divide!”

        Getting the correct timeline is kind of important.

        Age of the universe is 13 billion years plus or minus.

        Age of earth is 4.5 million years plus or minus.

        Cambrian Epoch or Explosion the point when life of earth became
        complex or multicelled as in 2 or more is 545 million years ago.

        Mathematics is the language of science, an attempt to quantify or measure things and largly in terms of other things.

        It has a few problems in this regard……take irrational numbers,
        numbers which never stop and do not produce a repeating sequence, such as pi or even simpler, the square root of 2, which arises for the diagonal of any square, or the hypotenuse of any right triangle with two equal sides. We cannot calculate an end to these measurements, yet neither squares or equal sided right triangles are
        impossible.

        A more interesting limitation is the n body problem, which is a gravity calculation for an n number of bodies and is intractable
        or UNSOLVABLE if n is greater than 2. Yet the universe consists of
        trillions and trillions of seperate bodies, and gravity is working just fine.

        Considering this FACT, where gravity is pretty much nailed down as a measureable force, the difficulty of climate modeling, with many more variables should be somewhat more understandable?

        The author of the main piece here, using his chimp example, which is irrelevant, is either stupid or thinks you are stupid, but wait, maybe he has a point……let’s just change the scenario to homo sapiens with keyboards…..some of whom have training…..and you have to admit the response here is pretty random and mostly ignorant,
        but to be fair, so is the source….but it is kind of hard to ignore his conclusion…..none of the great works of literature have been produced here! ( and scant intelligently reasoned offerings )

        The problem is THIS HAPPENS EVERY DAY…..it’s like monkeys on cue…

        Well don’t lose heart…….maybe tomorrow will BE the first day of the rest of your life?

        “Do not ask for WHOM the bell tolls…….”

      • Altaica

        Dawn- Evolution is not a Theory of Everything. It only details the process of getting from point A to point Z and the steps in between. Nowhere is it the theory of where that first organism came from. This is something certain extremist try to make it say but that is not the case. Evolution is a long process. Philhellenes on youtube actually has a great video that demonstrates why we don’t see evolution as it is happening. The process is a slow one.

        The reason why there are some species that may be ancestral to modern ones still extant is that there was no competition for that species. Many times a new feature will give a species an advantage over the other and push the other out through competition. But if the new adaptation happens to push the species into a new niche and it is not in direct competition with another then both species will persist.

        There are some cases of rapid adaptation and evolution. This is most easily observed in species that have a relatively short lifespan. We have new strains of bacteria and viruses, as well as insects that have resistances to the poisons we use to kill them. In time, as these species have better tools for survival they will persist and may out compete other members of their species. Some of them are already considered a new species.

        The biggest problem that I see is many in the religious community see science as a competitor and trying to push them out, when in fact we in the scientific community have no desire nor intent of taking over the niche of Religion. Many scientists are religious. Robert T. Bakker, one of the foremost Paleontologists and proponents of evolution (One of my heroes) is in fact also a Christian Minister. I am a biologist and evolutionist and a devout follower of the Native American Religions and of the Great Creator. Science and religion are not mutually exclusive. We are able to co-exist in harmony, but for some reason there are some members of religion that have developed a phobia of science and project it on others. This is what has caused the rift we have today. It is a sad state of affairs in my opinion, that a phobia, defined as an extreme or irrational fear, has come to create such a problem here in the U.S.A.

    • JeffH

      DaveH, I respect your right to believe that evolution is possible or real and that you don’t believe in GOD or rail on christianity just because you are an atheist. That in and of itself seperates you from the many thankless atheists that get enormous enjoyment taking shots at christians and GOD at every opportunity. I also don’t believe that the religeous have the right to make attempt to “convert” the non-believers against their will. I learned years ago(my brother was once the youngest deacon in the Free Will Babtist church across the nation) that not every one who calls themselves a christian are christians, at least as to what I belive a christian to be and how they should conduct themselves and their actions in life. The hypocricy on both sides is astounding at times.

      I do believe in GOD as our creator but I am far from an expert…simply, that is what I believe. To me, my religeous beliefs are not up for debate and my relationship with GOD is mine and nobody elses.

      • DaveH

        As it should be, Jeff.

      • patrick H.T. paine

        “To conquer, first divide!”

        My congratulations to the H family, especially Jeff…..I just wanted you to know that atheist’s are just like everybody else…..not quite sure of what they do or don’t believe in…..I haven’t actually met any TRUE atheists by definition, most are clueless as to defintion,
        and atheism itself is not a complete position. I used to have a lot of fun playing with them, on their own sites and constantly warned them not to engage the inevitable theists that would show up attempting to save them.

        But Jeff, you have a problem…..because for other theist’s, YOU are the atheist……do you understand?

        If all theist’s were like you, no problems would exist.

        But theism doesn’t work that way…….every theism, is the one true theism, and those who fail to accept it as such, are doomed. Also, most theism’s require conversion or…………death!

        Islam is like this NOW, and many christian varients have been and would return to this if possible……..

        So your problem is not atheism…..your problem is other theist’s who
        if given the chance would condemn YOU……

        What I have found particularly ironic about this is…..with eternity at stake, heaven or damnation……and some god being the final judge….no theist seems in a rush to get there ( except for the 72 virgins ) yet they have some strange urge to rush the infidel along sooner….like eternity was not enough and 3 score and ten too long?
        Do they think their one true god will get it wrong?

        Just kidding about the H family thing Dave….remember what Patton said: “No poor dumb bastard theist ever won a……

        “Do not ask for whom the bell tolls…….”

    • JeffH

      This is for those who have started to question and critisize DaveH…he stated very clearly what he believes. He’s not trying to indoctrinate or convert anyone…just stating his belief and opinion. For all of you who want to rail on him because of his beliefs, think about it for a moment…are you not being hypocrits?
      Don’t you want the freedom to believe what you want also?

      DaveH has made it very clear time and again that he is an atheist, but he has also made it very clear that he believes in the freedom of choice, that anyone can believe what they want to as long as it’s not forced on others.

      • Altaica

        Well said! This is the point I have tried to make several times as well. Freedom of Religion means every religion.

    • Lawrence Harris

      DaveH says:

      August 23, 2011 at 1:04 am

      No, Robert, you don’t make me angry. You can believe what you want. All I ask is that you don’t try to force your beliefs on me or my children
      Why then, DaveH, do you and your kind insist on forcing your beliefs on me and my children? Why are your beliefs so sacrosanct and mine so ludicris?
      Why when you and your kind can’t get your way through the democratic process you resort to lawsuits, intimidation, threats, riots, etc.?

      • JeffH

        Lawrence Harris, you obviously don’t know DaveH. What is his kind? Tell me please? I think you are speaking out of ignorance of the facts.

      • Jana

        Lawrence H,
        I have known DaveH a long time. He has never tried to force his opinion on anyone. He gave his opinion, and he is entitled to do that. In fact he has often defended Christians rights, so no, he is not in the forcing business.

        • Dennis48e

          The problem with DaveH is his very thin skin. He makes many good points and has many good ideas but every so often he gets upset and goes off on rants against others with very little to no provication.

    • Mark

      DaveH,

      Anyone who believes that man made dogs, cats and rabbits is not qualified to speak about evolution. Even if you MEANT that dogs are bred from wolves, it doesn’t diminish the fact that dogs are genetically identical to wolves, meaning they are the same species. Even though present-day evolutionists like to claim that they are different species, these two animals are fully capable of breeding (just like cats can will wild cat “species”, and rabbits).

      • DaveH

        Another guy who can’t read. Mark, I refuse to babysit all the numbniks whose reading comprehension is lacking.
        I didn’t say what you are saying. You’ll have to take some classes to improve your reading comprehension.

      • Altaica

        Domestic cat and wild cat are two separate species. A serval is a different species. A jungle cat is a separate species. They can all breed with one another and produce viable young. We call these exotics such as Savannah and Bengal cats. The ability to breed with one another is not the defining feature of a species. Species that are closely related enough can produce viable offspring. Humans and Neanderthals were closely related enough to produce offspring that could reproduce, this is evidenced in the genetic evidence. Particularly those of European descent. Many of the smaller cats are more closely related to one another than the big cats. We see that in the fact that lions and tigers create sterile young. But Tigers, which have 5 extant subspecies can interbreed among them creating viable young. The closer the species are to one another on a family tree the more likely it’s ability to breed and produce viable young. There is a lot to understand, this is something you would have to pick up a biology book and do some reading, and going deeper into a genetics and zoology concentrations would further your understanding. As a Biologist I am not always the greatest at putting my terminology and explanations into a more general and broad description for all to understand. So I suggest doing some reading on your own.

    • http://personallibertydigest cowdad

      I would like to understand more about evolution but i can’t get past the big bang.Two particles collided and from that came LIFE? Science taught me that life CANNOT come from non life what changed?

      • Altaica

        Ok, if you want to understand evolution forget about the big bang. The Big bang is a Physics theory, evolution is a Biology theory. As a Biologist I can tell you, one branch of science does not convey the understanding of all branches. I’ve taken physics and I admit I have a hard time wrapping my mind around some of their science as I am sure they feel the same about mine.

        The very basic thing you need to understand about evolution is it does not address where the first life form came from. Evolution looks at how that first life form changed and diversified. In a nutshell is the process of going from point A to point Z and the steps in between. It can be likened to understanding how your computer works. You take it apart and put it back together. You can understand the mechanisms, but the material is already present. I think a lot of confusion and conflict comes from the inaccurate belief that Evolution explains the creation of the first life form. If you understand that it is simply understanding the process after the first life form existed then you can see that it is in no way in conflict with the religious views of how that first organism was created.

    • Ron Hagge

      Dear Dave,
      Why should you care? What difference does it make? Actually you should care vary much because it is evolution and it presuppositions that have created the “modern paradigm” or world view with its own set of values and believes. Our civilization was based on a Judo-Christian world veiw.
      Rememer,We hold these truths to be self evident that all men are created
      equal endowed by there creator with certain inalienable rights, among these is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Compare that with the idea that we are just a random acident of uncaring forces. Than what rights do we have? What moral code do we follow? Did you know Hitler,Stalin,Mao and many other tyrants justify the genicide of millions of people useing the ideas that follow from evolution! You are right about one thing you get to choose what you believe, and that is a Christian princple!

      • Altaica

        Ultimately Judeo-Christianity is based off of the Sumerian traditions, so what you say is a Christian idea is actually a Sumerian ideal.

        Actually I don’t agree with your belief that it is a christian idea to those rights as most religions have those ideas, some of them are more equal than christianity and far older. Also, some of our forefathers were actually atheist.

        I also feel that you can no more say that hitler’s genocide is because of evolution as you can say that the genocide of the Native American peoples at the hands of the Christians under Imminent domain is because of evolution. Those suppose that someone is a superior race and therefore has the right to wipe out all others. This is often linked to religion where the believe of a chosen people of ones deity comes from. Hitler wanted to create the Aryan race, which he mis-defined as blonde haired, blue eyed nordic types. The Aryan race is in fact an Indian race from the Indus Valley. When the egos of flawed humans get too big we end up with crazy things like genocide and eugenics. Last I checked all living humans are homo sapiens sapiens. We’re the same species yet we act like we’re not. I used to belong to an international club and the motto we used is one I still believe and hold dear to my heart. “One world, one race, the human race.”

        • Altaica

          Replace Imminent Domain with Manifest Destiny, that’s the concept I was looking for. Imminent (Eminent) Domain is slightly different and not religion based where Manifest Destiny is.

    • http://www.sarandipity.biz TonyS

      I don’t think that Mr. Ringer intended for the typewriting monkey analogy to hold your attention so much, DaveH. Mr. Ringer intended to use the typewriting monkey example to highlight the mathematical improbability of random events leading to complex coherent results. In the case of the monkey that randomly re-creates a line of text excerpted from a classic work of literature, Mr. Ringer is saying that Mr. Murchie calculated that mathematical chance at 10^110. The point is not literature… the point is that re-creating a line of classic text is something akin to the first serendipitous step towards the animation of a soup of organic materials into life, which is the first step that Darwinism requires us to buy into if we are to believe in the “spark of life” axiom of the evolutionary explanation of life on Earth. And it is only the first step… after that comes several others: evidence of inter-species evolution (there never has been any such evidence found… oops!); the classic Intelligent Design question asking Darwinists for an explanation for the evolution of the “eyeball”; the “quick” beginning of the fossil record; etc..

      Darwinists love to portray themselves as the ones with the open mind, the ones looking at the evidence and drawing conclusions rather than the opposite. But ask Ben Stein what he thinks of Darwinists and their love of honest debate and academia… he made a movie about it, “Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed”.

      The evidence seems to support a starting point of: species evolve, species don’t make other species, complex life came into being and spread very quickly, Jesus existed as a man and was put to death for some really crazy heretic stuff he was preaching (just sayin’), there was human life on Earth well before the generation of Adam and Eve (chronologically speaking), you can’t fit all Earth’s mammals (species-wise) onto an Ark two by two, it’s been way warmer and way colder than it is today in the recent past without the benefit of the internal combustion engine (just sayin’), yada yada yada. Life is complicated enough without us making up stuff, as scientists, to support our argument.

    • Gary

      Both Ringer and David offer food for thought. Happily, our critical thinking skills allow us to agree and, if necessary, disagree. The subject of evolution is both an intellectual process and a healthy process. Moreover, to question the meaning of our existence is a quest to understand what,in the end,we may not understand. In short, our NEED to believe is often more important than the belief itself.

  • Michael J.

    Robert, brave indeed and somewhat out of our ideological neighborhood, but I too am convinced that all life on this planet and probably the universe evolves over time.

    The perceived hole in the theory which is most commonly pointed out is “the Missing Link”. But to me it is explainable by understanding that at some point in man’s early development, probably as a reaction to climate change, we lived next to the sea. We developed a nearly symbiotic relationship with marine mammals, like dolphins. Which explains why dolphins readily take to humans. It also explains why we like other marine mammals are semi hairless. It also explains why we as humans have hooded noses and are accomplished swimmers unlike fellow primates who instead have forward facing nostrils poorly adapted to swimming.

    Living and evolving next to the seas for a million years or so also explains why there is no physical record of our time there thanks to the ebb and flow of ice ages and the resulting rise and fall of ocean levels.

  • Ocala Charles

    As a school teacher, I am continually amazed at the gullibility of people to latch onto fables and turn them into perceived fact. Evolution is a fable the intellectual monkeys love to latch onto. Every time I show a Nat. Geographic video I feel compelled to apologize to my students for Nat. Geo.’s intellectual dishonesty. Your article is excellent.

    • DSK

      Ocala Charles: If you are genuinely a schoolteacher, which I doubt, you should be fired for poisoning the minds of the children supposedly in your care.

      • tom2f

        DSK,
        When did it become wrong to teach young people to question the validity of some published work? Is National Geographic now elevated to inerrancy by the religion of Media?

        • Russell Poley

          Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Evolution along with The Big Bang theory are the most experimentally proved theories in science precisely because so many people don’t want to accept them. Where is your proof? Oh, and not some criticism of some small part of the theory that hasn’t been explained yet. I’m talking extraordinary proof.
          Any system of belief which is at odds with reality is doomed to fail. This is why I’m not a Christian and why Christianity is becoming passe. Just look at the attendance drop worldwide.

          • Capitalist at Birth

            What attendance are you thinking of? Perhaps you are unaware that Christianity is the fastest growing religion on earth. Are you speaking about organized religion? It is not necessary to be a believing Christian to belong to a church.

          • Jana

            Ocala C,
            You are so right, and you sound like a great teacher. Good for you! Praise God for men and women who stand for TRUTH!

          • Bruce

            Russell, First off evolution of Monkey to man can’t be why? Easy Humans have HAR 1 in their base genetic code to date there has been not one single outher life form form in fossil form or otherwise found on the planet earth that has the base HAR 1 within its code. Thats rules out any possible way that Humans came from Monkeys.
            Next is that Neanderthals, clearly display in their base genitic code HAR 1, as well today many modern humans have like genitic codes to Neanderthals, that proves beyond any question that at some point in time modern humans had relations with this group and they didn’t die out they just changed base values.

            Next to be a follower of Christ, in plain words a Christian is not the same as the big bang theory. They are two completely differant values of belief. To be a Christian means that you follow the teaching of Christ, thus a Christian.

            Who can give the quote in its proper text from the first Bible as to how man came about.

          • Mac

            Jana: There is no TRUTH in faith. Faith is believing something in the absence of evidence. Scientists are among the greatest believers in THEORY, which in spite of MOST evidence sometimes turns out to not TRUE. Einstein’s Theory of Relativity continues to be TRUE in cases where certain conditions are met during the testing, but in the conditions where Quantum THEORY are met Relativity does not apply. What is TRUTH for you is not necessarily TRUTH for others.

          • always right

            Wow, Russell! Talk about “sleeping through the movIe”! You have. There’s plethoric proof of the validity of the Bible. Take the Dead Sea Scrolls. Take the fact that archaeologists ae digging up Biblcial city after city right where the bible said that thety were and are finding in those cities coins, seals and isncriptions showing the names of people and kings from Biblical history, with the smaller evidence even in the right cities. Take into consideration that upon more recent examination, the Shroud of Turin has proved to be much older that originally tested (God said that in the end times, there’d be an awakening, quickening and increased understanding of biblical msyteries), that it contains pollens from the middle east of plants present at the time of Christ and which have since vanished, has the photo-imprinting of flowers from the area at that era, with the “imprinting” done buy an unknown and unduplicatable means, that the image iself is still unexplainable and is 100% consistent with a scouraged and crucified human. How do you explain the “Jesus family tomb” discovered by acident in the 90′s during road construction, in which the names on the sarcophagi are consistent with the family members of Jesus, the burial techniques consistent with a tiny 30 year window period at the time of Jesus and the one box which contained no mitochondrial DNA had his name on it? Using that same mitochondrial DNA they were able to link the other family members together in like manner to the Biblical family tree, except two: “Jesus” and a second Mary, as in mary Magdalene. No DNA from him, and Mary’s was from a different family. There’s proof. you just choose to ignore it.

          • Kate8

            Doesn’t anyone else find it astounding how we so passionately argue amongst ourselves about…SOMEONE ELSE’S IDEAS.

            For crying out loud, we are so easy. We can be trained to believe anything some “authority figure” proclaims, especially if it’s taught in school or announced in the media.

            The comical truth is that most of science is made up. The results tend to reflect the beliefs of the one conducting the experiments. Even Einstein admitted that he made stuff up.

            We think we’re so smart. So important. The fact that matter likes to arrange itself to fit our expectations…sounds like a great cosmic joke.

            I wonder what would happen if we would actually start thinking for ourselves.

            I guess we’ll never know.

          • Jana

            Kate8,
            Amen.
            I was on earlier today, but saw quickly this was a no win blog, so I left.

      • SC Murf

        DSK crawl back under your rock and while you are at it make that POPPING sound. Ocala my wife is an Early Childhood Development Teacher and a good Christian woman so you keep up the good fight, I know and understand what you are dealing with

        up the hill
        airborne

      • UPCHUCK

        A rare teacher, he should be cloned.

      • L

        It does, indeed, take much faith to believe in the religion of evolution. No matter what examples an evolutionist believer uses to “prove” the evolutionist THEORY, it is mathematically impossible. The teacher’s comments are factual.

        • Altaica

          Evolution is not a religion and it is mathematically possible. Are you even a scientist? Do you even understand science? I find that is where a lot of the problems come from, people either don’t understand or don’t want to. This creates quite a frustration for Biologists like me when people want to listen to some guy with a mail order degree or no degree at all to learning to understand what the science is and means.

          • denniso

            That’s a big reason why our country and the globe are in such a mess now…we have people w/ no scientific training or even an understanding of basic scientific priciples challenging real scientists on things like evolution and climate change. These people won’t read up on the science and try to comprehend it,instead they just read some rightwing clueless diatribe against the science…they want to believe in what their rightwing,usually self interested leaders spout,though they also can’t understand the science either.

      • wandamurline

        Children should be taught both theories…evolution and God, then they should have the right to decide for themselves which they wish to believe. Now, you are teaching only evolution without creatism and that is not fair. Both sides should have the right to put forth the information about evolution and about creatism, but, alas, the aeithists only want their side told in the school rooms and have done this by the “separation of state and church”. For me,I taught my kids and I will teach my grandkids that God created us since the schools no longer have that right.

        • Alabama red neck

          Well you and many others keep using the same old phrase SEPERATION OF
          CHURCH AND STATE…PLEASE PUT A TRUE COPY IN THIS BLOG AN GIVE where you found it…THERE IS NO SUCH STATEMENT….SO GO
          ahead AND SEE IF YOU CAN FIND IT.
          I think several people are offering
          a hugeREWARD for anyone who can find that statement in the Constitution…I
          wiil waste some time from time sure hope you can find it…..Let me
          just add this about GOD….Do you have to see everything to believe it
          reall exist? How does ELECTRICITY LOOK INSIDE THE WIRE, BUT IT SURE DOES WORK GREAT…..

          • Dennis48e

            Alabama, you just lost any credibility you might have had. Re-read her post and make an attempt at comprehending what she wrote. She DID NOT say she believed there should be “seperation of church and state” she said the athiest had used that concept to force the teaching of any view of creation other than evolution out of the school system.

        • Altaica

          Creationism is a religious theory and does not belong in a public school. If you want your kids to learn your religion you take them to your religious institutions. Academics are for the public religion is for the private. The Government will not endorse any religious establisment, which they would be doing if they taught Creationism. Also if they taught Christian Creationism they would have to be fair to all religions and teach druidic, native american, jewish, muslim, hindi, etc. This is ridiculous because you are now forcing your religion on others. You have your religious studies to teach this. Keep it out of the public schools. I’m not paying tax money to teach your religion. I’m paying my tax money to teach academics. If you get Creationism then I get to have every student take a full course on learning how to respect and pray to nature and my creation story as told by the Native Americans. It’s only fair after all.

          QQ more

      • pennsyltuckian

        When did evolution move from theory to fact???? It was taught as the THEORY of evolution when I went to a non pc school that actually taught science and math rather than political crap. To my understanding none of the gaps have been filled and mass extinctions followed by new life forms have never been explained. I can’t tell you how life began or how it has changed so significantly over the years but my MIT statistics degree tells me it was not a random occurrence.

        • Mac

          I have read many explanations – theories – for how new life forms follow mass extinctions. You need to study a little further.

        • Altaica

          Statistics is one of those interesting forms of Math. What you need to keep in mind is the particular statistics that we are using as Biologists. The statistically principle we are using is that once an advantageous aspect is reached it is preserved in the DNA. So consider it in short terms like a lottery, but instead of drawing all 6 balls every time when you get a correct number it remains and now we only have 5 numbers. So we start with a 6! and over time of getting correct (or advantageous features) reduce down.

          The evidence, just in the last 10 years has been pouring in providing more and more conclusive proof to the Theory of Evolution. Remember too that a Theory in Science is one that has a lot of evidence and proofs. If it did not it would be a hypothesis. Evolution is rapidly moving from Theory towards Law. And to remind you, evolution does not explain where the first life form came from, it is the explanation of the change from one to another and the similarities through the fossil record and now the massive amount of DNA evidence that provides support. A lot of people are confusing evolution as the explanation of first creation which it is not.

      • http://liberty Tony

        To Dsk:
        Right on, although, i’m for Ron Paul but Huntsman hits it on the money. Maybe, these Tea partiers will listen.

    • Kate kat

      Thank you Ocala. You are right there. I have to ask this of these Evolution people….From what I understand it all started with a fish with legs (Lol) umm OK, so where is that fish now? Don’t tell me it evolved and is now gone…that would like all of this Evolution stuff, makes no sence. If something Evolves and then it disappears…then why pray tell do WE STILL HAVE MONKEY’S??? And where did this fish with legs come from, and where did that come from…where did all this stuff come from? Was it a being from “Out side our world?” as mentioned above? LMBO! Ummm no…OK so where then? Ummmm I guess this big bang theroy thingy? Well where did that come from? No answers. AND YET…there are writings and proof about a God…about Jesus…so ans so forth. Yet there is nothing that ccan explain “Evolution, or that big bang theroy thingy, sooooo I guess all that’s left is that a higher power did ALL of this! Sorry another Evo Fail!

      • http://www.ae911truth.org/ Jacques Cuse

        Kate kat said:
        August 23, 2011 at 7:49 am

        “Thank you Ocala. You are right there. I have to ask this of these Evolution people….From what I understand it all started with a fish with legs (Lol) umm OK, so where is that fish now? Don’t tell me it evolved and is now gone…”

        That ‘fish’ can be found in many places, there are many fish with a skeleton with rudimentary legs. One example of a further development of your ‘fish with legs’ is for instance the Platypus (Ornithorhynchus anatinus), quite an out of the ordinary animal. It has both mammal as well as reptile features.

        But hey, in some way I have to agree with the religious crowd here, there definitely must have been some ‘creation’ or intelligent design after all: Modern man, with more neurones than any other living being who is also more full of sh*t, by far. With a brain so much into make-believe that this variety cannot be other than a creation of some higher being. This also explains the enormous ecological problems in our world. Nature having evolved into all its beauty and perfection, having survived many catastrophic events and doing very well until recently, to be destroyed by the godly creation modern religious man, the most destructive being in the whole known universe…

      • Altaica

        “From what I understand it all started with a fish with legs (Lol) umm OK, so where is that fish now?”

        First off what you need to understand is if a species develops a feature that gives it an advantage to survival it will pass that on to future generations. If this new species is in direction competition for an ecological niche it will push out the other species and cause extinction of the previous form.

        Now fish with legs: Ceolocanth: Is a lobe fin fish, one of very few known species to still exist. You can look it up for yourself, but this is very much the step before. A fish with legs would not be in direct competition with a lobed finned fish because it can take advantage of other ecological niches. The next step of this process can be clearly seen in the mudskipper or mudpuppy. An animal that walks on it’s lobes, can breath air or water and thus is able to hunt in both environments. further on down the chain we get every increasing changes and types of amphibians. These are your walking fish.

        “then why pray tell do WE STILL HAVE MONKEY’S???”

        This is an easy one. First off Monkeys and apes are two completely separate branches of the primate tree. Monkeys typically are arboreal and fill a niche there. Humans, well we don’t live in trees. we farm, we build, but we aren’t out there scavagening the same foods the monkeys are now are we? Because we do not share the same niche there is no competition and thus both species can persist.

        “And where did this fish with legs come from, and where did that come from…where did all this stuff come from?”

        The fish with legs came from a fish like ceolocanth, a living lobed fin fish that is also in the fossil record. That fish came from even more primitive fish and so on and so forth to the first organism. That is where evolution starts, at the first organism, not before and it does not even attempt to explain where that first organism came from.

        ” Was it a being from “Out side our world?”

        I am not so arrogant to think that nonhuman beings could have seeded us. In my religion “From the stars we came and to the Stars we will return.” This is a core belief in the Native American traditions, so not all that possible. The book Gods, Genes and Consciousness, nonhuman intervention in human history, compares similarities between religious accounts of angels, gods, demons, etc and today’s modern ET encounters.

        ” Ummmm I guess this big bang theroy thingy?”
        That’s physics, not really my forte. But I will give you a scientific all. “Energy can neither be created nor destroy, only transformed.” This law tells me Energy had to always exist. You call the energy God. I call it Great Spirit, Great Creator, Divine Spark, or Divine energy.

        “Well where did that come from? No answers. AND YET…there are writings and proof about a God…about Jesus…so ans so forth. Yet there is nothing that ccan explain “Evolution, or that big bang theroy thingy, sooooo I guess all that’s left is that a higher power did ALL of this! Sorry another Evo Fail!”

        Sorry you are wrong on the evo fail. Evolution is observable and proveable. In order to be labelled a theory in science it has to be tested and proved. Evolution does not disprove or even touch on creation of the first life form. That is a common misconception. As for the writings being proof, you can belief that if you want, but remember, God did not write the book. Men did, many man. It is evident by the contradictions even in one book. Genesis 1 and Genesis two almost complete contradict themselves. To add to this humans voted for what would be contained in the New Testament at the council of Nicea. Any kernels are of truth there are have to be pulled out of the political and religious agendas of those who wrote the bible. The only proof you can really go by is your own experiences which only you can determine for yourself. That is why there are so many religions, because all we have are twisted fragments. each much find the belief system that fits them and walk it and leave each to find their own truths.

    • Altaica

      Ocala Charles
      I am amazed at people for their gullibility of the fables of the bible and other religious texts.
      If you are a science teacher you sure aren’t trained in Biology or up to date on your journals of science where the experiments and proofs are. Read more than just a magazine that is catered to everyday people and pick up a real science paper. As a teacher you should be reading everything on the subject and teaching science objectively, not colored with your opinion. Science is based on objectivity and observable data.

      • Bruce

        Altaica, So whats the very first code in base of the human genitic code?

        • Altaica

          Look it up yourself in the Human Genome project. I’m a Biologist with an understanding of genetics but not a Geneticist. Do research in the journals of science until you find the answer you are looking for. If you are truly interested get thee to a library and start reading the journals.

    • DaveH

      Ocala,
      We all have our own “gullible” beliefs, you included.

      • Altaica

        I like Fall out Boy’s take on belief in their lyric “The best part of believe is the lie.” I like songs that make you think.

  • Warrior

    Ok johnnie, you’re crazy! There now johnnie, just go away.

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Why do you want him to go away?

  • DSK

    “You’re not crazy, Governor. In fact, I might just agree with you on both points. I, too, trust a lot of scientists on global warming, but they are the ones who have overwhelmed the scientific community with so much hard evidence against the theory of manmade global warming that the whole notion has become something of a joke.”

    The ignorance and arrogance of this remark are stupefying.

    • Capitalist at Birth

      Is that all you can add? Insults?

      • eddie47d

        Check yours out at 8:30 and see who likes insults. What a merry-go-round we all get on.

        • DaveH

          I checked it out, Eddie, and I see nothing. Perhaps you can enlighten us?

  • Yvonne

    Where do the laws come from? Where does science come from? Laws of gravity, physics, et. al. Where did science originate from?

    Where do morals, right and wrong, come from? In the animal kingdom, there is no “right” or “wrong.” An animal simply does as it wishes. So if humans evolved from animals, i.e. primates, where did this consciousness come from? Why is it wrong to steal, murder, rape? It is not wrong in the animal kingdom. Why are we repulsed when we hear of parents killing their young children? It happens in the animal kingdom.

    Why does the fossil record record whole subjects, as if instantly implanted on the rock — like a picture? Was anyone there when that fossil was made? How do we know it’s billions/millions/thousands of year old? Because someone with a preconceived notion, with flawed testing, declared it to be?

    And if we age over time – from birth to death – how can anything evolve into something better? From the moment we, or any animal/plant, is borne, the aging process begins. We do not get better, so much as there is a peak of youth and then the body begins to slow down, (age) and then die… not evolve, die.

    And if all there is to life is the living/dying, then why are we hear to begin with? Really, since it’s all random, can we not just live the way we want, with no regard for anyone else, because in the end, it matters not?

    Just asking….

    • jurgy

      stupid idiot …

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Yes you are.

    • chris

      @Yvonne

      Why would God of the Bible not fix the problem with Adam and eve, and let the population grow to billions?

      Why does God choose to torture humans for Eternity? The bible says the path to heaven is narrow but the way to destruction is broad. Think about that next time Jesus lifts his eternal gas can to burn your grandparents. No wonder Jesus said, I am not good.

      Why is it wrong to steal, murder, rape? – Depends on who you ask. We still do that as a nation and we call it ‘war’. All those things happen, but we sugar coat them.

      Why did God choose to make pain?

      Why did God create the physics for evil?

      Why is the human race punished because one of God’s other failed experiments, Satan. Why would Satan have messed up Man? Why didn’t God just take care of the first problem. Then God wouldn’t need to torture my grandparents.

      Why did Jesus stay dead for only three days, when one child suffering in hell for eternity will suffer over 100 billion years, being eaten by worms, falling, and being burned alive but always regenerating? How does three days pay the price for eternity?

      Why do we think God could be human? When controlling a universe would require such a vast intelligence that we would look like frozen bacteria?

      Why can’t Jesus just rule the planet now? He can listen to six billion thoughts and prayers, but he can’t be in more than one place at one time?

      Why do most earth people have a very strong sexual desire, but almost no desire to go to church?

      Why do people have emotions like anger, jealousy, rage that can be useful in some survival situations? But lack other more ‘christian’ attributes from birth? Who programmed those people?

      Why are my first memories not of God, but of my family? Wouldn’t getting at 5 minute talk from God, that I could remember later, cause 99% of the population to follow him?

      Why isn’t the Bible the most concise, to the point, easy to read, and best written book in the entire world?

      Why does Jesus have such anger that we would want to see certain people sent to hell?

      KJV Mark 4:12
      That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them.

      Why does Jesus preach giving to your neighbor when he’s just going to burn and torture them forever in the lake of fire after they die?

      Why does the crime of sin, not fit the punishment?

      Why does God repent? He repented at least 10 times in the Bible? If he isn’t perfect, then why do we need to burn for our sins?

      Interesting food for thought…

      • Kate kat

        Chris,
        How woould we know good if there was no bad? What about the fact that God gave us free will? Everything comes with a warning. What do you want? Do you want a being that makes sure that everything is uniform? If so what is the reason for us being here? And if you do want that..you have it..Obama is in office. If you ask you shall recive…well I asked for Mr. Right one night…I asked God, hours later my Artie Walked in…We are married for 10 years now and growing stronger. You have the ability to do the right thing..but Morals are not everyones idea of fun…so don’t believe in God and Bang…excuse not to do the right thing. Not a smart move but one you are willing to make. OK fine. Have you ever read the Bible? I have just started and WOW..it is awesome. The stories are great. Some times I don’t understand what is being said…so I pray to god to help me understand it…amazing how I get it Right after I pray! I also feel Almost cleaner after I pray to him! He is a Father and a Really GOOD friend. You talk and he listens, once you are all done…he places a loving hand on you, and it is amazing how good you feel afterwards. And yes…some times I thank God for unanswered prayers! God has no issues with other’s belifes…unless it’s something questionable like Evolution! I still don’t understand WHY in the world you people want God to make EVERYTHING perfect..that would suck. We would all look the same, act the same and think the same…WE WOULD BE LIBERALS…all of us! Yelk…except that liberals love violence…so that’s the only Non-liberal thing that would happen. God is NOT a puppet master like Soros…God is a creator, our Father. Jesus, he was teaching the difference of good Vs. Evil…really, you didn’t get that one? OK fine it’s all good. but he is our Savior, and our healer…that’s what Jesus does. Creating is what God does. End of Story. ;) bible…basic instrutions before leaving earth.

        • chris

          I’ve calculated it out, and I’ve been to 6,000 church services. That includes Sunday morning, Sunday night, Wednesday night, vacation bible school, Bible camp, christian school chapel, daily bible class, prayer groups, and spiritual emphasis weeks.

          Always with mere ‘babes’ that never ask any hard questions.

          According to your logic, you’ll be a robot in heaven. I think we all like free will. As a computer programmer, I don’t see why God choose to make things that he detests things that we detest standard. Problem solved. You already have genetic knowledge you were born with, why not add in some of the Bible?

          If you ask a Christian why he loves Christ, it always ultimately comes down to selfish reasons just like everyone else.

          I was talking with my parents the other day and there church split again because of a post trib – mid trib disagreement. Yikes.

          I’ve been close to two churches were the pastors was preaching abstinence, and the pastors were both having an affair with a church member. In one case, the girl was a minor only 16. Yes, jail time. But he told his wife the devil made him do it, and she stood by him. Oddly enough these weren’t even the big scandals like you see in the news. (Ted Haggard) Thankfully, none of the churches I went to had a pastor that was hiring gay prostitutes.

          In my experience Christians whom I’m still friends with many, trade one perversion for another. Taking the moral high ground on one issue can lead to a whole we level of level of rigidness and hypocrisy on another level.

          I certainty didn’t vote for Obama and I’m not a liberal. I’m someone who’s read the Bible on their own, and is reading what the Bible really says, not the reinterpreted version from your pastor.

          I think we were designed not to know the big picture-not yet. I think we can find evidence of that everywhere.

          If you created something and it was always groveling and trying to praise you, wouldn’t that be an abomination to you? Shouldn’t you just be doing what your designed to be doing?

          • Karolyn

            Chris – “If you created something and it was always groveling and trying to praise you, wouldn’t that be an abomination to you? Shouldn’t you just be doing what your designed to be doing?”

            A good one.

            The Universal Intelligence does not require praise, nor is it jealous, vengeful or angry. A Supreme Being would have no need of praise. Why would God punish beings for acting just the way they were created to act? For what purpose?

          • Kate8

            Karolyn – God does not love praise because He has a big ego.

            It is for our benefit that we praise Him with all love, appreciation and sincerety, because we tend to become more like that which we adore. By honoring His Virtue, His Holiness, His Love, these things grow in us. Our desire is to be more like Him.

            We can’t really have a meaningful relationship with those for whom we have no real appreciation. It will be lackluster, at best.

        • eddie47d

          There is no end to the story Kate kat and you had to go political on us. “Liberals love violence”. What a crock of arrogance.

          • TheRealBob

            Not arrogance, truth – Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot were all left wingnuts like you and they all loved violence. Also, the SEIU and other union thugs are all left wingnuts like you.

          • eddie47d

            Don’t speak for me phony Bob. God has your number and it won’t be pretty. So your liar comment at 4:30 doesn’t cut it. I do believe you will be the one who won’t escape unscathed with your evil bile.

        • Altaica

          “Morals are not everyones idea of fun…so don’t believe in God and Bang…excuse not to do the right thing.”

          Morals are societal norms. They are in place as they preserve and protect the society from whence they come. You can lack religion and be totally moral. We call our dearest morals laws. An atheist still follows those morals the same as you and I follow these same morals. Those morals of which are the most beneficial and agreed on by the whole of society become the basis for our laws. IF you look at the worlds religions each one of those have their own morals. Morals and religion are not mutually inclusive you can be amoral and religious and you can be moral and atheist.

          “Have you ever read the Bible? I have just started and WOW..it is awesome. The stories are great.”

          Yes, confusing as hell, contradicts itself all over the place. Some of the stories are great but some of the authors did a pretty poor job.

          “God has no issues with other’s belifes…unless it’s something questionable like Evolution!”

          If your God were the supreme divine creator he would have no issue with evolution because it is the natural process of development in our balanced natural world. I am happy for you that your religion works for you and you are close to your god, but I don’t believe that god has a problem with evolution. It makes you understand how some things work, it doesn’t tell you where that first life form came from. This is a common misconception I have seen cropping up is the misrepresentation of what evolution truly is and means.

          “WE WOULD BE LIBERALS…all of us! Yelk…except that liberals love violence”

          Most of the liberals I personally know are pacifists and hate violence. A lot of them don’t even want to harm animals and refrain from animal products. from what I understood Jesus himself would qualify by the truest definition of liberal, the original meaning.

          “basic instrutions before leaving earth.”

          My instruction book says from the stars we came and to the stars we will return. It also says the world was created and balance and we should honor all of nature.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        I didn’t find one interesting morsel for any thought at all.

        • chris

          lol!

      • billy

        If one tell’s a story around the campfire, like religon,
        some people will soon start to belive in these myth’s

        • chris

          I agree.

          If we had a major disaster now, and very few people were left. I hate to think of what would happen when our civilization started to be rebuilt 1000 years after the event.

          Someone would find our modern day comics and reinterpret them. I’m sure there would be very elaborate stores of people with super powers. Superman comics would probably become a new religion. There’s been just a few decades of elaborate story building let alone thousands of years, with dozens of authors.

          Look at people from remote tropical islands, who build wooden mockups of airplanes and you’ll see the picture more clearly.

          Lets face it- were in this universe to learn and grow. Everything else is so petty, and disposable. Like Solomon of the bible says ‘all is vanity’.

      • home boy

        you might read the bible but you surely don’t understand it. god did not create evil. satan ,one of his angles turn evil by putting into question gods sovereignty. god allows suffering that man creates . god does not create suffering. he does however allow it to exist so that man will hopefully realize that they cannot exist with out his help then giving him back his sovereignty.

        • chris

          Didn’t he indirectly? If you don’t create something perfectly then you allow for mistakes, which is basically what evil is.

          No one wants to be against God. No one wants to be born ignorant.

          God could have made instant two way prayers, were you instantly see him on his throne and he could see you. Or one of his representatives.

          Lets just say he chose not to. Probably 50% of the population will burn for it.

          Instead your left with your imagination, and positive affirmations by praying the same thoughts over and over.

          I personally believe in God just not the God of the Bible. Everything is growing and evolving, and its not all us. He’s changing the laws of physics so they entire universe is becoming perfect, I believe. It’s just unfolding though time.

          How can a God burn us forever in a lake of fire for not being perfect, when he’s not perfect – at least not yet.

          It’s a process not a destination anyway.

      • jim

        Hey chris, you’ve obviously made your mind up already about what you believe….so, why don’t you try feeding on some of what Yvonne shared as food for thought?

        • chris

          The same reason I don’t inject people with cancer.

      • Karolyn

        Chris – “But lack other more ‘christian’ attributes from birth? Who programmed those people?”

        Everyone is born with morals but is corrupted by society.

        • chris

          So you never stole a peanut as a child?

          Never just took a toy from another kid when you were 4?

          Never threw a rock at someone?

          Never was in a rage when another another girl looked at your 15 year old boyfriend? That wasn’t your first, second, and third thought?

          That’s how it starts.

          • Karolyn

            Chris – You’re talking about things that happen as we age, after the influence has started. Once a child reaches an age where it starts to comprehend, it absorbs everything it sees and hears, hence stealing a peanut, etc.

          • Kate8

            karolyn – “Everyone is born with morals…”

            This is a Leftist idea, that we are all born the same. Except that it is untrue, and is another dehumanizing idea.

            How can you explain that children born into identical situations, even the same family, can be so different? Even have very diverse values?

            How about those who experience great suffering as children? Some strive to relieve suffering in others, or go on to live otherwise meaningful lives, while another will be angry and driven toward acts of violence and destruction. Some have no conscience at all, regardless of their environment.

            We are all born with a unique set of attributes. Some strive to be virtuous, some strive to have power, some are wild, some downright evil. We do not come into this world as a blank slate, but with our own personalities, talents and desires, and pre-set psychological potentialities.

        • DaveH

          “Everyone is born with morals”?
          Where do you get that, Karolyn? If that were the case there would be no need of spanking or other punishment for children.

          • Kate8

            DaveH – LOL.

            You said it so much better than I, with far fewer words.

      • newspooner

        While Ralph Waldo Emerson had a lot of political flaws because he was somewhat under the influence of the “intelligentia” (pseudo-intellectual fad following socialists) of his time, he produced some very good poetry and thought-provoking philosophical writings. Everyone should read “Compensation”. My main take from it is an explanation (accidental?) of why God “allows bad things to happen”. Simply stated, you can’t have a “good” if a “bad” doesn’t exist anymore than you can have an up if a down doesn’t exist.

      • Franktruth

        Chris:
        Consider, if you will just for argument’s sake, that the almighty creator and sustainer of the universe is infinite as a first premise or principle.
        At least three aspects of this infinite being must be love, wisdom and power. (Of course if a being is infinite all aspects are infinite, not just the ones we can name.)
        Any view that we, as finite beings, have of the infinite is incomplete by definition of our first principle.
        So, for us as finite beings to critique the infinite we need infinite evidence and infinite wisdom to do so. We, you and I, are finite beings and thus have neither. Therefore we are not competent to judge the infinite. That’s the end of my syllogism.
        But we do have a finite yet powerful feeling for what is just (good) and what is unjust (evil). Where did that feeling come from?
        Let’s consider an opposing first principle: there is no infinite creator sustainer of the universe – all that exists is only random mass and energy.
        There is no purpose to the universe. We, you and I, are random sentient and thinking amalgamations of protoplasm that just happen to gather some memory knowledge(?) from other random sentient and thinking amalgamations of protoplasm living and deceased. Therefore we are competent to impose our will on entities weaker than us, but we must avoid, deceive or obey entities stronger than us.
        But we do have a finite yet powerful feeling for what is just (good) and what is unjust (evil). In a universe with no purpose, that feeling merely serves us as a means to survive in a life without purpose or meaning. That’s the end to this syllogism.
        Both syllogisms in themselves are valid leaving you and me insignificant.
        But the first syllogism includes a notion that we have access to infinite love, wisdom and knowledge.
        I believe that access is lovingly given by our Creator and Sustainer through Scripture (infinite reaching out to the finite) and the infinite’s Holy Spirit sustaining and enriching our very temporal (natural) and eternal (spiritual) lives. I also believe what we in our finite wisdom see as evil is the visible consequence of our individual and collective free will to reject the love and admonition of Lord and anointed Savior Joshua (Jesus) the risen LORD. Please join me in this faith – He will enrich you with purpose and love.

        • chris

          I wonder how many Kings used the excuse of ‘knowing God’s will’? “I the king know God’s will and he has revealed X. You can’t judge me because God’s ways are above man’s ways.” (type quotes) They seemed to use that a lot when they wanted to get rid of the queen for a younger model. It was always, I need to follow God’s will by doing X.

          I had a friend growing up that’s a pastor, that used to use that technique and still does. Its not me saying this, its God. You cannot judge.

          Where do you draw the line with not judging the infinite? I’m not going on about it more, because I think it speaks for itself.

          I think the universe does have purpose. I think it has so many purposes, that it’s difficult to isolate just a few.

          I agree that you can’t leave people without infinite love, wisdom, and knowledge. A strong Christian can never just change his/her believes radically. You have to have something to replace that, and it has to be better than what you currently have. I’d say that’s NLP, or using your imagination in more creative ways. When you think about heaven, and good things your happy. You learn to control your thoughts in different ways, without the baggage.

          God could have made it so every time you closed your eyes and said his name, you were in a 3D world talking with him face to face, but he chose not to do that.

          Instead he chose to maximize the pain of hell. Most people are going to hell according the Bible. Burning more people than saving isn’t much of an enrichment.

          • Altaica

            Here’s another good one Chris—

            God says all this land is ours. I.e. Imminent Domain. I don’t think that was a good reason to take Native American lands, but it sure is the one that was used.

          • libertytrain

            I’ve never heard of imminent domain. Must be a scientific term?

        • Altaica

          Actually it’s a Legal-Political term. I learned about it before I learned about science. It has been exploited by both governments and religion to acquire property that otherwise belonged to someone else. Usually religion comes into play when a government that is ruled by a religion uses it. America has done it. In fact my family was victim to this practice. And let me tell you, they don’t give you fair market value. They give you pretty much pennies for something worth a dollar and call it fair. I disagree with Imminent (Or Eminent) domain.

          Here a couple of links that provide some useful information on the subject.
          http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Imminent+Domain
          http://www.ehow.com/facts_5008545_definition-imminent-domain.html

          • libertytrain

            Your first link actually goes to eminent domain definition – and the second says it’s eminent domain in the US. I had not heard the term imminent in all my years, even in the legal profession. Interesting.

          • Altaica

            It was once something that was rare, but it has been used more and more as of late. I know in recent years it was used in Connecticut to take property, or try to, I don’t know what the courts decided, many of the homes of the residents in Greenich. They may even still be in litigation. The government wanted to take the property and give it over to some corporation I believe. I may be wrong on the details, but I am sure there are better examples and definitions then the ones I quickly pulled up. I am getting a sinking feeling that CT may well be a state that uses it more than most. I grew up in a small town in Connecticut and was taught about it in school. Unfortunately school wasn’t the only place I learned about. The save state also used this very process to take my great great grandmother’s property from her in order to have a private school for the developmentally challenged. They weren’t paid what the land was even worth at the time and it was a situation where you take what you get or get nothing cause we’re taking the land. One of the really messed up thing too is that school has much better facilities and programs than most public schools and I know the state contributes to it. They even have horses….on my family’s ancestral land. The government agencies can also use this to take your property to widen and build roads.

          • libertytrain

            Eminent domain is not rare. Has been used excessively during my lifetime across states. From friends losing their houses so that expressways could be built, to A State Park being created as a result of NC taking a very prime property from a gentleman who had invested millions and was paid a whole let less than it was worth. DuPont State Park. The State turned the land down when it was offered to them and then a few years later decided they now wanted it after all…after it had been sold to the gentleman I mentioned…It’s a lovely park however was stolen in my opinion.

          • libertytrain

            And I still haven’t forgiven the Supremes’ decision in 2005 re Eminent Domain.
            http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/06/23/AR2005062300783.html

          • Altaica

            It was supposed to be rare, but it seems to be getting used more and more. I would attribute the fact that so many are losing their property through it that it is a symptom of the sickness of government corruption. I certainly don’t agree with the practice. The hard earned private property of people should not be just snatched away because the government wants it to give to their buddies cause it will make them money. That was not how the idea was intended, but like some many things, the government twists it to their ends. I’m still looking for some sort of a reset button. I’ll take even a soft reset at this point.

          • Altaica

            Apparently Imminent and Eminent Domain are just different spellings. I couldn’t remember the right way to spell it lol, that’s why I had two links. Seems there are two appropriate ways to spell this political-legal atrocity. No surprise there with all the government double-speak that goes on.

            Yeah that article you linked is one of the reasons I’m so sore about the Imminent Domain stuff. I happen to be originally from CT so when I heard about it going on it really steamed my collar. I don’t like the process, and when they say economic gain, it is clear it is not the people’s economic gain, it is the fat cats. They have money let them buy property they want the way everyone else does. Sometimes you just can’t buy the stuff you want. The corrupt aren’t used to being told no, so like spoiled little children they run to the government and force their will on the people. This sounds like a violation of those people’s constitutional rights doesn’t it?

          • libertytrain

            Funny, I don’t see that term as doublespeak. In the USA it’s Eminent Domain, in another country it’s Imminent Domain, That’s not doublespeak. That’s different countries, different words used for the same concept. Compulsory purchase in some, expropriation in others and on and on. Manifest Destiny. I almost see where you find that similar to eminent domain. Almost. It seems more of a concept in thought than anything else.

      • Almerin

        Chris — You have many good questions. I could only wish for a few days to discuss these with you face to face because all of them are interesting, while some are valid and some are based on a bit of misinformation.

        Please be careful to examine your information sources, both in their literal senses and in their intended, conceptual sense. For example, the Bible was written by inspired men over a great period of time and their cultures were different from one another and from ours. That is why it does not read the way you would find easier. I have a few physics and calculus books that require the same kind of concentration — and occasional re-reading. As a Christian it has taken me 74 years to get to where I am, with _many_ wrong turns. Please be patient and defer final judgement and be gentle with yourself and ignore those raucous individuals who condemn you. They too are probably trying to find the right path for themselves. You sound like an earnest young man with an active mind. Use it well.

        And remember the words of the poet, “A little learning is a dangerous thing / Drink deep or taste not the Pierian spring / There shallow draughts intoxicate the brain / Whilst drinking largely sobers it again…”

        Blessings on you.

        • hicusdicus

          It took me 75 years to get to where I am at and Christianity is not part of it. The only thing that ever gave me concern about Christianity was being wrong and having to spend eternity surrounded by born again Christians.

          • denniso

            Good line!!

      • SC Murf

        chris the bible says that you will be gone for eternity, not that you will suffer for eternity. Yes Jesus suffered for three days for the sins of man. This is all God demanded was three days. Do you think that God would have you suffer more than Jesus? Get over yourself. I believe that anyone not born again will suffer but only for a very short period. During that time period you will realize just what you are going to miss by being no more for eternity. Again this is your choice.

        up the hill
        airborne

        • chris

          I wish that were true. This includes the devil who’s apparently with humans in hell.

          Mt. 25:46 “They will go away to eternal punishment.”
          Heb. 6:2 “… the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment.”
          Jude 7 The people of Sodom and Gomorrah serve as an example of those who suffer the “punishment of eternal fires.”
          Dan. 12:2 “… some to everlasting life, other to shame and everlasting contempt.”

          2 Th. 1:9 “…they will be punished with everlasting destruction.”
          Gal. 1:8 If someone preaches another gospel, he is to be “eternally condemned.”
          Is. 66:24 Those that rebelled against God, “Their worm will not die, nor will the fire be quenched.”
          Rev. 14:10-11 “And the smoke of their torment rises for ever and ever”
          Mk. 3:29 Those who blaspheme will be guilty of an “eternal sin.”
          Is. 34:8-10 “Lord has a day of vengeance … it will not be quenched night or day. Its smoke will rise forever.”

          Mt 25:41 “… eternal fires prepared for the devil and his angels.”
          Jude 6 The angels will be bound with “everlasting chains.”
          Rev. 20:10 The devil, beast, and false prophet being tormented “forever and ever.”
          Mt. 18:8 “… thrown into eternal fire.”
          Mk 9:43 “…fire never goes out.”
          Mk 9:48 “…worm never dies and the fire is not quenched.”
          Is. 33:14 “… with everlasting burning.”
          Luke 3:17 “… with unquenchable fire.”
          Mt. 3:12 “… with unquenchable fire.”

          • Altaica

            Wow it’s all over the Bible! Isn’t Wrath one of the 7 deadly sins. This sort of punishment sounds rather wrathful. How can a loving god commit such endless torture on people?

          • hicusdicus

            The whole religious concept is so ridiculous it is comical.

        • Altaica

          If that is what the bible says why do so many people say it says you will burn in hell for all eternity? I’m seriously curious cause this is the first time I have heard this version and not the hell fire and brimstone which sounds more like a bastardized version of the Norse Goddess Hel’s domain or Pluto/ Hades underworld.

      • Nancy N.

        Chris, I love your questions, they make so much sense. My question is if Jesus was the son of god, how could a loving god accept seeing his “only” son torchured and suffering severe pain nailed to a cross to save the rest of us from our sins? Such a mighty God who had the intelligence for creating the universe certainly could have found a better way than to sacrifice his son. Would anyone out there do that to their own son to save humanity? I doubt that. Apparently it didn’t work anyway because man continues to sin in the most violent ways. So a decent loving human being was sacrificed unnecessarily.

        I certainly don’t doubt the existance of Jesus as described in the Bible because there certainly is enough proof that he existed. However, I don’t believe he was the son of god as he proclaimed. He was not the first man of his time who professed to be the son of god. This notion was instilled in his mind from childhood by his mother, Mary.

        • Kate8

          Nancy – Yeshua was the only one who fulfilled ALL of the OT prophecies of the Messiah.

          Think, too, that His death on the cross is a demonstration of how the Christ-spirit within each of us is crucified on the cross of life (at that time the “cross” was the symbol for incarnate man), and that, by following His example of a life lived from Love, the mastering of the flesh, and coming into oneness with the Father, death is defeated by our eternally-living spirit.

          Scripture contains many layers of truth. The more you study, the more you understand the hidden meanings. He often says, “for those with ears to hear”. This implies that there are those who cannot hear.

          • Kate8

            Also, Nancy, when you consider that “God’s own Son” is nothing less than God, Himself, incarnating into human experience, you realize that it is HE, HIMSELF who offered His (human) Life for our redemption.

            “Who can know the Mind of God? His Ways are not our ways, His Thoughts are not our thoughts…”

          • Jana

            Kate8,
            Excellent, and very right on.

        • Christin

          Nancy,

          You have a lot of questions…

          First, Jesus IS the Son of God and those that BELIEVE this will be saved by His Grace through their FAITH in CHRIST… thus their spirit will go to Heaven forever in His presence. Those that reject Jesus as the Messiah will go to Hell forever living in misery and SEPARATED from God.

          John 14:6
          Jesus answered, “I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.”

          Why did God do it this way…

          God makes Blood ‘Covenants’ with His people. In the Old Testament The High Priest made ‘sacrifices upon the alter with an unblemished animal’ such as a ram or lamb to ‘atone for the sins’ of the people. ‘Marriage’ to another of the opposite sex is a blood covenant with God… it is not just a marriage to another person. And in the New Testament ‘life eternal through the forgiveness of sins’ is a blood covenant… Jesus’s death upon the cross (the last lamb of God) and the spilling of His blood atones for our sins ONLY if we BELIEVE and have Faith in Christ.

          Why did God chose to sacrifice His only begotten son…

          Because He LOVES us so much. God is Holy and we are sinful people… God made a way for us to be forgiven of our sins (by the blood of Jesus) so that we could have a relationship with our Father and live forever in His presence and light.

          Did it work…

          YES, our sins are be forgiven if we believe in Jesus and put our faith/trust in Him. The Bible never says “we will STOP sinning” if Jesus dies for us, only that “we will be forgiven” and live forever in His presence. Those Christians who have the Faith probably sin less as they KNOW they are to be more Christ like in their Christian walk with Jesus, but they too are still sinners and make mistakes daily… they are saved by grace lest anyone should boast [how great they are.]

          Why would God send His son to die on the cross, certainly none of us would do that…

          You are right , I doubt any of us would do that. I could not. But we are human and God is well…the Lord God Almighty Creator of the Heavens and the earth, the fowl in the air, the beasts of the earth and the fish in the sea, and humans with souls… He is the King of kings and He is the Lord of lords. He has done this in His way not mans.

          Philippians 2:9-11
          “Therefore God exalted him to the highest place and gave him the name that is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord…”

          Hope this helps answer some of your questions…all the best to you.

    • Karolyn

      Have you never heard of carbon dating? The indigo children? (evolving human beings with extra senses.) Are you aware that we are all energy and energy never dies?

      Ever wondered how unexplained structures appeared here like the pyramids, stonehenge, etc? Ever stopped to think that there might be highly evolved beings in the universe who put us here and built those things?

      Nothing is impossible…..

      • Altaica

        You might like the book Gods, Genes and Consciousness. Nonhuman intervention in human history by Paul Von ward. It is very interesting and gives theories on other intelligent beings involved in our creation.

      • TheRealBob

        Except that you may someday get a clue.

      • Cawmun Cents

        Except when you have only some evidence but not all evidence,you may think evolution is fact.
        Evolution as I understand it has always been asserted by the use of”natural selection.”
        This is the survival of the fittest doctrine which is taught in evolutionary circles.Evolution,will not work out scientifically if this is not present in the mix.

        Problem is that when you prompt paleontologists to provide an example of the fossil which did not survive natural selection,they cannot.
        This means that either natural selection is a false doctrine,or that it cannot be in the mix of Evolution.That would render the theory impotent,because Evolution cannot be explained without natural selection.Darwin based everything on the premise of natural selection.

        Adaptive Evolution is one quasi-alternative but that doesnt take into account the environment in which the evolutive subject must be explained.It uses only that which man has set in place(his own flawed reasoning)in order to form theories in adaptive behavior.Since that is not a possiblity over eons of existence you find that you are back to square one when it comes to providing evidence.Scientific manipulation or lab results cannot make the evidence anything other than man made.

        The simplicity of the mechanics of life are very hard to prove to be manufactured.Yet the complexity of life mechanics makes the evidence of design a reality which is hard to deny.To say that things happen by chance is not what you’d call scientific at all.It bears no need for evidence if things happen by chance,over long periods of time.

        Yet again in adaptive studies,only short periods of time were necessary for species to adapt to their surroundings.That would throw the millions of years theory out the window.Subjects were found under laboratory conditions(paraphrasing to be sure)to adapt at a much greater rate than evolution would have you believe.That of course is by human design which is flawed in many ways.
        This constitutes a conundrum for evolutionary theorem.It really only serves to prove that by design the world functions without the need for millions of years of natural selection,to have been necessary for developing processes to have moved forwards.
        That,it seems would shoot the evolutionary theory in the heart.

        Massive periods of time are not a necessary equation it would seem to say to the patient observer.
        Only those who feel the need to ride this dinosaur into the dust will argue points in which they in fact find, to have no foundation.However this is only my personal observation after having studied both sides of the issue for 40 years.
        I find that creationism is at least as plausible as the evidence for evolution,and its(evolutions)followers will dispute that I am sure of that fact.But they can only claim accidental creation.That is like saying that human invention is by accident.Somehow I just dont buy into that premise.Perhaps those of you who do are not as intelligent as youbelieve you are.

        But what do I know?Apparently very little……..-CC.

        • Altaica

          The thing you seem to be missing here in evolution is that evolution does not explain where the first life form came from. Evolution explains the process of getting from one to another. This is an often overlooked part of evolution. Since evolution does not even attempt to touch where that first life form comes from it is left up to each person to decide for themselves what they believe.

          We are learning more day in and out, the blueprints for life, our DNA has in just the last few years been able to give us far more evidence and proof to the process of evolution. The rise of new, resistant strains of bacteria, viruses and insects show us evidence of the process at work. Fossils are useful, but they are only a snapshot, the real bulk of the evidence is still being discovered, but I have seen, as a Biologist, the amount of evidence in just the past 20 years grow exponentially in favor of evolution.

    • Altaica

      “Where do the laws come from? Where does science come from? Laws of gravity, physics, et. al. Where did science originate from?”

      Science is the process of questioning and discovering that which is there in our world. Science is a very part of our curious nature to question and look for answers.

      “Where do morals, right and wrong, come from? In the animal kingdom, there is no “right” or “wrong.” An animal simply does as it wishes. So if humans evolved from animals, i.e. primates, where did this consciousness come from? Why is it wrong to steal, murder, rape? It is not wrong in the animal kingdom. Why are we repulsed when we hear of parents killing their young children? It happens in the animal kingdom.”

      Morals come from a society. Morals are decided based on the survival and benefit of the society as a whole. Animals that live in social groups do have morals. These morals are based on their society, much like our laws today. In Muslim countries if a woman is raped they are killed for bringing disgrace to their family. For them that is moral for us it is abhorrent. A very good example that is well documented and easy to watch are the nature documentaries on meerkats, like meerkat manor. Meerkats will even ostracize others of their kind that break their societal laws.

      “Why does the fossil record record whole subjects, as if instantly implanted on the rock — like a picture? Was anyone there when that fossil was made? How do we know it’s billions/millions/thousands of year old? Because someone with a preconceived notion, with flawed testing, declared it to be?”

      Why are there whole bodies mummified in bogs? It’s because the environment preserved the body. This is what happens with the fossil record. You should read some science books. They will help you with this understanding. As for the dating, it is not a preconceived notion, it is based on real hard science. Every organic thing has carbon. We stop producing carbon when we die. Carbon is radioactive with a measurable deterioration at a consistent rate. Radiocarbon dating utilizes this true and repeatable process to date fossils. There are also other forms of measurement that confirm these dates and are repeatable.

      “And if we age over time – from birth to death – how can anything evolve into something better? not evolve, die.”

      I can see from your question and statement you misunderstand the purpose and process of evolution. Evolution is not something that happens in the life cycle of one living thing. It is something that happens over the course of many lifetimes, for many thousands or millions of years that gives a species a new feature. If that feature does not hinder the creatures survival or does not hinder it then it will pass it on to it’s progeny. If creatures did not grow, age and die then the world would be stagnant and there would never be any change. Evolution requires growth and change and the dying off of older models.

      “And if all there is to life is the living/dying, then why are we hear to begin with? Really, since it’s all random, can we not just live the way we want, with no regard for anyone else, because in the end, it matters not?”

      Societal norms are what dictate how you live. Why we are here is based on your belief structure. This is in no way a part of evolution. Evolution does not in any way even try to answer these questions because that is not what it is about. Evolution is the process. If you take apart your tv and put it back together you understand how it works. We don’t explain where the first life cam from. The organism was there. We look at the process of going from that organism to another. The tv was already built, you just looked at the process of how it works. Same idea.

      “Just asking….”

      I hope I have provided you with a little more understanding. A misconception is that evolution contradicts religion. We are only explain the nature processes in our world, not where they came from. Many evolutionists are also religious. Look up the paleontologist Robert T. Bakker. He’s one of the foremost paleontologists and evolutionists. He’s also a Christian minister.

  • Richard McCord

    The Bible explains the disagreement, There is none so blind as he that will not see. Satan has blinded the eyes of people and the only way to change that is to be born again. We need to respect the faith of evolutionists because it takes far more faith to believe in evolution than it does creation.If you do not believe in the Biblical account of all things you will be in for a big surprise when you die.

    • Altaica

      And just why is your religion better than another’s and we will suffer for not following yours? That seems pretty arrogant to me. How about I be arrogant back. I know I have lived many past lives as my soul (Spirit, energy) has moved from one being to another. So the only hell and heaven that exist is in your indoctrinated mind. Stop telling other religions they are wrong and going to suffer for not believing as you do. Maybe if religions stopped doing this we’d have a hell of a lot less wars.

      • SC Murf

        Yea and this time you came back as a dingbat

        • eddie47d

          Do you talk like that in church Murf??

        • Altaica

          Your words show that you are as you say a dingbat. It is clear from your reaction you are not willing to accept there are other faiths out there. This is why I get so frustrated with some religious people. It’s ok for them to preach and condemn but not for another religion to do so. And I’ve also heard Christians say my religion is older than yours so it is right. By that logic I am right, the practice of shamanism and nature worship is 60,000 years old. Christianity about 6 to 8k years old…and a lot of it rehashed from Sumerian religion and stolen from pagan religions. I follow a religion far older than yours. You toddle off and follow your God, and I will continue to follow The Divine Creative Energy thank you very much. I don’t need a book that constantly contradicts itself and I don’t need a preacher to speak with my creator. All I need is balance and enlightenment. Ahh, here’s another good line I’ve heard that I will use, “I feel sorry for you. You are too blind to see how wonderful everything the Divine Creative Energy has created.” So, what goes around comes around. Never thought I could use the Christian platform in my own religion. Sweet!

          Peace and Love Smurf.

      • Richard

        Gods word is the final answer to any disagreement. If you choose to disregard him no argument will get through to you. You have made yourself your own god and that will get you nowhere.I am not talking about religon of any kind just a personal relationship with our creator through his word. If you have lived so many differant lives you should try harder to get to know the real God.

        • Altaica

          See you are arrogant. You like most religions profess their god is the one true god. Islam says Allah is the one true God. Judeism says Yahweh. Hindu says Vishnu. If you all say you are right then you all must be either wrong or partially right. I am comprised of energy, energy can neither be created or destroyed only transformed. Spirit is energy. The spirit cannot be destroyed only transformed. The soul is energy, it can only be transformed. If it can only be transformed then it can change from body to body and existence to existence. The only thing that has always been is energy, and all things are made up of energy. You’re religion is at most 8 thousands years old, you stole aspects from older religions, most notably Sumerian. You had many men write stories that contradict one another at every turn. Just read Genesis 1 and Genesis 2, they contradict each other like crazy. Your bible was written by men and voted on by men in the Nicean council. You sir, follow a written belief created by men and decided on by men who can’t even agree. You go ahead and keep following you man dictated religion, I will follow the one that has been around 60,000 years and does not require a flawed book and intermediaries to follow. Anyone can communicate with the Great Creator. You don’t need priests or preachers, you don’t need a building and you don’t need a book. I am a part of the Divine energy. And I will continue to be so for all eternity. I have no desire to follow a jealous, murderous god when I can follow the truth of balance with all things.

          Have a good day sir, and enjoy your beliefs. I’ll stick with mine, my guides, and my creator.

  • http://www.diyyardandhome.com Dan

    If evolution is real then where are all the bones? Why has evolutionist faked findings of man’s evolution?

    • Altaica

      There are bones and there are DNA. The only one’s faking findings are creationists. They are the ones making up lies to make their point sound credible. They have mail order specialists that aren’t true scientists and then try and twist and manipulate hard scientific data to continue to control their flock of sheep. They think evolution threatens them when it really doesn’t.

      • TheRealBob

        You are a liar altiaca – have you never heard of the Piltdown Man and other evilutioinst frauds?

        • Altaica

          Bob, I am not a liar. The piltdown man was not made by scientists it was constructed by greedy men trying to make a name for themselves. It was science that proved it was a hoax. There will always be people twisting the truth and trying to fool the sheep. P.T. Barnum said it best, “There’s a sucker born every minute.”

          So the best you have is an insult and a hoax perpetuated by regular joes to make money and fame?

          Here’s a question for you, if god created everything then why does he need man to create and give him 10% of all the money he earns?

          • libertytrain

            I’m fairly certain God never sees that money.

        • Altaica

          I think you need to go on a field trip to a natural history museum and read some real science books.

  • http://aol.com sean murrey ILLInio

    This is off the subject but i must tell you i was barred from patriot news for speaking my mind they have sold out to soros.

    • jim

      Banned for speaking your mind is OK if you use words that no-one wants to read! Or if you start breaking rules that you agreed upon when you started typing stuff….oh….you forgot to read what you agreed on…didn’t you!?!

  • W D Hale

    Robert is correct. God created this universe through scientific design. All things are created through a process of scientic formulas. How else do you think God could have done created this universe? What makes humans different then most creatures in this Universe is that we have a spirit (soul) which can also create things. So in truth, man has finally reached a point in his evolution that clear vision of God’s universal design approach is growing in the correct direction. God created science and uses that approach to create all things in this Universe. We will all learn more as time passes. LOL, we did not know much 2000 years ago, did we? By the way, God is actually the intelligent power source of this entire universe. He is part of all things.

    • Altaica

      Now there’s a reasonable response. Science does not preclude or say you can’t believe in your religion and you get it. You’re view of god is similar to my view of the Great Creator or Divine Spark of Energy.

  • Larry Bowers

    What goes on with evolutionary theory begins with simply this – Because they had not a love for the truth God gave them over to a reprobate mind.

    • Altaica

      I love the great creator and I know the proofs of evolution. I am a scientist and an apprentice shaman of the native american faith. I don’t have a reprobate brain and I don’t have your god. Why must so many of the Christian Faith be so hateful towards other faiths?

      • newspooner

        Only because they are not true Christians. Kinda like Al Capone going to church on Sundays.

        • Altaica

          So love thy neighbor only applies to christians and you hate everyone else. Now that’s pretty discriminatory and prideful.

          I thought the Commandment was “Love thy neighbor.” Not “Love thy neighbor, but only if they are a christian like you, if they aren’t then you can hate and smash them in every fashion and disrespect them.”

          That kind of attitude seems pretty contrary to an all loving creator.

          And just what is your definition of a “True” Christian? Pope Innocent III had a definition of “True” Christian that resulted in crusades that wiped out whole branches of Christianity and innocent people as well. Read up on that history and you’ll understand where the phrase Kill them all, God knows his own” came from. If all are the children of god wouldn’t they all be his own? This is the kind of hyprocisy that made me leave the faith and return to one that is 60,000 years old.

  • home boy

    the people that comment on this site usually don’t comment on subjects that involve a religious nature but we shall see today. having said that, it is interesting that not only you but others seem to give bill maher any kind of credence to the fact that he is an expert on not only this subject but any subject. he is a comedian . a jokester if you will. but it doesn’t surprise me that people would take this man serious. people today would rather follow someone than do their own research on any subject mainly because they have gotten lazy . not once in you article did you even mention the bible . not surprising since you may have never read the best selling book of all time. the problem with the bible is it takes an effort to read it and understand it which most are not will to do. but the big thing is it takes FAITH to say that the bible is GODS word. i find it interesting that people will read books by man and believe their writings but give GOD no respect for the words he has written. just to have the thought that something all of a sudden exist is crazy. if that were the case then how come it doesn’t happen all the time. and how come scientist still to this day do not totally understand the human body. you have given man to much credit for being smart . even einstein knew his limitations and was will to admit it. and by the way man did not exist 40,000 years ago. not according to the bible any way. 6000 is the correct number. the earth might have been there. but not man. and why on earth would you trust a politician point of view. everyone is entitled to their opinion but at least do some research on the subject and don’t assume something to be . just remember that you are created and because of that you cannot exist without the help of your creator. read the bible and maybe you will learn a thing or too.

  • http://www.personalliberty.com/conservative-politics/government/lies-our-leaders-tell-us/#comment-504618 conservative independent

    a take from albert einstein as a student in the classroom well worth reading

    Let me explain the problem science has with religion.’
    The atheist professor of philosophy pauses before his class and then asks one of his new students to stand.
    ‘You’re a Christian, aren’t you, son?’

    ‘Yes sir,’ the student says.

    ‘So you believe in God?’

    ‘Absolutely. ‘

    ‘Is God good?’
    ‘Sure! God’s good.’

    ‘Is God all-powerful? Can God do anything?’

    ‘Yes’

    ‘Are you good or evil?’

    ‘The Bible says I’m evil.’

    The professor grins knowingly. ‘Aha! The Bible! He considers for a moment. ‘Here’s one for you. Let’s say there’s a sick person over here and you can cure him. You can do it. Would you help him? Would you try?’

    ‘Yes sir, I would.’

    ‘So you’re good…!’

    ‘I wouldn’t say that.’

    ‘But why not say that? You’d help a sick and maimed person if you could. Most of us would if we could. But God doesn’t.’

    The student does not answer, so the professor continues. ‘He doesn’t, does he? My brother was a Christian who died of cancer, even though he prayed to Jesus to heal him. How is this Jesus good? Can you answer that one?’

    The student remains silent. ‘No, you can’t, can you?’ the professor says. He takes a sip of water from a glass on his desk to give the student time to relax ‘Let’s start again, young fella. Is God good?’

    ‘Er..yes,’ the student says.

    ‘Is Satan good?’

    The student doesn’t hesitate on this one. ‘No.’

    ‘Then where does Satan come from?’

    The student falters. ‘From God’

    ‘That’s right.. God made Satan, didn’t he? Tell me, son. Is there evil in this world?’

    ‘Yes, sir..’

    ‘Evil’s everywhere, isn’t it? And God did make everything, correct?’

    ‘Yes’

    ‘So who created evil?’ The professor continued, ‘If God created everything, then God created evil, since evil exists, and according to the principle that our works define who we are, then God is evil.’

    Again, the student has no answer. ‘Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things, do they exist in this world?’

    The student squirms on his feet. ‘Yes.’

    ‘So who created them?’
    The student does not answer again, so the professor repeats his question. ‘Who created them?’ There is still no answer. Suddenly the lecturer breaks away to pace in front of the classroom. The class is mesmerized. ‘Tell me,’ he continues onto another student. ‘Do you believe in Jesus Christ, son?’
    The student’s voice betrays him and cracks. ‘Yes, professor, I do.’

    The old man stops pacing. ‘Science says you have five senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Have you ever seen Jesus?’

    ‘No sir. I’ve never seen Him.’

    ‘Then tell us if you’ve ever heard your Jesus?’

    ‘No, sir, I have not..’

    ‘Have you ever felt your Jesus, tasted your Jesus or smelt your Jesus? Have you ever had any sensory perception of Jesus Christ, or God for that matter?’

    ‘No, sir, I’m afraid I haven’t.’

    ‘Yet you still believe in him?’

    ‘Yes’
    ‘According to the rules of empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your God doesn’t exist… What do you say to that, son?’

    ‘Nothing,’ the student replies.. ‘I only have my faith.’

    ‘Yes, faith,’ the professor repeats. ‘And that is the problem science has with God. There is no evidence, only faith.’

    The student stands quietly for a moment, before asking a question of His own. ‘Professor, is there such thing as heat? ‘

    ‘ Yes.

    ‘And is there such a thing as cold?’

    ‘Yes, son, there’s cold too.’

    ‘No sir, there isn’t.’

    The professor turns to face the student, obviously interested. The room suddenly becomes very quiet. The student begins to explain. ‘You can have lots of heat, even more heat, super-heat, mega-heat, unlimited heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat, but we don’t have anything called ‘cold’. We can hit d own to 458 degrees below zero, which is no heat, but we can’t go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold; otherwise we would be able to go colder than the lowest -458 degrees. Every body or object is susceptible to study when it has or transmits energy, and heat is what makes a body or matter have or transmit energy. Absolute zero (-458 F) is the total absence of heat. You see, sir, cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat. We cannot measure cold. Heat we can measure in thermal units because heat is energy. Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it.’

    Silence across the room. A pen drops somewhere in the classroom, sounding like a hammer.

    ‘What about darkness, professor. Is there such a thing as darkness?’

    ‘Yes,’ the professor replies without hesitation.. ‘What is night if it isn’t darkness?’

    ‘You’re wrong again, sir. Darkness is not something; it is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light, but if you have no light constantly you have nothing and it’s called darkness, isn’t it? That’s the meaning we use to define the word. In reality, darkness isn’t. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?’

    The professor begins to smile at the student in front of him. This will be a good semester. ‘So what point are you making, young man?’

    ‘Yes, professor. My point is, your philosophical premise is flawed to start with, and so your conclusion must also be flawed.’

    The professor’s face cannot hide his surprise this time. ‘Flawed? Can you explain how?’

    ‘You are working on the premise of duality,’ the student explains.. ‘You argue that there is life and then there’s death; a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can’t even explain a thought.’ ‘It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one. To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life, just the absence of it.’ ‘Now tell me, professor.. Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey?’

    ‘If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, young man, yes, of course I do.’

    ‘Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir?’

    The professor begins to shake his head, still smiling, as he realizes where the argument is going. A very good semester, indeed.

    ‘Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you now not a scientist, but a preacher?’

    The class is in uproar. The student remains silent until the commotion has subsided. ‘To continue the point you were making earlier to the other student, let me give you an example of what I mean.’ The student looks around the room. ‘Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the professor’s brain?’ The class breaks out into laughter. ‘Is there anyone here who has ever heard the professor’s brain, felt the professor’s brain, touched or smelt the professor’s brain? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain, with all due respect, sir.’ ‘So if science says you have no brain, how can we trust your lectures, sir?’

    Now the room is silent. The professor just stares at the student, his face unreadable. Finally, after what seems an eternity, the old man answers. ‘I Guess you’ll have to take them on faith.’

    ‘Now, you accept that there is faith, and, in fact, faith exists with life,’ the student continues. ‘Now, sir, is there such a thing as evil?’ Now uncertain, the professor responds, ‘Of course, there is. We see it Every day. It is in the daily example of man’s inhumanity to man. It is in The multitude of crime and violence everywhere in the world. These manifestations are nothing else but evil.’

    To this the student replied, ‘Evil does not exist sir, or at least it does not exist unto itself. Evil is simply the absence of God. It is just like darkness and cold, a word that man has created to describe the absence of God. God did not create evil Evil is the result of what happens when man does not have God’s love present in his heart. It’s like the cold that comes when there is no heat or the darkness that comes when there is no light.’

    The professor sat down.

    If you read it all the way through and had a smile on your face when you finished, mail to your friends and family with the title ‘God vs. Science’

    PS: the student was Albert Einstein
    Albert Einstein wrote a book titled God vs. Science in 1921…

    ” When Injustice Becomes Law, Resistance Becomes Duty.” T. Jefferson

    • Pegasus66

      Wow! Thank you so very much for your entry.

    • BGinTN

      Enjoyed the story conservative independent, but that is just what it is.
      Yes, I can agree with what it is teaching.
      A book “God vs. Science” written in 1921, dose it exist?

      May I suggest reading a book that I know exists and get ready to expand your mind.

      Our Undiscovered Universe
      Introducing Null Physics
      The Science of Uniform and Unconditional Reality
      By Terence Witt

      ISBN-10: 0-9765931-3-8
      ISBN-13: 978-0-9785931-3-1

    • newspooner

      I cannot remember Fuzzy Albert’s 1921 Book, but I will take it on faith that it exists and you are correct and quoting correctly because while the universe is infinite, my practical time is finite and I have more critical things to do. The Socratic presentation that you quoted at length is excellent, with only slight flaws or imperfections (e,g, lack of clarity on the difference between heat and temperature). I believe that all good Deists, Christians or otherwise, can use it a a basic building block in their preachings and intellectual discussions.

      My real question is: What happened after 1921 that caused Fuzzy Albert to go over to the other side, becoming an atheist, a socialist, and somewhat of an opponent of individual liberty? Did he get bought out? Was his intellect even less than what his critics claim? Does his switch to the other side explain why he was uprated from of the 200 best mathematicians and physicists to all ltime to supposedly one of the top 10 (or even number one)? Was his ethnic religion loyalty greater than his intellectual deism? Did he sell out to be given glory and a position of “leadership” in these areas? Did artificial political delineations become more important to him than either freedom or cultural loyalty? This raises some very interesting questions. But still, it was a nice Socratic presentation, and he should be given due credit.

      • Polski

        Are you talking about Einstein or Darth Vader?

    • http://n/a Bill

      I have one question? If man evolved from Ape? Why do we still have Apes? Why didn’t they all evolve? The same reason we didn’t,we were made this way! I like the one about ( Albert Einstein. ) It was sent on Aug.23-2011 at 7:50 a/m-it explains everything.read it and weep!

      • Altaica

        You don’t understand evolution.

        You can still have the parent species that one evolved from. If one species is born with a change that allows it to thrive in an ecological niche that the parent species did not, there is no direct competition. It is when the two species compete for the same resources that one consequently pushes the other out. Humans are not in direct competition for the same foods and territory as apes (well until we destroy their habitat and hunt them to extinction) therefore both species are able to persist. Another understanding you are missing is that we share a common ancestry, that means that animal A divereged into animal A, B and C. When A could not longer compete with it’s descendants it was pushed out of existence and the two divergent branches went on to further diverge and change and so on and so forth. We are related to Neanderthals, and genetic evidence shows some humans mated with them, but over time our ancestors pushed them out.

        I’ve given you the basics, if you have any desire to actually learn true science then you have starting points to find information.

    • patrick H.T. paine

      “To conquer, first divide!”

      The interesting semester indeed……so interesting that if you have idiots leading idiots……..eventually you might be able to come to
      agreement on DEFINITION.

      For all the words in this story, the dramatic description…..it requires a stupid scientist…..change the scientist’s answer to the correct one’s and you have no story…..and that includes the question of evolution…..yes, it has been seen and is being seen….
      so your story doesn’t work. But here’s a better and TRUE story.

      Descartes once confronted Deidirot in the Court of Catherine the Great
      by scribbling and bunch of math on a blackboard and ending it with the
      declaration, therefor God exists. Not being a mathematician, Deidirot left never to return…….the math was gibberish, but “ignorance”
      won……..and this board thrives on ignorance, which is it’s only
      attribute…..endless discussion, conducted by those whose words have no common definition……

      “Do not ask for whom the bell tolls………”

    • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

      conservative independent
      Wrong,
      There is no historical evidence Albert Einstein wrote God vs. Science in 1921.That was a fabricated lie.

      Excellent collection of Albert Einstein quotes on Philosophy, Religion, God, Theology, Jews, Anti-semitism, Religion vs. Science.

      http://www.spaceandmotion.com/Theology-Albert-Einstein.htm

      • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

        conservative independent
        Excerpts

        Albert Einstein Quotes on Philosophy of Religion, Theology, God
        The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend personal God and avoid dogma and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. Buddhism answers this description. If there is any religion that could cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism. (Albert Einstein)

        It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it. (Albert Einstein, 1954) From Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas and Banesh Hoffman, Princeton University Press

  • Kate kat

    Bible. What dose it stand for? Basic instrutions before leaveing EARTH! So read up! Let it go…there is a God..OK so you don’t want to have Morals and not beliving in God is an easy out for you..ok I get that….but really? Evo? Come on now. I know that you all have GOT to be smarter than that. I mean HUNTSMAN believes in Revo..he is a sick twisted confused old man. He claims that he is a Republican….umm have you heard what he has to say? Yeah he is a liberal…so I am NOT suprised that he believe’s in EVO! That’s the type that believes in Revo! Just saying. And funny how they NEVER win anything. True…just look it up!

    • Pegasus66

      Kate: I think you may have the two Huntsmans confused – - the son is running for President, not his “old man”. I do agree that the younger, in his support of man-caused global warming and evolution shows a sad lack of seeking fact instead of political correctness.

      • Kate kat

        No I know it is the kid…I was mocking him. He got mad once because someone called him an Old man. ;) That’s all that was. Sorry I should have explained that. I love your comment BTW… John Wayne once said: “Life is hard;Its harder if you’re Stupid!” I also know why an atheist cannot find God,for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman! Have a Nice Day! VERY WELL PUT!! I am so going to have to use that! Thank you for sharing that one with us. :)

        • DaveH

          Christ taught tolerance to his followers. Not all of them have learned.

    • Altaica

      These basic instructions tell me to war, hate and contradict themselves. Take 2 steps forward now three steps back. Assemble this part then take it apart and mash it with that one. No thanks I like the Native American instructions better. They’re more clear in their instruction. I respect your right to follow your religion, but it is not the only one out there and what is right for you is not right for me. This is the issue I run into so much is so many religions have to tell others they are wrong and try and force their ideals. By saying following evolution, the inter workings of the web of life, will make me suffer you are judging us. Stop judging and enjoy your religion and I will enjoy mine. Debate is fine, but condemnation brings the feeling of being attacked.

      • Polski

        If there is a God, then why is a “middleman” necessary? So much for religion. And science, it’s just another religion, no matter what you call it.

        • SC Murf

          Jesus said “where any one meets in my name there I will be”. No need for a middleman

        • Altaica

          You are mistaken about Science being a Religion. The definition of a religion is belief in a supernatural power, usually a god or gods. Science only looks at what can be observed in the nature world and study through testing. Science is no more a religion than Math or English are religion. They are academic pursuits, not religions.

  • Pegasus66

    Mr. Ringer: Thank you for your knowledgeable article. What part of “NO CREDIBLE EVIDENCE” do people not understand? I come from a science/art background (aka. medical illustrator) and had the scientific method of inquiry trained into me by some very good science teachers from grade school on up to Stanford University. A theory is just a theory until hard evidence is found and results are reproducible by someone other than the theory’s originator. Gould is correct – - there is no credible evidence . . . a single tooth or bit of bone does not an entire creature make. One specie changing into another takes more faith than science.

    The other mistake is people confuse Darwin’s theory of evolution of species with Darwin’s accurate reporting on Natural Selection – - particularly based upon the varieties of finches observed in the Galapagos Islands. This is what allows us to breed different varieties (breeds) of dogs, cats, horses, etc. These are indeed varieties, or subspecies, of the main specie and can interbreed; if you allow a large variety of dogs to interbreed you end up with a dog that looks very wolf-like. The Spitz line of dogs is the closest to this “parent specie” and as such show genetic dominance when crossbred. Thru species cannot interbreed. However, very close species may give you a hybrid, such as horse + donkey = a mule, but mules are sterile. There are also ligers and zorses.

    Darwin’s work was appropriated by the opponent’s of God to prove His non-existence. He was aware of and saddened by this, as that was not Darwin’s intention. From then on it has been a matter of a great propaganda plan that would have made Bernays proud.

    Natural Selection is TRUE. Evolution of one species into another new species is UNPROVEN. If it were true there would be lots of evidentiary fossils lying about showing intermediate forms. Sorry folks, they do not exist.

    • Altaica

      Pegasus66,

      There is credible evidence. The book written by gould is years older than our recent work into DNA. As for Fossils, think of how many of our important fossils turned into the stuff you use to power your car. The Fossil record is a snapshot. DNA provides a lot more data. Plus it is clear there is more to that passage then what was quote. I would want to read that passage in context to see what it truly says rather than a quote that can easily be manipulated to say other things.

      If you want to talk about credible evidence, where is the credible evidence of God’s existence? All I see is a book written by a number of human authors, cobbled together and voted on by the council of Nicea as to what it would contain. If it was written by God no human should have voted on what it contained. If it was the inerrent word of god it shouldn’t contradict itself and other religions. Islam, Judeism and just about every other religion says their book is the absolute. If this were the case there would be one book and one belief. But there is not, each religion can’t agree within itself which is right and which is wrong. All these books were written by men, not a god as each proclaims. Science has proven to be a far more credible source then the various religious texts.

      • jim

        The age of a book may or may not matter when it come down to facts. Adiition is still addition….subtraction is still subtraction!!! As for Fossils, it is nbot proven fact that the oil we use to power cars come from “Fossils”!!!

        You bring science into the picture as if one must choose between science and religion! That is pure bull and proof of a shallow mind!

        • Altaica

          You are putting words into my mouth. I never said science and religion are mutually exclusive. If you read the very first post I made you would see that.

          • Altaica

            You completely missed the point of my comment. There are tangible, credible resources for science. The same cannot be said about religion but many religions parade their works as credible. If they were a credible source they would all match mostly, but they don’t. You are free to follow what ever religion you want. Science doesn’t care what religion you follow, but it is a hell of a lot more credible then contradicting books of morality stories.

      • FreedomFighter

        ‘The neo-Darwinist is now reaching the point of dignity in the history of science that the Ptolemaic system in astronomy, the epicycle system, reached long ago. We know that it does not work. And that is interesting. Because from the actual structure of the chromosome we can demonstrate that the human species did not come from a progressive humanisation of a pre-human.’

        Quoted from Conference Paper dated October 1975, The Beginning of Life, by Professor Jerome Lejeune, Chair of Fundamental Genetics, University of Paris, France.

        ‘If there were a basic principle of matter which somehow drove organic systems toward life, its existence should easily be demonstrable in the laboratory. One could, for instance, take a swimming bath to represent the primordial soup. Fill it with any chemicals of a non-biological nature you please. Pump any gases over it, or through it, you please, and shine any kind of radiation on it that takes your fancy. Let the experiment proceed for a year and see how many of those 2,000 enzymes [proteins produced by living cells] have appeared in the bath. I will give the answer, and so save the time and trouble and expense of actually doing the experiment. You would find nothing at all, except possibly for a tarry sludge composed of amino acids and other simple organic chemicals. How can I be so confident of this statement? Well, if it were otherwise, the experiment would long since have been done and would be well-known and famous throughout the world. The cost of it would be trivial compared to the cost of landing a man on the Moon… . In short there is not a shred of objective evidence to support the hypothesis that life began in an organic soup here on the Earth.’

        Sir Fred Hoyle, British physicist and astronomer, The Intelligent Universe, Michael Joseph, London, 1983, pp. 20-21, 23.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

        • Nancy in CT.

          Thankyou Freedom Fighter for your post. I have always been influenced in my beliefs by the description of the “premordial soup” issue that seemed a logical explanation to the theory of evolution. Your post has made a huge change in what I believe… Not saying that I actually believe in a God, but possibly in some super magnetic/electrical force that our brains are not capable of understanding…YET.

        • Altaica

          Interesting. But science grows as more data is made present. How about you find a Geneticist’s paper from at least the current decade. You’ll find if you compare the two we have learned a lot in the last 35 years.

        • Altaica

          You’ll also find that genetics in just the last 5 years has uncovered ever increasing support for evolution. It looks to me like you choose only that which supports your arguments, hence an article that is pre-human genome project and very early on in genetics before even genetic mapping. The information at that time period was very limited, and so the controversy between scientists much greater. The majority of the scientific community does not have the same viewpoint as it did 35 years ago because it has uncovered more evidence to be able to make a better decision.

    • Polski

      So what is “credible evidence”? And what is NOT “credible evidence”? You remember ASSUME don’t you? It makes an A** out of U and ME.

      • Altaica

        Credible evidence is one that can be observed, tested, etc. We have fossils. Tangible. We have DNA. Observable. We have bacteria, viruses and insects adapting, changing and in some cases deviating enough to be a new species that are observable, testable evidence. These are things that can be repeated time and again. That is what a theory is in science. Something that has substantial proof and evidence to support it. If it did not it would be a Hypothesis.

  • SC Murf

    Robert as for me I was born from woman. Our scientists admit that they do not understand exactly how the human brain works, but yet there are people who say that it evolved into the lump of gray matter it is today. NOT. The people that do not believe in God and what He has created are blind, they refuse to see the miracles that stare them in the face daily. I too believe in the Big Bang Theory. Can you imagine the noise that was created when GOD said “LET THERE BE LIGHT”. The bang had to be deafening when the sun and all of the universe came into being from God’s command. And when people ask me what sign I was born under I tell them “Hospital Sign”
    Good article

    up the hill
    airborne

  • samuel welsh

    science and christanity match
    God is in control

  • http://lib.alerts Joel

    If you wish to believe you desend from a chimp fine but I know that makes you a chump.
    If we desend from apes then why are there still apes? Different breeds of dogs can inter breed and was done to perform certain tasks for the men that bred them. A mutated lizard, really? What in your highly educated mind has turned from one thing into another. Such as a dog into a bird! The only evolution I see here is an educated man (yourself) turning into an absolute MORON. I envision Huntsman and Marr sitting in the White House smoking a joint with fingers on the BUTTON. And as for Marr, he is just so much pig dung!

    • Altaica

      Joel
      Man and Chimpanzees share a common ancestor. The answer to why there are still apes is a simple one. Humans and chimpanzees do not occupy the same biological niche. If species are not in competition with one another then they will both persist.

      You’re assumption is ludicrous. By your logic since we have dogs we should not have wolves. Since we have domestic cats we should not have any wildcats. since we have domestic rats and mice we should have no other rats and mice. Since we have domestic rabbits we should not have wild rabbits. I think you get the point. One species adapting and changing to a new environment and niche does not preclude the existence of the parental species.

      As for a dog to a bird you are being ridiculous. A dog would have to de-evolve all the way back to a reptilian ancestor then undergo the entire evolutionary process the other direction to a bird. This is a process that would take somewhere around 65 million years or longer.

      I think your understanding of nature and science is lacking. If you understood science you would understand the process.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        There is no scientific evidence. You obviously have accepted the Evolution Religion.

        • Altaica

          Evolution is not a religion. It is a scientific principle. Religion is the belief in a supernatural force, science believes in fact and demonstrable tests. Religion relies wholly on faith. Science relies on objective observation. Evolution is a process not a religion. It is a part of science. Philosophy is not a religion. Politics are not a religion. Mathematics is not a religion. Science is not a religion. They are two completely different categories of thing. Science is a profession, religion is a faith in a supernatural something.

          • home boy

            they both have one thing in common. that you believe what they say is true.

          • hicusdicus

            Altaica, Have you ever run into so many retards in one place?

        • DaveH

          I’ve had extensive experience with both (Religion and Science). Science trumps Religion, but there is no doubt that displaying the label of Scientist does not preclude chicanery.

          • Altaica

            That would be true, that’s why I encourage people to read many sources and do research. Those that truly want to pull back the veil will look deeper.

            Chicanery exists everywhere, the reason being is because we’re all human and all humans are capable of telling big stories. Actually it’s kind of hard wired in our brains. If you were told two stories with the same basic details, but one was exaggerated and more entertaining which one are you more likely to remember? Of course the more entertaining one. I believe that a lot of stories from religions hold kernels of truth, but in order for them to be remembered well from the time of oral tradition they became big fish stories. So you have to look through that story and figure out what the point is. It’s not the details, it’s the theme you are looking for. The details are entertainment to make it more memorable.

            In traditional religions with oral history if you ask them a moral question you will often get the response, “Let me tell you a story…” Makes it easier to tell that you are looking for theme rather than hard facts.

    • Nancy in CT.

      Yes, Joel, you are correct. It has been scientifically proven that you cannot breed one species with another…say a dog and cat, a horse with a cow etc. It’s just not possible to do! Breeding within the species can change color, size, and general appearance BUT not change one species into another. So how does that fit into evolution?

      • DaveH

        If I’m reading you right, you expect evolution to turn a cat into a dog or visa versa? No, it’s a random process building upon previous foundations. The outcome is very unlikely to be a replica of an Existing species, for the same reason you couldn’t easily convert a Motorcycle to a Limousine.
        See here. This is gross, and admittedly Genetic Engineering makes me very uneasy, but so does lack of knowledge:
        http://www.bucconeer.worldcon.org/contest/2002e_5.htm

  • TheRealBob

    The scientist will look at a flint chip and cry out that the chip is evidence of a tool-maker or creator. That same scientist will look at a universe trillions of times more complex than that flint chip and will cry out that it all happened by accident; that no Creator was involved. The proper place of science is as the handmaidem of belief; when it usurps that place, it becomes the realm of fools. Evolution is a lie and all who proclaim it are fools. The very thought that everything came from nothing without the guidance of an intellect is anti-reason and nonsense.

  • Altaica

    I feel the need to put my two cents into this conversation. As a Biologist evolution is a cornerstone of my science. This is in no way an attack on religion, I am also an apprentice Shaman. I follow a nature based religion and I do not believe evolution is a threat to religions.

    I think a lot of people misunderstand quite a few things about evolution and the terminology of science. First off a theory in the scientific definition is in between a hypothesis which is conjecture with minimal supporting data and law which has been absolutely proven. A theory persists because there is a myriad of evidence that supports it. Theories are peer reviewed by the scientific community and have tests, studies and papers showing their validity. Evolution has a growing amount of evidence just gathered in the last 10 years showing this. I believe the Stephen J. Gould book you are referring to is older than that time frame. Science constantly changes and as such older information is more like a historical framework. Gould is indeed a good scientist, but you have to look at more current works. It is also a good idea to look at other scientists work, such as Robert T. Bakker who is considered one of the foremost paleontologists and a proponent of evolution.

    The fossil record every day yields more and more evidence, but we have to remember too that the fossil record is like a snapshot. If you took 1000 pictures on a week long vacation then tried to build the story of your vacation you would find it lacking. Does that mean your trip didn’t exist? No, it just means there are not records preserving the history. The same can be said about the fossil record. We are doing the best we can with the puzzle pieces we are given. The other important thing to remember is that ever day we lose fossils in the oldest layers of the earth due to tectonic plate movement. As one plate pushing another beneath it, the below rock is consumed and turned into molten lava within the core resulting in the destruction of fossils. Other fossils are also destroyed by decay into the oil we use for our fuel. The earth constantly renews and breaks down as a natural cycle of construction and destruction. Since our knowledge is limited to the hard evidence we find, the very forces of nature are destroying the pictures. Think of it like a smoldering fire destroying those pictures you took on vacation. You rush to try and salvage them, but you can’t save them all. Now instead of 1000 pictures you have 100.

    DNA evidence has provided us with some of the best proof of evolution. We share DNA with even plants. This commonality suggests we evolved from a common ancestor all the way down before plants, which supports all life on this planet stemming from that first life form. DNA is more like a continuous recording of history, just like if you had videotaped you vacation and then backed up the data in several places. The aforementioned fire may destroy the original, but you have copies all over the place and so the data is preserved.

    The thing you need to remember about evolution is it is not like a billion monkeys typing on keyboards. Each time a sequence is considered useful it is kept. That means that each time you get a correct sequence you are no longer looking at randoms for that particular slot. Over time this means the slots will all be filled in. It is variances in DNA that changes a species, slowly over time until we have a whole new species. Sometimes the species exists in a separate niche from the original species, allowing both species to continue to exist. Sometimes the species compete and the one better adapted to the situation will persist and pass on it’s genes. As for the gaps, they are being rapidly closed by new evidence each day. I do fully believe that Evolution will one day be the Law of evolution.

    It is important to understand that no-where does evolution state where those first organisms came from, it merely explains the process of getting from point A to point Z and the steps in between. It is clear from the fossil record that all species did not arise at the same time. If this were true we would have dinosaur, human and rabbit bones all together in the same layer of the fossil record.

    If you want to find the down and gritty details and understanding of evolution you have to read a lot of sources. Scientific journals, science publications and books all contain varying degrees of information with the journals providing the most technical understanding, books next and magazines last as written for the lay person. You have to remember too, that science evolves and changes with new information and tests and what was true 10 years ago may have new data now in light of increasing DNA evidence.

    As for where that first life form comes from, to each their own. It could be a god or gods, a meteor striking the earth bringing biological material here, extra-terrestrial beings manipulating our genes, or any number of other hypotheses. We simply do not have the data to prove what caused the first life form, and we likely never will because it was more 65 million years ago. Unless we somehow manage to make a Tardus and go back and watch. But I will leave theories of time and time travel to the physicists.

    I prefer to believe as the Native Americans, “From the stars we came and to the stars we will return.” To me the great creator is energy because law dictates that energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. As this is a firm scientific law it stands to reason that energy in one form or another is the very root of creation. But that is my view, and each person must find their own belief.

    • TheRealBob

      Pseudo-scientific babble from a witch doctor.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Ditto that, and boring to boot!

      • Karolyn

        Have you never thought outside your box? How sad and limiting.

        • TheRealBob

          What does someone like you know about thinking outside the box? You are nothing more than a collection of lieberal lies and fantasies. You are as much a thinker as my dog. You parrot new age nosense with the same amount of thought that my cockatiel uses when it squawks. By the way, I was in your lieberal/athiest/fool box for years and I finally saw the truth and got out of it and embraced the truth of Christ.

          • Altaica

            Shamanism is over 16000 years old, older than your bible. It is not new age, it is the original set of morals and understanding that religions are based on. Shamanism is a profession, not a religion. Every religion has their form of Shaman. The christian shaman is referred to as a mystic. My teacher is an elder Shaman Christian Mystic and a Theologian. I am capable of listening to and understanding her as she embraces us all and does not spew hate speech against other faiths. The Native American Faith is at least 10,000 years old. Also older than your bible and definitely older than Christianity. Native American religion is not New Age it is older. New age is the set of newer religions that have cropped up in people’s attempts to find a faith that fit their ideas and does not have the heavy handed control of many of the mainstream religions. I chose to leave Christianity because it didn’t work for me. The more hypocrisy and contradiction I saw the more frustrated I became. Faith should not cause one to be stressed, it is supposed to help us feel less stressed. Christianity was harmful to me and thus not appropriate to my spirit. I feel more balanced and aware as a member of the Native American faith and here I will stay. You walk your path and I will walk mine.

      • Altaica

        There is no psuedo science involved. Psuedo means false and all of this science is documented. Witch Doctor is the improper term, I am a shaman, medicine woman, not an african witch doctor. I am not of the African religions. If you are unable to understand pure science then it is obvious you do not have the requisite education to judge science.

        • TheRealBob

          You are as much a scientist as Stalin was a capitalist. Shaman, witch doctor, voodoo practitioner – all the same thing – nonsense that has been resurrected by new age bimbos like you.

          • Altaica

            Wow! Such hatred and bigotry. You know what, I love you anyway because you are part of life, even if you do not love thy neighbor as your comm. I wish I could heal your heart of the obvious pain you have within to be so hateful and derogatory towards someone different than yourself.

            And were I Christian scientist would you spout such hate? Robert T. Bakker is a Christian Minister and one of the top forerunners in Evolution. Gregor Mendel, the father of Genetics was the head abbot of his monastary.

            I am once again amazed by such hate that has spewed forth. Would you call my teacher these things? She is an elder, and a Christian. She is a doctor in Theology and has taught me much and does not say such obvious and intentially hurtful things as you. You remind me of the monkey’s at the zoo flinging poo at people because they want to be free and are angry at everyone. I didn’t resurrect the old ways, they never died. My teacher was taught by her grandmother who was taught all the way down the line. The Native Americans, despite the Christians trying their best to wipe them out have persisted with their traditions. The African tribal religions, still around. 60,000 years of a congruous traditions that mirror each other and haven’t died out. Mayan and Aztec descendants still teach as they did before Christians came to South America.

            Christianity is a 6 to 8 thousand years old, belief system very closely resembles the much older Sumerian religion. Hmmm. Sounds new age to me since they took their relgion from Judeism which was taken from Sumerian. And if you hate pagans so much why are you constantly stealing our symbols. Give back our incense, our rabbits, our pine trees. Give back our eggs, and our winter feasts. Give back our red caps (You stole that one from the Romans and their feast of Saturnalia.)

            I could sit here and fling names at you, insult you and try and hurt you, but I won’t. I will turn the other cheek and leave you with your hate and your bigotry. It is clear that you do not wish to have an intelligent, peaceful conversation. I pray you can find healing, balance and love in your heart.

          • Altaica

            And by the way, your very scholars, the Jesuits, are the ones that educated me and through my hard work and worth agreed I was worthy of being a Biology and handed me my degree in Biology. Maybe you should spend some time at a Jesuit college and learn some things about the world my neighbor.

    • BGinTN

      May I suggest reading this.

      Our Undiscovered Universe
      Introducing Null Physics
      The Science of Uniform and Unconditional Reality
      By Terence Witt

      ISBN-10: 0-9765931-3-8
      ISBN-13: 978-0-9785931-3-1

      After doing so answer two questions.
      1)Can you give me a accurate definition of ‘time’?
      2)Can you name one thing that has been ‘totally’ destroyed?

      • hicusdicus

        GinTN, That’s an easy one. Time, the area between birth and death. Totally and completely destroyed, my belief in God.

        • denniso

          Time is just the arbitrary human measurement between events…we age,and we call it the passage of time. The aging is real,time is only a measurement based on human constructs.

    • hicusdicus

      Altaica, Your an apprentice shaman. Does that mean you are studying to be an evangelical TV preacher, healer,sooth Sayer and collection plate passer?

  • http://www.facebook.com/DarrenLPatterson Darren Patterson

    Congratulations on writing a medium-brave article. I do really like the gift from God line. Darwin observed micro-evolution and jumped to the macro-evolution conclusion; which of course, has no scientific foundation.

    Thank you for this article.
    dp

  • Al Sieber

    And God created Satan so he didn’t have to take all the blame, and Satan created Lawyers so everyone didn’t blame him.

    • jim

      God did NOT create Satan! God created an Angel named Lucifer who had also been given free-will! Evil was found in the form of pride in Lucifer. This led to Lucifer rebelling against God and being thrown out of Heaven with 1/3rd of all the angels. Lucifer then became known as Satan, a fallen angel! Lucifer was create to be good and the number one angel in Heaven. No evil was created here but the free-will of others lends to the existence of evil to be.

      • Altaica

        If God didn’t want evil to exist then why did he create temptation in the Tree of Knowledge and why did he give free will? If there was no free will there would be no evil, but he created free will. How does this work?

        • home boy

          the tree was a test for adam and eve. had satan not convinced eve that god was lying about the tree we would not be born into this world under sin. and jesus would not been sent to die for our sins so we would have a chance of everlasting life. satan was the #2 angle behind michael but was greedy and wanted to be equal to god. so now man has had to live under satan’s rulership since adam and eve.

          • Karolyn

            As an all-knowing being, God would already know what the outcome of any test would be, so why would he have to do it in the first place? It’s a fairy-tale!

          • TML

            What’s worse is the story of Adam and Eve and the forbidden fruit is the equivalent of a father putting a poison cookie on the table, telling the children not to eat it, and then walking out of the room, and watching from around the corner as he lets someone else come talk them into eating it.

          • Kate8

            It is allegory. And some version of the creation story is repeated in all cultures.

            Did you ever consider that each culture perceived this story according to their own understanding and tradition, and that many of them were subject to distortion as they were handed down by the spoken word?

            It is the story BEHIND the story we must seek to understand.

          • Karolyn

            I do agree with you there, Kate. It is unfortunate that most people take the word of the Bible literally.

          • TML

            “It is allegory.”

            No kidding… the comment I gave was to those who take it literal.

      • TML

        “God created an Angel named Lucifer …”

        Uh.. no… Lucifer was the name of a pagan god referred to as the morning star.

        “Satan’s” name was Semjâzâ … one of 200 watchers, Grigori, sent to watch over mankind.

        You don’t even know where that story you speak of comes from do you?

        BTW – Isaiah 45:7 – “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.”

        • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

          TML

          Wromg,
          Lucifer is not the Devil.Just a morning star.It is borrow from the Latin speaking Romans.

          Lucifer the morning star became a … Not at all. In Latin at the time, “lucifer” actually meant Venus as a morning star. … Satan (or the Devil or Lucifer …

          http://www.lds-mormon.com/lucifer.shtml

          In the original Hebrew text,the fourteen chapter of Isaiah, lucifer is not a fallen angel,but a fallen king who persecuted the chidren of Israel.

          • TML

            First of all… I didn’t say that Lucifer was the devil.
            Secondly… I fail to see how I was wrong when what you presented supports my assertion. Venus is the name of a pagan god.

          • TML

            “In the original Hebrew text,the fourteen chapter of Isaiah, lucifer is not a fallen angel,but a fallen king who persecuted the chidren of Israel.”

            And that part is correct, btw.

            I think you misunderstood me, or was replying to the wrong person.

          • TML

            Ah… I see your confusion. The initial phrase in quotes was said by Jim… to whom I was replying.

          • Kate8

            In ancient Egypt, when a Pharaoh assumed the throne, he was ceremonially transformed into the “risen” Osiris, which is the same entity as Apollo, Nimrod, and other names. In their belief, he actually BECAME this “god” until death.

            This is also the same entity expressed as Lucifer, and is the god of the Freemason NWO elite. They await the arrival of the “resurrected” Osiris/Apollo/Lucifer. This symbology is everywhere in DC.

            When a new US (Masonic) president takes office (and they nearly all are Masons), they hold the same ceremony still today (behind secret doors), “morphing” him into the returned “Osiris”.

  • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Keith Giunta

    Gee, I don’t feel so alone.

    I was trained as a scientist and for a while, was fully vested in the current paradigm that accepts Evolution as fact. Over the years I pondered questions for which no satisfactory answers exist, as yet. I came to the conclusions that the Theory is based on bad Science. The “given enough time” explanation is just not sufficient given the complexities involved in all the life forms in existence. Naturally, the knee jerk reaction to this statement is “you’re an idiot” or something similar. But, as we know, this response is not part of the Scientific Method (which requires arriving at a plausible conclusion based on verifiable facts, valid testing and repeatable outcomes). In reading Kuhn, one can understand how difficult it is to change any paradigm, especially one that is part of a specialized field of study in whom so many have a vested interest in perpetuating.

    Regardless of the “examples” that support the idea, there is not one single datum that shows that one life form has transformed into another. The “natural selection” argument is illogical in this context. Natural selection can only occur when a life-form already exists; it does not create a new form. Variations exist in all organisms and natural selection is an ongoing process. However a spontaneous change (mutation) has yet to appear on the scene that results in a completely new life-form. When one considers the seemingly infinite complexity of even “simple” organisms, the idea that any single change (or even a collection of random changes) would result in a new life-form is unsupportable.

    If one has the courage to evaluate the data first without having a fixed outcome in mind, one might discover that the Theory of Evolution is just a theory and not a very good one at that. And before anyone resorts to “have you got a better one” argument, that mode of thinking would make the “spontaneous generation” theory of the day a fact as well (maggots spontaneously sprang from rotting meat). As we all know (or should know) until the “mesh over the jar” experiment was tried, the scientific community of that day got just as worked up when challenged as the current bunch does over this issue.

    Remember the three most important (and courageous) words in Science: “I DON’T KNOW”

    • BGinTN

      You are far from being alone sir.
      Ask how you get something from nothing.
      Ask how existence is derived from nonexistence.

    • Altaica

      We have a wide variety of drug resistant strains of insects, bacteria and viruses. These are considered new species and evolved based on a response to our attempts to irradicate them.

      • Michael J.

        Interesting, are these insects Progressives?

        • TheRealBob

          Only when they are parasites like ticks.

      • home boy

        they are new only because man did not have the knowledge to see them.

      • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Keith Giunta

        Yes, but they are still bacteria, are they not? They haven’t managed to transform into a “higher” life form yet.

        • Altaica

          That’s an over 60 million year process. You don’t just jump from bacteria to human there are steps, lots of steps in between.

  • http://n/a WC Carnahan

    John Wayne once said: “Life is hard;Its harder if you’re Stupid!” I also know why an atheist cannot find God,for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman! Have a Nice Day!

  • D Riley

    I appreciate the inquisitive mind, and yours is no exception. My pastor was famous for saying something to the effect… that God will not fall off his throne if (fill in the blank here with something presumably irreligious). If the entirety of humanity gave God the middle finger… He’ll STILL be God… sitting quite comfortably on His Throne, etc. Which, to some, would be SO iconoclast as to think God would be offended by the very thought. So, He probably is… but that doesn’t negate the fact that God is STILL in authority over it ALL!!! And, I personally have a hard time rationalizing the thought that God would be so ticked-off at ANYTHING we do He’d instantly and capriciously counter our stupid and thoughtless actions with an equally irrational and thoughtless action. To me, God is SO much higher than our thoughts and our ways its inconceivable that He’d hardly even be moved one way or the other over one person’s opinion of Him. That’s not arrogance, that’s confidence in knowing who you are. So, to me, God smiles on the likes of the Bill Maher’s of the world… who KNOWS that one day Bill will stand before the Throne he doesn’t believe in, and Bill will be given EXACTLY what he’s desired: to be around like-minded “believers” in a world (or hell) without God! Meanwhile, those he derided will be living a life in an eternal paradise beyond the scope of Bill’s socialist vision down here.

    Ronald Reagan once said that socialism only legitimately works in two places:
    In Heaven, where they don’t need it; and in Hell, where they already have it!!!

    • Karolyn

      Why would an all-powerful, all-knowing, all seeing, perfect being take offense at anythig? Taking offense in itself is an imperfect action.

      • TheRealBob

        And yet you lieberals take offense at everything that is true and decent. You are the grossest of hypocrites.

        • Karolyn

          And who decides what’s “true” and “decent”, Bob, you? By your very posts, you make a good case for nonbelievers. Somehow you have come to the conclusion that liberals are not like you – that they are not decent, loving, even God-fearing people. I cannot imagine where on earth that comes from. Do you live in a conservative cave and never go out into the world to interact with regular people?

          • TheRealBob

            I live in a democrat controlled cesspool and I am around lieberals every day and they are godless scum without a shred of decency. And yes, I do think that lieberals are different fromn me because they are – they are lazy, selfish, dishonest, immoral, and they are stupid. Does that hit close to home Ms. tax-consuming americorp drone?

          • Karolyn

            Wow, Bob, I really feel badly for you…..

          • eddie47d

            Don’t worry Karolyn there is no way The “Real” Bob is a Christian. His vile comments are the work of the devil himself.He also sounds like the other guy who used Bob for a name. His mouth wasn’t clean either.

          • Kate8

            eddie – How does the ability to discern evil make someone “not Christian”?

            Just because you liberals embrace all manner of immoral behavior as morally acceptable…

          • Altaica

            Hey we both feel sorry for the bob. You should see the sheer amount of hate spewing from his mouth because I follow a different religion than he does. Oh my goodness I just had a revelation! He’s like a teenager, in the frame of time Christianity is a teenager and fighting like an adolescent. Some are more mature than others. It makes perfect sense. I come from a 60,000 year old tradition, he comes from a 6 to 80000 year old one and spews things like “I hate you” and “You don’t know anything!” OMG the same words I hear from teens to their parents. I finally understand. Thanks Bob you gave me a key to better understanding your faith and people like you!

        • Altaica

          Funny I see many Christians taking offense at anything that is not their way.

      • TML

        An Omni-Max being is logically impossible to exist… impossible to prove, and impossible to disprove. It’s the equivalent to an invisible pink unicorn.

        • Karolyn

          NOTHING is impossible!

          • TML

            Perhaps… then I shall say improbable. The point was, that such a being is a logical contradiction. Like a ‘pink’ unicorn that is invisible… which has as much possibility of existing as an Omni-Max being. Better? lol ;)

          • TML

            Wait… are you saying it is impossible for something to be impossible? :)

            I’m just havin’ fun now, lol

  • Carl

    It’s interesting that some well published authors don’t recognize the uniqueness of their own humanity and the earth that we live in. Taking the typing chimpanzee example, could a chimpanzee type at a keyboard? Could he build a house with power tools, hammers and nails? Could he write an idea on some talking leaves (using Cherokee chief Sequoyah’s term for his written language) which would communicate to a distant person?
    No. There is a great divide between humans and the most intelligent other species. That requires a special intelligent design.
    Our earth also requires a special creation. In walking the dog, I encountered a baseball along the path. Being so finely stitched, it must have resulted from the execution of a detailed plan by a craftsman. Astronauts encounter an infinitely more complex item when they observe our earth from outside. Dozens of forces, temperatures and chemicals are delicately balanced to support life as we know it. If one was unbalanced, we might be six inches tall, or breathing methane only. Yet, some published experts say that the earth, like its inhabitants, is a result of an unreplicatable unguided random process, given enough billions of billions of years. If that is true of our earth, it must also be true of a plaything like a baseball.

    • Michael J.

      Carl asks:
      “could a chimpanzee type at a keyboard? Could he build a house with power tools, hammers and nails?”

      The answer is no, but neither could our ancestors when they were at the same stage of development.

      • Capitalist at Birth

        Says who?

        • Michael J.

          Capitalist at Birth
          Humans and chimps share 96 % same DNA. Why do you think drugs used to be tested on chimps prior to being approved for humans?

          If you liked that, you’re gonna love this. Why do you think there is so much testing in lab rats prior to human approval for consumption?
          Because we share a common ancestor, that’s why. When that asteroid took out the dinosaurs, we were the small rat like mammals called “Shrew”. If it were not for the asteroid that spelled doom for dinosaurs and a majority of other species, we’d probably have never invented the rat trap.

          • Altaica

            They also test a lot of things on pigs and they grow a lot of vaccines in horses because of the similarities.

            The similarities are why I believe in the Native American way of all our relations that swim, walk crawl, or fly.

          • TheRealBob

            Nonsense – you are manufacturing proof where no proof exists. That is called lying.

          • eddie47d

            How often to you make that popping sound “Real” Bob? You must have to pull it out quite often in calling folks liars all the time. You definitely don’t believe in individual rights or accept other points of view. You are one shallow human being.

          • Altaica

            Bob, have you ever read a real scientific paper or are you a sheep following the words professes by your Creationist Fundamentalist fellows. You know you exhibit not only adolescent behavior but the behavior of one ho exhibits a phobia. Phobias are irrational fears and the way you react I think you have a phobia that the truth will hurt your faith so you have to hurry and bash everyone that speaks facts. Bob, if you were truly strong in your faith you would not have these fears. You would be capable of a mature discussion and know where your convictions lie. I truly feel sorry for you. It must be a terrible thing to be so insecure.

      • TheRealBob

        Nonsense – our ancestors could learn anything that we can do today because our ancestors have always been fully human. In fact, I suspect that Adam and Eve were a lot smarter than we are today because we are the product of generations of breeding under the curse and for several generations, the excess of production has allowed the unfit to multiply and degrade the gene pool even further (hence the democrats).

        • Michael J.

          TheRealBob,
          According to the Bible, Adam and Eve existed thousands of years ago, while when our ancestors shared similar abilities with present day chimpanzees was millions of years ago.

          • TheRealBob

            Our ancestors didn’t exist millions of years ago. Our ancestors were created directly by God as completely human. Only the evilutionist fools believe that we had apelike ancestors.

        • Altaica

          Boy have they pulled the wool over your eyes. Humans existed long before the time frame your bible says they did. The time frame I have heard for humanity based on the bible, 6 to 8000 years. The existence of humans is far older than that. At least 60,000 years. Pick up a history book and read about archeological discoveries. Are you saying native Americans, Indians, Asians, Sumerians, and other Mesopotamians did not exist? Open your eyes man, you are gonna fall into that big gaping hole in front of you that you cannot see.

      • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Keith Giunta

        Michael, do you have some special knowledge concerning our ancestors? You confuse technology with intelligence. Just because a technology (hammers and nails vs rocks and twine) was unknown in earlier times, it does not diminish the creativity and intellect of those who wielded the technology of the day. Are you or I more intelligent now because we’ve figured out how to make sand (silicon) into chips that make billions of calculations per second possible? Again, you are assuming that our ancestors were a lower form of humanoid. This speaks to the existence of this less developed species without proof.

  • Thor

    Interesting post, Robert. I just finished a book that addresses that very issue.

    http://www.amazon.com/Eternal-History-Time-ebook/dp/B005GXL8XY/ref=sr_1_40?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1314106531&sr=1-40

    Seems there is no logical or dialectic reason to view science (evolution) and religion (creationism) as mutually exclusive.

    • home boy

      but thats man’s opinion not gods. once again you only want to read what man has to say. why not pick up the bible and read what gods say’s or do you not want to give him the time of day.

      • Altaica

        Man wrote the bible and man edited and decided (At the Nicean council) what was in it. Your example is no better.

  • s c

    The matter of evolution is best apprached with a sense of humor. To me, a system which wants its believers to line up like sheep, act like chimps, slap each other on the back for doing things that are usually done wrong and after all that, I’m supposed to see these types as high priests of ‘knowledge.’ No way, hoser.
    Some are intelligent, but please don’t expect me to put someone like Al ‘duh’ Gore in that bunch. That list of pretenders is a LONG list, and I’ll spare readers the temptation to humble their ‘leaders’ by name.
    God likens people to sheep, and it’s a pretty good way to see them. Whenever people lower themselves so they can be herded around by those they don’t know (politicians) but are supposed to render blind obedience (and keep that money flowing), that’s just too much.
    If you will remember, evolution is a system that revolves around the idea that life forms change over long periods of time, and somehow are better able to survive. That’s OK, up to a point. However, can we agree that the vast majority of those life forms do NOT think? Those that can be said to ‘think’ do not rise to the level of humans.
    So how many eons does it take for politicians to evolve? From what I see, politicians are working hard at DEVOLVING. For that, they will never have my support or money. Let them survive on their own (take away their money, and they will self-destruct).

    • Michael J.

      sc said:

      “If you will remember, evolution is a system that revolves around the idea that life forms change over long periods of time, and somehow are better able to survive.”

      The common misconception about evolution is that each change that occurs is for the better. Fact is, random changes happen randomly and can be helpful or harmful. Some changes may help the survival of a species, while others lead to an evolutionary dead end. Natural selection has no conscience or agenda.

  • Airangel

    Huntsman is just another Middle of Road puppet that doesn’t really stand for anything (especially the people of this country)…just another notch in his belt, another platform to force an agenda…Who says Evolution wasn’t God’s plan? Why can’t man completely figure out how the human body fully functions and all its capabilities if allowed in with clean air, water and natural foods? Why can’t science create the perfect seed? Oh they can create hybrids (franken food, fish, meat), genetically modified seeds (franken seeds)…but they all harm you, poison you, contaminate wildlife, marine life, birds, bees, etc…not even close to the nutrients of heirloom seeds, organic produce, etc….God gave man intelligence and many great things have been done as a result but also many evil crimes against humanity..Science will never be God but that very science will end up proving God to be true…there is a documentary out now using that very science that disproves evolution…my mom just watched and is getting me the name and I will post…we need someone that is a patriot to America and Americans and truly wishes to serve the people not the elite.

  • Don

    Good article. Matches actual scientific reality as we stumble on to it even through our arrogance. Thanks for your bravery in publishing this piece. I truly pity all the naysayer people commenting. Someday, they will be face to face with the Creator whether they believe in him or not. Their intellectual arrogance won’t be an asset. So, for now, just let them rant and crow. What they say is unimportant noise. If they were in fact intelligent, they would at least see the obvious discrepancy between the physicists saying that left without intelligent influence things deteriorate to lower forms and the biologists who say the exact opposite that in the absence of intelligent influence, things increase in complexity? They need to get their stories straight…. perhaps God might be an appropriate source? You can’t reason with people blinded by their egos and arrogance. So, I don’t. Again, good job. Sleep well.

    • Altaica

      The same can be said of religion. There are so many sects of Christianity that contradict one another, and the Bible itself contradicts itself. Islam does the same with sects and so on and so forth.

      • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Keith Giunta

        Hmmmm. Interesting observation. And how much of the Bible have you read and studied?

        • Altaica

          Alot actually and I acquired the most direct translation of the bible I could find to read again. I was a devout Methodist for 20 years. I went to Sunday school, I was part of the church choir, I went to church, I did volunteer functions. I am re-reading the Bible now that I am older and by reading it in the whole I can see the contradictions. Read Genesis 1 and 2 and look at them together. The very first book contradicts itself in the order of creation. I’m not saying I’m an expert, but I am willing to read for myself and study other religions, because I am both interesting and I think that there is some truths hidden in each religion. So I am seeking for myself through the fractured world. I hold to a Hindi belief that religion is a many faceted gem. You cannot see all the facets at the same time without moving the gem or moving around the gem.

  • Carlee

    My husband and I try to walk our farm everyday. There is always something new to see -baby quail in the spring, deer, skunks, armadillos, racoons, ‘possums, rabbits, woodchucks, birds of every shape, size and color, snakes of different species, ducks, geese, field rats…the list goes on. All the varieties of trees, shrubs, hay fields… We marvel at God’s creations, because that is the only reasonable answer. All of this beauty didn’t just happen. If you live in the city – get out into the country and observe all the wonderful things God has made for us. Put your troubles aside and soak up the peace and beauty. You will come away a renewed person.

    • Tom Key

      Thanks for your post! So refreshing to hear from a Believer who is not so filled with bile against others, they fail to follow the quiet and fundamental teachings of all great Religions. Inclusive. Filled with Wonder. You understand.

  • Old Henry

    “As with such phenomena as wind and gravity, it would seem that the only way evolution could have come into existence is through the work of a Higher Power that is beyond human understanding.”

    And there Mr. Ringer is the crux of the issue. Man by nature must be able to “put everything in a box” so that he can explain it, understand it. God Almighty is far beyond that “box” and that bothers many people who feel they must be able to get their arms around it and bring it down to human levels. Also, Satan is hard at work.

    A few years ago I was waiting to see my ENT (for you Obama voters that is Ear, Nose, Throat) and to kill time I was looking at the medical pictures he had on the wall showing the construction of his areas of study. When he came in I turned and said that anyone who thought something as intricate as this just “happened” was very naïve. He agreed and said that only God could make something as complex as the human body and our Earth.

    Has anyone ever “splained” where the primal ooze came from?

  • Tibor Karol

    The river flows in vallies only. Your example supposes plain surfaces where water could flow anywhere. It is far not the case, as events are consequences of previous ones. You can’t construct a building starting with ANY bricks of the wall, you have to start with the fundament and proceed layer by layer. So the bricks are different, they are not interchangable, they have different values, depending on their position. Probability is for those who are able to apply it correctly. The fact that you need your god to help you out proves that you have no idea about this. Try something entirely different, more natural and more logical for change and you may succeed. The real answers are hard and complex to comprehend. Escape to fairy tales is just an easy and cheap excuse.
    Pray less and think/learn/experience more…

  • Bob Lovell

    Awesome article, Robert.

    It truly does take a tremendous amount of blind faith to believe in accidental, atheistic evolution as an explanation of origins. When you consider the complexity of just one little body part, such as your ear, carefully designed to sense vibrations in air and nearly instantaneously convert these into meaningful and understandable speech through an absolutely miraculous interaction with nerves and then our brain, to imagine that it was all a big accident is beyond stupidity. Oh, yeah, we accidentally evolved vocal chords to create speech from exhaled air as well. Pavorotti’s magnificent voice was just trial and error. The stench of a skunk’s intricate defense mechanism is carefully designed. It is no accident that his discharge does not smell like Chanel No. 5.

    As to DNA similarities mentioned above between different kinds of organisms, I would suggest that a Creator God might have put some order in His creation, and used one very good idea — DNA molecules with all their fantastic complexity — in all kinds of life. Why not? It seems only natural to me that our Creator used the same scheme, by which a friend I used to know inherited his mother’s big nose, to pass on certain beautiful colors from a rose to its descendant. The notion of similar genes and chromosomes in trees and donkeys contributes nothing to the evolutionist’s argument.

    Finally, as to the multitude of scientists who begin from the premise that evolution is true and then struggle to try to “prove” it, I would remind everyone that just a few short years ago we were being warned by the best and brightest that we were heading into another ice age. Now some predict heating of the earth. I’ve had this discussion with my son a few times. These scientific theories constantly change as new discoveries torpedo what was once taught as truth. Each generation thinks it has the answers. Science in 1850 was “modern” at that time to those people, yet we have learned much to contradict the beliefs of those brilliant minds of the 19th century. The same will happen to us as we stumble around in 2011 trying to explain our universe. If Jesus hasn’t returned by then, in 2111 people will snicker at how ignorant we are today.

    But the one thing that has never been proven wrong (when properly read and interpreted, of course) is the Word of God, the Bible, and those who sneer at the “ignorance” of Christian believers will one day stand before their Creator to give an account of their lives — and THAT is the real reason for “science” so desperately trying to explain away God and His creation. They want at all costs to escape the fact that they were created by a loving God who will one day judge evil. Huxley famously admitted as much.

    • Altaica

      The real reason of science is not to explain away your god. It is to learn, develop and grow. It is a way to figure out how things work together. science and religion are no mutually exclusive and this is where the problems arise when people think that. Science is learning to understand the natural world around us. Religion is to provide a person with a way to fill an emotional and spiritual need. When have time to think and reflect because of science. We have agriculture, developed by early science. We have technology to do our work, and help us. We have more time to contemplate. Science is not an enemy it is an understanding. We used to believe the word was flat, science proved it was round. If you feel you don’t need science in your life give up everything science gave you. No vehicles, no homes, no processed food. No tools. Only your bare hands, naked and wandering looking for a cave to shelter in and tell me science was created to destroy religion when you are trying to survive day to day by finding food and not get killed by nature.

    • SC Murf

      Amen Bob and Thank You

      up the hill
      airborne

  • TheRealBob

    Atheism is actually a religion where self is god. The arrogant atheist places himself at the pinnacle of creation, falsely believing that his tiny mind contains all the evidence necessary to proclaim that there is no evidence for God. The fact that creation is the evidence of God does not occur to him because his mind is too small to conceive of anything greater than himself. The god of the atheist, self, is the most pathetic excuse for god ever. Examine the claims of the atheist and you will see right through them.

    • Altaica

      The atheists I have interacted with don’t believe in any god, self or other wise. A theism by definition is non belief. To believe would make them a theist.

      • TheRealBob

        Your lack of reading skills is amazing in one who claims to be a scientist. I specifically said that atheists worship the self as god. You are just a bunch of arrogant, puffed up theists who worship the most pathetic god possible – themselves.

        • Altaica

          Bob, you are the one incapable of reading. Religion by definition is the belief in something supernatural. Atheists do not believe in anything supernatural. They are not a religion by the very definition. In addition Theism is the belief in a religion. A in front of the word means not or not of. By the very meaning of the word Atheist means not religious. Did you pay any attention in English class. Do you think Asexual creatures use sex to reproduce as well?

  • Roger

    ONLY the MIND of a Primitive MYSTIC would find it incomprehensible that, by chance ,over millions (or more) years, in an INFINITE universe( INFINITE by virtue of it’s existence, allows ALL things to be possible) could create LIFE, in many forms… BUT….those same barbarians will accept, by FAITH alone, that A SUPREME POWER or BEING EXISTS (or existed) and would create LIFE in those same many forms…

    …..We still have a long way to go BEFORE we truly become a CIVILIZED,Rational species and ONLY then, when we throw off the YOKE of the SUPERNATURAL, will there be PEACE, Freedoma and Wealth for all

    • TheRealBob

      Roger – Sure – like the people of Nazi Germany had under the atheist Hitler; like the people of the USSR had under the atheist Stalin; like the people of Red China had under the athiest Mao. Atheism is the belief system that has inflicted murder, mayham, and poverty on billions of people. Atheism is a spiritual disease that can only be cured by Christ.

      • Altaica

        Hitler was a devout catholic not an atheist. Like Pope Innocent III who ordered the murder of 1200 men, women and children in france because he didn’t agree with the branch of christians there and couldn’t figure out who was who. Like so many christian crusades slaughtering those of other sects and faiths. Like the Muslims fighting with the Christians, or tons of other infighting between religions that cause death and war. The Spanish Inquisition. The Divine right of the christians in kill the Native Americans and taking their land. You’re example falls flat. There are more examples of religious people commiting these atrocities then atheists.

        • Bob

          Puhleeese, Hitler was deeply into the occult. He had nothing to do with any form of Christianity. He killed off a ton of Polish Christians along with the Jews. Hitler was into the New Age not any form of Christianity.

          • Altaica

            http://nobeliefs.com/Hitler1.htm

            He was baptised Catholic and used his birth religion to support his stance against Jews.

            You also forgot about the 10 million Roma he killed before the jews.

          • libertytrain

            Many many babies are baptized and it doesn’t mean anything if they don’t follow through. Hitler was very into the occult. He murdered how many thousands of Catholics? I’ve not seen or read anything in my years that reflects what you are saying. It does seem to be in vogue to assign a religion, particularly a Christian religion for life to someone that is basically a nut case and never truly practiced the religion.

          • Altaica

            Hitler used his religion as a platform to kill the jews. History in his speeches alone show his ties to his religion. You don’t have to be pagan to be obsessed with the occult. The Ark of the Covenant is an occult item, the spear of loginus, the holy grail. And while we’re at it, how about you give back all the pagan symbols and religious ideas you stole as well as all aspects of your religion and let’s see what is left.

            No more bunnies. No more crosses. No more eggs. No more red caps at christmas. No more wreaths. No more christmas trees. No more incense. No more prayer. The list goes on and on. I saw a shirt that sums this up very well “For someone who hates pagans you sure steal a lot of our things.”

        • Bob

          Stalin killed off 65 million of his own people. Mao, at least 32 million of his people were murdered in the “cultural revolution”. The list can go on and on. So atheists aren’t killers?

          • TheRealBob

            Bob: Quite right – hitler was probably a shaman like Altaica. Atheists and lieberals have tried to portray him as a right-wing Christian for decades when the truth is he was a left-wingnut like Eddie and Karolyn.

          • eddie47d

            You can pull your Satan mask off any time now “Real” Bob. One thing for sure “The truth will never set you Free” and Jesus rejects the haughty like yourself.

          • Altaica

            “TheRealBob says:
            August 23, 2011 at 2:18 pm
            Bob: Quite right – hitler was probably a shaman like Altaica. Atheists and lieberals have tried to portray him as a right-wing Christian for decades when the truth is he was a left-wingnut like Eddie and Karolyn.

            You are so afraid of the truth. Christians are just as guilty of the murder of people. The Crusades. The Witch Trials. The Spanish Inquisition. The Genocide of Native American Peoples. The Slavery of Africans. The list goes on and on. Why don’t you read real history instead of the made up lies that you have bouncing around in your head. Hitlers own speeches demonstrate his inherent Christianity. Love thy neighbor and kill them if they are different than you. Numbers alone demonstrates the blood thirsty nature of your religion. How about the Spanish (Christian) Conquest of South America and the genocide performed on the Aztec and Mexica peoples? Isn’t it your book that says let he who is without sin throw the first stone? I know another good stone quote, those who live in glass houses should not throw stones. Bob, you are a hateful bigot that from what I was taught in 20 years as a Christian is very contrary to the teachings of Jesus. Jesus who was a christian mystic, which is the christian term for shaman. I am thankful that my Christian Mystic teacher is not such a bigot and hateful person as yourself.

          • Altaica

            Any Hitler was clearly not a shaman. By Insulting shaman you insult Jesus christ, one of the most famous shamans.

          • libertytrain

            If you believe the folks that led these events were Christian, than you don’t know what a Christian is. One can call oneself anything, even a Shaman…but be nothing but a monster. I pity the poor sheep that followed those who called themselves Christian. You know for all the education you purport, and I know, they were not.

          • Altaica

            Why were they popes then if they weren’t christian?

        • http://PersonalLibertyDigest Keith Giunta

          Hitler a devout Catholic? You clearly have not read much history regarding the Third Reich. Even a cursory read reveals that Hitler removed all religious symbols and instruction that did not proclaim Hitler himself as the object of adoration and obedience. His propaganda machine declared Hitler the new messiah.

          • Altaica

            I don’t think you have read the same historical sources that I have. Hitler’s own speeches hail to his faith in Christianity and he used it (sadly) as a platform for his persecution of the Roma and the Jews.

            There is no doubting Hitler did horrible things, but lets be honest here, there is a lot of historical evidence of religious people doing bad things too. I really think it doesn’t matter what faith, nationality, whatever label you are, there can be horrendous monsters from every one just like there can be good people from everyone. The reason why these topics comes up is side a uses one historical figure to try and categorize all people of that group. That’s actually pretty bigoted. Not all atheists are evil not all Christians are good. Maybe when we cast off the labels and look at each person as an individual maybe we actually have some enlightenment for our species.

        • denniso

          The big myth for the past 70 yrs is that Hitler alone was evil and orchestrated his slaughter on his own. The tone of hate and bias against the Jews especially had been set for more than a thousand yrs,and it was almost entirely the work of the Christian churches and the govt’s they were part of or controlled. The Jews had been vilified and demonized for all that time as the killers of Jesus…Hitler used that framework and expanded it to include Gypsies,gays,mentally ill,Poles…Hitler was also aided in his vile work by many powerful business people and corporations around the world,even here,because they feared the rise of actual Socialism and Communism after the Depression left so many millions jobless and hungry.

          The Christian factions that laid the groundwork for Hitler to be able to do what he did, need to recognize and apologize for their role in the holocaust. The great irony and stupidity of Christians hating the Jews for killing Jesus is that they were just supposedly filling the role ordained by God,sending his son to die for our sins. Silly,stupid,and sad.

          • libertytrain

            Perhaps there are some purported religions that teach hatred as you suggest. I never experienced that in my nearly six decades on earth. Neither did my parents or grandparents instruct me in such hate. You must have grown up in a very hateful world. Poor thing. And a good many of the Gypsies, probably nearly all of the Poles were Catholic. Jehovah’s Witnesses; priest, nuns, — Hitler was pure evil. There were evil men before him and plenty after him and will be many more if the world lasts long enough. Ego. Terrible problem for dictators.

      • home boy

        and they are all puppets of satan’s regime.

  • Raggs

    Thw whole theory of evolution and global warming have one single common ground…. Anyone with half a brain cell can figure out that these are theory’s produced by man to control the outcome of man.
    In other words if the government can convince the dumb to go along with this type of program than the government can control the dumb by manipulation / fear / and regualtions….

    • Altaica

      Funny, that’s the same thing I have heard about religion. Used to control the masses and herd the sheep where they want.

      • home boy

        that’s because most religions do not teach the truth about the bible meaning they teach from the bible 100% not 95 or 99. 100% or it’s false teaching .

  • Charles

    While beyond my understanding, I continue to believe in a Divine Creator. The Bible says there is a new heaven and a new earth coming!

    • home boy

      amen to that. and it’s sooner than you may think.

  • Stunned at sunset

    I think that people confuse the term “evolution” with the term “creation.” That things “evolve” or “change” over time is patently evident. This is a life-cycle that processes an environmental requirement for modification of some sort. Novas eventually “evolve” into stars and the dust around them into planets. The sea floor eventually “evolves” into limestone or marble. You get the picture. With animated entities, their existence might require them to “evolve” into something that can cope with environmental changes. Other animated entities haven’t shown a need to “evolve” (i.e. aligators, for example). Evolution is a process of change that is brought about by the influence of an “entity’s” immediate reality.

    Scientists make a serious mistake when they attempt to use this theoretical explanation for the great diversity of nature to explain how something came into existence–how something was “created.” While even the most rational ideological arguments cannot explain how things were “created,” creation is an “act” of consequence and not a random event. We can see this in the way everything around us seems to behave according to “design.” For example, children have a “program” that permits them to “learn” their parent’s language. Where did the “program” come from? Why is the Universe vast? How is it that chaos always returns to “order” (i.e., chaos theory)?

    I’m not going to get into semantics with people but I think I’ve made my point.

    • Raggs

      Thats a good point, however I think the issue is that the liberals and the democrats use evolution as a tool in order to denounce GOD.
      That is the biggest issue…

      • Stunned at sunset

        You’re right, Raggs. They deny the existence of a Creator ideologically; that is, they make their assertion because they have been TOLD to or because they “believe” (i.e., have faith) in an atheistic supposition often making them more of a religious fanatic than the people who we normally consider to be the case. But, when the philosophers ask those questions (read: Godel, Escher and Bach), they become rabid and howl at the sheer weight of the material evidence against their assertions. At least, it can be somewhat entertaining. Sort of like watching the clowns at the circus :o).

        • Altaica

          Evolution is not inherently atheistic. I am not an Atheist. Evolution is describing the process of change over long periods of time. It does not explain where that first life form originated. This leaves it open to religions as well as scientific conjecture.

          • TheRealBob

            Actually you are deluded and your attempts to delude others only increase your condemnation.

          • Altaica

            Bob, you are the deluded one, incapable of seeing the truth. You are more blind then the average human and a hateful bigot. As such you words are the most worthless I have seen on this forum providing little to no substance and absolutely no attempt at reason and understanding. Perhaps some day you will reach maturity enough to have a reasonable debate with the other adults here and refrain from your bigoted hatred and idiotic spewings. Every other word you utter is garbage or just as appropriately, poo flung by a monkey. Go back to your mindless existence and let the adults talk.

      • Karolyn

        Raggs – What does all this have to do with liberals and democrats? Are you trying to say that liberals and democrats are all anti-God?

        • Raggs

          Karo… MOST certainly!!! democrats and liberals only USE GOD in vain to manipulate the masses ( for votes )…
          Most of the liberals and democrats are the 60′s hippies that used too many drugs…

          • Karolyn

            Raggs, You crack me up! :-) Do you live in the cave with Bob?

          • eddie47d

            So it is those two who are doing those cave man commercials.

          • Altaica

            So, the Dems and liberals use god for their agendas? But wait a minute, I see republican conservatives doing this too. Yeah I’ll stay right here in Independent land, less mud slinging.

  • Caroline

    What everyone is not considering is that God did not “write” the Bible. I’m not saying I believe in God or that I don’t, I admit that I have conflicting thoughts on both issues. But if it is true that the “stories” in the Bible are from God and Jesus and the Disciples, they were not written as a Bible back then. They were written as numerous scrolls, passed down through the ages as stories. These scrolls were found many hundreds and thousands of years afterwards, such as those of the Dead Sea Scrolls. Who knows how complete these scrolls are. Many were missing pieces. They were written in ancient languages which needed to be translated. Who knows whether the translations were entirely accurate. Then, after many thousand years, they were written down into a “Bible.” Who compiled this Bible? MAN! And what does MAN do when they compile something? They EDIT IT! There are many scrolls that are not in the Bible because MAN did not put them in. Just like the history books today that are edited to remove any offending material. And newspaper articles that give only one side of the story. People believe all kinds of things that aren’t real. Children believe in the boogie man, Santa Claus, and the tooth fairy. Does that make them real? As I said before, I’m not saying God isn’t real. I’m also not saying whether if real, God is a man, woman, or an energy source that created everything. Perhaps the truth is somewhere in the middle! Maybe God created evolution!

    • Raggs

      WRONG!!!! The dead sea scrolls were found many many centuries after the bible was written…..

      • Caroline

        Raggs, I said “such as those of the Dead Sea Scrolls.” I did not say the Dead Sea Scrolls were THE sources. I was only using an example –don’t put words into my mouth. Where do you think the information sources for the Bible came from? Did God write them on tablets like he did with Moses? No, man wrote them on tablets, scrolls, and whatever other writing sources were available in those ancient times.

        • Altaica

          Read the translations of Sumerian and Babylonian Cunieform and you will find a very good source as to where the original writings came from. There is an astounding amount of similarities between Sumerian and Christian stories.

      • libertytrain

        the key word is FOUND. They were dated to 200BC though 68 AD. Of course, those folks may not have any intelligence to actually date them :)

    • Altaica

      The Bible as it stands today was voted on by men at the Nicean Council. If man decides what goes into the Bible then that is why it is flawed.

      • home boy

        man did not decide what went into the bible. god told them what to write through dreams and illustrations. some like moses were able to have conversations with god. i suggest you read the bible instead of just making statements. you will be amazed at what you will learn

      • Michael J.

        Emperor Constantine’s re-write by the hand of the Council of Nicea was the second or possibly the third re-write. In fact the previous Bible was a compilation of even more ancient religions. Similar forms of monotheism were first recorded under the rule of Egyptian Pharoah Akunaten and the Sun God.

        • SC Murf

          The sun god was nimrod the boy king that married his mother so as she could stay in power. Now about the word of God, Jesus said that the words of the father would never pass away from the face of the earth.

  • downs1

    Philosophers abound, each with his own answer! Amazing! If there is no God, then everyone can go his own way, do what he wants, and worship whatever or whomever he wants. Evolution essentially says this. Just answer one question . . . what is “life”? Don’t tell me it is cell structure with nucleus, protoplasm, mitochondria, ADP and ATP and neurons and aminoacids and hormones, hemoglobin, polysaccharides, etc. That isn’t “life”. Pond scum cannot become a fish or a bird, or a monkey, or a human. The basic building blocks simply aren’t there to go from one to the next. One can’t get something as intricate and functional as the human eye from non-life no matter how many billions of yesrs one waits.

    Old Darwin was a fool! Those who subscribe to his theories and manipulate the truth in the name of science are also fools. I’m not trying to be harsh or nasty. God, the Creator says so. He says, “The fool has said in his heart,’there is no God.’” Ah, poor Bill Maher!

    Evidence of God’s existence is all around us, but we simply choose not to see it. After all, if there is Someone greater than we, we must admit it and honor Him. The worst thing is that we should obey Him! We would rather deny Him and believe the lie that was told to Eve in the Garden . . . “You can be like God!”

    Therefore, I have serious doubts about Jon Huntsman. It sounds like he has one foot in “reality” and the other foot in the foolishness of the scientists who push evolution (which scientifically cannot be proven!). [Here it comes! Some will say you can't prove the existence of God either! Ah, but you cannot disprove His existence!] Is Huntsman saying, “It suits me to believe in God today for this group of constituents, but tomorrow I believe in evolution for this group . . .”? That is intellectually dishonest. What else will he waffle on?

  • Former Walmart person

    I agree 100%. I beleive there is a God or a “higher power source”, but I also believe that all religions have it wrong. We have no idea of the exact nature of God. I believe that asking man to describe what God is is like asking a bunch of chimpanzees how to design a nuclear reactor while they smile and scream at you and throw things at you.

    • home boy

      the bible says we are created in god’s image.

      • Karolyn

        It’s more like God was created in MAN’S image.

        • SC Murf

          On the day of judgement karolyn I will stand in witness against you for that remark

          • Karolyn

            SC – When I come back reincarnated, I may meet with you reincarnated, and maybe we will become friends. We are all one with God, and our energy never dies.

        • Altaica

          If we were created in God’s image and we are physical then god must be physical as well?

          Or is the flesh we have simply a transportation device for the energy of the Divine Creative Energy that shared it’s substance with us?

    • Caroline

      Former Walmart person, I agree with you as well. Everyone calls God “He.” And the Bible states God made man in his own image. Where did a being of such “higher power” in the image of man come about in the first place? There definitely is a higher power at work in the universe. It’s evident wherever you look. But as far as organized religion, I believe they all have some things right and they all have some things wrong. All have similarities. Instead of fighting over who’s right and who’s wrong, why doesn’t someone look at the similarities and find out why they exist? If we all can find some common ground, maybe the world would be a better place.

      • home boy

        god is the alpha and omega. there is no beginning and no end to god . god is, was, and always will be. read your bible.

        • Altaica

          Energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. Energy must therefore always have existed. Sounds like the alpha and Omega thing in the Bible supports science there. Energy has always been because it can neither be created nor destroyed. So the true creator must be energy which has no sex. So really if we were created in the image of energy then that means our spirit/ soul is what was created the physical body is just transportation. When it wears out we get a new one.

          hmmm, curioser and curioser

      • Karolyn

        Amen, Caroline. The problem is that people want their way to be the only way. Many are even afraid to even look at another’s point of view.

        • TheRealBob

          Why would I want to look at a lie? That is all I ever see from you.

          • Karolyn

            It’s a lie in YOUR eyes, Bob, but not in mine. You really don’t get it? You cannot grasp the concept of different people having different perceptions and that we are all right according to our own viewpoint?

          • Altaica

            I think Baaaahb can’t see through that very large beam in his eye Karolyn. He might want to go to an eye specialist. Oh wait, science is a lie. No medicine for you. It’s science.

  • James

    Athiests rule. Bring humanity into the light of reason and out of the shadows of superstition and lazy thought.

    • TheRealBob

      Yes James – Atheists like Hitler, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot aqnd the rest of the atheist pantheon sure did a lot to advance humanity. Ask yourself James – who built most of the great universities in the West? Answer – Christians. Atheism is the religion of the dark and limited intellect.

      • Altaica

        Again Hitler was a devout Catholic. Thomas Jefferson and Ben Frankling we Atheists. And lets not forget the wonderful contribution of Imminent Domain in taking the Native American’s land from them and the myriad of Crusades to wipe out other people. Yeah those are positive Christian contributions there.

        • libertytrain

          Unless one knew him personally and very very intimately and could crawl inside his brain, I don’t know how any person could say Hitler was a devout Catholic whether it was written about him or not.

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            libertytrain,Altaica and Karolyn.

            Liberty,what was the devout Catholic Church’s excuse?Bloody crusades, sick pathetic inqiistions, war on science and learning.Hitler was just a by product.

            Years ago, when the xtian church had complete control over government, human life and spirit, we can see from the inquisition, just how sick these people …
            http://www.exposingchristianity.com/Inquisition.html

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            ( I meant Inquisition).

          • libertytrain

            Coal, I would venture to suggest they weren’t particularly devout or they were taught that what they were doing was right, kind of like slavery. I wasn’t there, were you — To know what they were thinking or what they were taught to think —

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            Hitler,Stalin,Mao and Christianity all are guilty of genocide.

            The Inquisition was called the sanctum officium (Holy Office) because the church considered its work so praiseworthy.F. Even after the death of a victim, …
            http://www.mtc.org/inquis.html -

          • libertytrain

            coal, I appreciate that you are trying to share your new found knowledge and websites, but I studied all this stuff years ago, and am well aware of all of it.

          • Altaica

            Coal Miner,

            I read a book recently that might interest you.

            The encyclopedia of Heretics and Heresies by crofton.

            I picked it up thinking it was going to be some pagan bashing and I’m a curious little pagan and like to see what is going from some other perspectives. You know what I found. All but W, witchcraft, spoke of different Christian branches that the ruling church didn’t agree with and the various Papal authorities had annihilated if they could. It really opened my eyes on some things. This included the sainting of some of the crusaders that committed mass murder! In one instance, in france, they slaughtered and entire city of men, women and children because they couldn’t figure out who were albigensians and who wasn’t. This was under Pope Innocent III. His response, Good job, kill them all god will know his own. Wait a minute, if they were all christians, wtf? History has some crazy turns doesn’t it.

          • Altaica

            He used his Christianity in his own speeches like Mein Komf. And various other speeches. That is where they get his religion from. Regardless of what faith he adhered to most will agree he was a cruel and evil little man.

          • libertytrain

            I can tell you I’m anything…that doesn’t make it so. You know that.

        • Karolyn

          I am currently in an American History 201 class and being reminded of the barbarity of the Christians who came to the New World in the 15th century, killing 1000s of native Americans either with disease or bullets.

          • libertytrain

            Yea, I’m guessing Christ wouldn’t have called them Christians…

          • Altaica

            We need a guidebook of who is a “Christian” and who is a Christian. Or at least a checklist we can use to help us determine them. I left Christianity because of the cruelty and hypocrisy of my “Christian” town. I could never understand why if we were supposed to love all and have peace why they were the way they were. There must be very few of those idealistic ones left. Mother Theresa was one of those I am sure. Oh and Sister Ann at my Jesuit college she was a good one.

          • libertytrain

            I don’t think you need a guide book. They show themselves by their work. As you experienced.

        • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

          Altaica
          You are right, it is imminent doain.Liberty is wrong.

          Imminent domain, or eminent domain as its known in the United States, is the concept in which the state can use the power of common law to seize a citizen’s …

          http://www.ehow.com/facts_5008545_definition-imminent-domain.html

          • libertytrain

            Coal, what is wrong with you? It seems to me they are both correct —- didn’t you look at both his links.

          • libertytrain

            And in the USA which is where you say you live and I live, you will only see eminent domain on the legal docs.

          • Altaica

            I wish that were true LibertyTrain, but they were using it not all that long ago in Greenwich, CT. I think they may still be fighting it in court but I haven’t checked up on the case in quite awhile. It was also used to take my family’s farm lands and home a few generations back. Also in CT. It’s supposed to be rare, and I had thought buried largely in the past, but the whole Greenwich thing reared it’s head and I was astounded it was still around.

          • libertytrain

            I think you misunderstood. I’m stating that in this Country the term is eminent domain, and that’s what’s used as the legal terminology in this Country. And it’s grown worse not better because of the Supremes unfortunate decision in 2005.

      • Karolyn

        “the dark and limited intellect” like Thomas Edison, Linus Pauling, Pavlov, Carl Sagan, Auguste Compte, Georges Clemenceau, Shastakovich, Durkheim, and many, many more contributors to the arts, philosophy and sciences.

      • James

        For the record, I’m not the James who wrote “Atheists rule.” My comments are below.

    • FreedomFighter

      ‘I know of no finding in archaeology that’s properly confirmed which is in opposition to the Scriptures. The Bible is the most accurate history textbook the world has ever seen.’

      Dr Clifford Wilson, formerly director of the Australian Institute of Archaeology, being interviewed by radio by the Institute for Creation Research (ICR radio transcript No. 0279–1004).

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

  • Jeryl

    There was a time in my life that I was and atheist and swallowed the whole evolution story hook, line and sinker. But, I left atheistic evolution based on rational thought. Order and arrangement demand and intelligent originating cause. Aside from the simple fact that evolution is not mathematically possible, there are the first and second laws of thermodynamics. The fossil record definitely indicates the sudden appearance of millions of highly complex organisms. The entire dynamics of physical science support intelligent creation, despite what Bill Mayer may espouse. But, in the end, it is all a matter of faith. Christians have faith that God, in His Word, explains how he did things. Atheists have faith that we are all an accident. Some theistic evolutionists attempt to combine the two – through faith. As far as empirical evidence is concerned: there is no proof of exactly how it happened.

    • TheRealBob

      The Bible gives the only believable account of creation. Theistic evolutionists are whores who try to please the world.

      • Altaica

        Your Bible is no more believable than my religion that is 10,000 years old and has a different account. Deal with the fact that it’s all a small piece of the puzzle and you are not 100% right.

        • Karolyn

          Amen! It is very sad that too many are so afraid of what they don’t understand, what goes against what they believe, and turn that fear into mistrust, anger and hatred.

        • home boy

          man has only existed for 6000 years . so what planet is your religion from?

          • Altaica

            Form Planet Earth where Homo Sapiens have walked for more than 60,000 years. Where is yours from?

        • TheRealBob

          Actually, the Bible is believable for those who have the wit to understand it. Your posts prove that you lack the wit to understand.

      • Karolyn

        Believable? If you can believe in the biblical story of creation, then you have it in you (as do we all) to believe anything. If the incredible stories in the Bible are believable, why can’t the incredible stories told in other religions be believable?

        • Altaica

          It’s because he’s afraid. He’s too lazy to look and afraid of what he might find. He has chosen to be a sheep with blinders rather than a Thinking Man. If he admits that there are other faiths he is afraid he would have to admit that he is wrong. I think the bible supports that there are other religions and gods in the commandments, “Though shalt have no other god’s before me.” This alone acknowledges the presence of other gods. Also in the Bible when can left his parents, the only humans of god’s creation he found other people. This is another point in the bible that not all human kind was created by God as the bible only addresses Adam and Eve and their progeny. I think the bible details the history and culture of that lineage and that part of the world, but in way tells the story for the whole world.

          • libertytrain

            I find it continuously funny that people accuse other people of another faith of being lazy or non-thinking. If these people found something to believe in that satisfies their needs and faith, who the heck are you to decide they are wrong in finding what is right and true for them. I don’t get that ‘I’m right and know more’ concept you all push. I appreciate your choices but it’s not really your right to decide other people’s choices – you apparently get very unhappy with people that try and push their belief at you – you can’t have it both ways… You can’t do the pushing as well and not accept their right to push their thoughts — It’s kind of a no win situation and insulting people’s intelligence doesn’t appear very kind either yet you continue to do it. So why should your faith be of value to me if you continue to insult people — silly isn’t it.

          • denniso

            Not all religions are trying to force their views on others continually and as part of their dogma…the Christians are obviously one of the worst,if not the worst and Muslims are doing a pretty good job at doing the same. Buddhism is one of the least offenders in that regard, and native American religions make no attempt at all to coerce others into their religion.

  • Larry Pierson

    Evolution is not common sense! Its caving to the voices of the most obnoxious, close-minded intolerants on the planet.

    I am an engineer and have run the numbers. Evolution is impossible. It can’t work. It actually takes more faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe in God. The only thing that keeps this discredited idea from being laid to rest for good is that it allows people to actually believe they don’t have to be held accountable for their actions in this life. Go ahead and ask a true evolutionist whether or not he believes Adolf Hitler is burning in hell right now.

    • FreedomFighter

      “Even if all the data point to an intelligent designer, such an hypothesis is excluded from science because it is not naturalistic”

      Reference
      Todd, S.C., correspondence to Nature 401(6752):423, 30 Sept. 1999.

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

    • Altaica

      Statistical mathematics is a wholly different way of doing math then what you would be using as an engineer. I’ve had various forms of math and statistics is formulated and used differently then the other maths. Statistics when used the proper way, the way the discipline is designed does prove evolution as does our very genetics and the fossil record. The evolution of various bacterium, viruses and insects to become resistant to our poisons is another example. You do not fully understand because Biology is not the same kind of science as Physics. They are different branches because they deal with different things. As for hitler and hell, I don’t believe in Hell. I believe in reincarnation and karma. I believe hitler is living out another lifetime in some other form.

    • Karolyn

      There is no hell! Hell is what we experience here when we do not live as we were meant to live! Do you really believe that “evil” people are happy? I think not. They are living in hell. Think about it.

      • FreedomFighter

        Hell is to not know god, whats it like K?

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

        • Karolyn

          I have my own concept of God, thank you very much and am pretty satisfied and happy with it. If you are so happy in your belief, why would you feel it necessary to denigrate another for theirs? Sad, really, that people choose to be that way.

          • Altaica

            It seems to me Karolyn, that a lot of people think freedom of religion is only for their religion. If you try to have your freedoms they flip out and slam you. Kind of crazy huh?

            I always thought that Freedom of Religion meant every religion.

  • Alabama red neck

    Well it seems you have all the answers, but you left one very needed
    point. Just where did you get the phrase SEPERATION OF CHURCH AND
    STATE//? Okey next time you use it please tell us where it is found.

    • Altaica

      Uhm, let me see, it’s called the Constitution of the United States of America! That is where I get it from. The document written by our founding fathers.

      • Bob

        Ummm, not found in the Constitution, Thanks for playing. The Constitution calls for freedom of speech and freedom OF religion.

        The trouble with most Americans is that we do not read, understand or demand that our “leaders” obey the Constitution.

        • TML

          You are guilty of your own conviction. Read below

    • TML

      1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

      THAT is a seperation of church and state, my friend.

      • Caroline

        TML says:
        August 23, 2011 at 11:22 am
        1st Amendment: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

        THAT is a seperation of church and state, my friend.

        TML, no you are wrong. What the 1st Amendment means is that Congress shall not interfere with religion or prohibit expression of religion. It does not mean that you cannot say prayers in schools or that you cannot have a Christmas Tree on the town Green.

        Separation of Church and State means that you cannot have any of these privileges and that religion must be practiced behind closed doors so as not to offend someone else. At least that is what the athiests and government officials would have us think!

        • TML

          “TML, no you are wrong.”

          No, I’m not. The 1st Amendment is clear on what it means by itself.

          “What the 1st Amendment means is that Congress shall not interfere with religion or prohibit expression of religion.”

          You left out the second part of that, conveniently… which is that, Congress shall make no law respecting a religion. Thus with the second part that you mentioned, we have a separation of church and state, as opposed to say… the Holy Roman Empire.

          “It does not mean that you cannot say prayers in schools or that you cannot have a Christmas Tree on the town Green.”

          I agree. And to make a law that respects or forbids such is unconstitutional.

          “Separation of Church and State means that you cannot have any of these privileges and that religion must be practiced behind closed doors so as not to offend someone else. At least that is what the athiests and government officials would have us think!”

          Uh… so you present what you think atheists and government officials think as what a separation of church and state really means? :-/

  • mjnellett

    Evolution has one BIG problem….”nature,” or whatever you would like to call it does NOT have the ability to create (bring forth something out of nothing)the Big Bang! Evolutionists can only go backwards in time so far then they run into a problem. You have to have something to have caused the gigantic explosion that they say started all of this! Gases, matter, something, but they can’t prove anything!Man’s intelligence has been impressive since history first recorded his existence! Why is it so hard to believe in a Supreme Being (God)? Science, math, all of which was given to us by our Creator. We don’t discover anything new in the world we simply discover that which is already here. The bible says, “there is NOTHING new under the sun. We only find what has been here since the beginning.

    • TheRealBob

      True – the evilutionist belief that everything came from nothing without the guiding will of an intelligent being is a belief that beggars reason. Atheist superstition is the true darkness of the mind.

      • Altaica

        You really don’t understand. Evolution does not explain the first creation, it explains the difference of creatures. Evolution is based on the development of the first life into ever increasing new life. It does not attempt to explain how that first life form got there only what and how it changed over millions of years.

        • TheRealBob

          Obviously you do not understand that evilution is the true superstition. It is a lie and all who embrace it are liars. The mechanics of evilution are statistically impossible, hence evilution is superstition.

          • Altaica

            Bob,

            Were you part of the no child left behind program? You are severely lacking in a basic education and the ability to understand even basic concepts. Science is real, nature is real, provable and tangible. Cogito Ergo Sum. You so far in this discourse have only proven to me that you are a close minded, egotistical, uneducated, pompous bigot. The impression I get is it is ok for you to preach and purport your religion with no real substance yet when others try to teach a view different than your own you act like a child with name calling and a belligerent attitude. If you are incapable of any kind of rational and intelligent discourse and giving of actual information that has some form of accurate documentation like so many here on both sides of the issue have been able to do, then you are clearly not in a stage of maturity where you should even be participating. You spew forth hatred and lies and call me a liar when I use concrete facts. Your responses are very much like that of a spoiled rotten little brat. Maybe I should call you Veruca Salt from now on.

            su·per·sti·tionNoun/ˌso͞opərˈstiSHən/
            1. Excessively credulous belief in and reverence for supernatural beings.
            2. A widely held but unjustified belief in supernatural causation leading to certain consequences of an action or event, or a practice based on such a belief.

            As you can see by this dictionary definition of the word, science cannot be a superstition. Science deals with everyday, observable occurrences that are not supernatural. If you want to use superstition properly then the usage would be in describing all religions. Yours included. Now, since you don’t believe in science and you think it is all a lie, log off, throw out your computer, get rid of all modern conveniences and go live in your cave and scavenge for food with your bare hands. Don’t wear clothes, because those are from science, unless you’re going to use a fig leave that you just lick and stick. Agriculture is a science, clothes are a science, shampoo, processed food, fire, tools, homes, cars, bikes, computers, the list goes on. Go back to your cave troll. If you want to be so close minded and think you should follow everything literally in your book then find a way, without science to go back to the middle east and live there. Maybe you’ll find yourself a female troll that will like you.

    • home boy

      because man thinks his poop doesn’t stink. he knows all . yeah right.

      • Altaica

        Man I wish my poop didn’t stink and my cats too. That would be awesome! I don’t want to know everything though, cause then I would be bored and have nothing to do. That would suck!

  • bob

    God created the universe and all thats in it! As far as global warming goes it’s a joke! The planet is a liveing, breathing thing, and when it get sick the temp goes up. Global warming was cooked up by Al Gore and scientific cronies to scare people. I am for GOD so all those who think it was evolution, read the BIBLE and get the real truth!

    • Altaica

      Uhm, I did and it is so convoluted and contradictory that it doesn’t make any sense. And you can believe in your god, but I will stick with my believe in the Divine Creative Energy. I don’t need your book, your churches or your preaching. Stop trying to force others to follow your Christianity. That is what causes the defensiveness from others.

      • home boy

        you didn’t understand it because you are to smart. you need to have someone with the knowledge explain it to you. you have to humble your self when you read it. some things are hard to understand but most is easy reading.

        • Altaica

          No I need to dumb down my thinking process and put on special decoder glasses? Shouldn’t it be understandable by all not just one group of people? So many say it’s the inerrant word of god, but how can that be when people took dictations and I know people are flawed, so of course the dictation is going to be imperfect. If the Great Spirit wrote the book everyone would be able to understand it. We wouldn’t need a special decoder ring…or are we in one giant game of spy versus spy to see who the best cryptographer is? Maybe I should get myself a bottle of wine and drink heavily before I read it, maybe then it will make sense.

  • Marc

    We cannot know God. The right thing for all of us to do is to make the world a better place by performing His commandments as best we can, including acts of kindness toward strangers, visiting the sick, hospitality towards guests and bringing peace between our friends who cannot get along.

    With regard to evolution, I would highly recommend the Sephen C. Meyer’s book, “Signature in the Cell – DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design”.

    • newspooner

      Another good book on the subject is “Tornado in a Junkyard”.

      • home boy

        another good book is the bible

    • Cawmun Cents

      First I would ask that you define the term”we”.Secondly…that is Islamic doctrine.”One cannot know God” is one of the basic principles of Islam.
      It is part of the”oneness doctrine”which the Christian faith by biblical account would find heretical.This doctrine follows the premise that God is one.But Christianity is the knowledge that God is three distinct personages in one distinct God.There is the spiritual aspect as in:(how God communicates with each individual spirit.)(There is the creator/father aspect as in the one who built the universe.)(There is the becoming human so that He could share our experience aspect.)
      Questions need to be asked.Doubts have to be quelled.

      1.How could a God who has never been a human be qualified to judge our humanity?
      2.How can God be known to human beings?
      3.How/why could He allow bad things to happen?
      4.Why didnt He make us flawless?
      5.What is the nature of man in relation to God?

      answer to question 1.He did live as a human being in the body of Jesus Christ(dont bother with the titles,its the ideals that get ignored for arguments sake)Both fully God and fully human at the same time.To act as a perfect sacrifice for the atonement of sin.Hence His death on the cross and the new life reborn afterward.

      answer to question 2.Through the Holy Spirit which deals with the spitiual aspect of human beings.The Holy Spirit is given as a comforter to those who have accepted Gods pure sacrifice in Christ Jesus.

      answer to question 3.God set forth conditions by which things occur by reaction.To have one condition,you would need to have the opposite to relate a reaction to that condition.Reactions are not random events.They are generated by the laws put forth in the beginning which keep order and define chaos.Each event in kind is a reaction to a previous event.As such”good and bad”are defined and not subject to the relation of conditions.By this I mean that what is bad is not good by the defining of its inherent conditions,but rather it is merely either good or not good(which is technically the understanding for bad).Opposing conditions cause conflicting reactions.Some events are good,while others are bad.Did God cause these things to happen?Not necessarily,but the laws governing reaction do.This is where the concept of free will comes to mind.

      answer to question 4.If we were made to be incapable of independent thought,we would be human robots.We might then be incapable of doing wrong.But our very design depends on the ability to choose one or the other of ways of thinking.Can you blame that on God?No.Why?Because you choose to react one way or another to the conditions which are extant.So by that reasoning,you choose whether to blame God or not.You choose to believe God or not.You see things with a particular skew,or the way they really are,depending on your choice.You choose to decide what is bad and what is good for your self,or you follow Gods instructions.God designed you to know Him.You choose your own path after that.Free will.

      answer to question 5.You were made in Gods image.To react in a way that pleases God.But the choice is still yours.Would you choose to love God if He made everything perfect for you?No.Why?Because then you would have no reason to react to Him.The laws which built the universe are dependent upon opposing forces to be able to gauge a reaction.So goes whether you love God or not.But the consequences for ignoring that fact,are of your own choices,not His.He set in motion a set of conditions that must take place for order to occur.You have chosen how to react to those conditons.That is your relation to Him.He made you.He loves you.He provided all which exists.He even provided an easy cure-all for your spiritual well being.Your choice whether you accept it or not.Its up to you.

      -CC.

  • TML

    When it comes to evolution, I think it’s important to understand that it is the best, if not the only, ideas yet formulated, which appeal to the acuter minds… where “God did it” just doesn’t suffice, and in which, even to the more intelligent believers; “how” he did it, is more to the fascination.

    • Karolyn

      After all, we were made with inquisitive minds to use! Not using them is an afront to God or Universal Intelligence or whatever.

      • TML

        I agree. Systems which refuse doubt are devices for drugging thought.
        It reminds me of one of my favorite quotes from Thomas Jefferson – “Question with boldness, even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear.”

    • Altaica

      Good point. I am a very curious being, that’s why I like to learn and grow.

      • TheRealBob

        Grow or mutate? Those who reject God on the basis of their false reasoning will find that He does not accept their rejection and will, in turn, reject them. God is not in the least bit impressed by the meager intellects of meager men and all your arrogant puffery will mean nothing at the judgment.

        • Karolyn

          I see a lot of “puffery” being displayed here today!

          • Altaica

            Psst. Have you noticed Baaahb is stalking me. He looks for all my posts and then flings insults. I think he’s a cave troll.

        • 45caliber

          Real:

          There is a big difference between Christianity and Islam.

          In Christianity, God wants you to study and learn. All secrets are open for you to learn. If God has some secrets he doesn’t want you to discover, you won’t even know there are secrets.

          In Islam, they are frightened at learning. So they insist that all their real scholars learn only to read the Qoran in its original language. They forbid any other learning because most of it will make you realize that the Qoran has a lot of problems with it – primarily conflicts of meaning. (Do you kill all strangers or do you make friends with them? Do you honor your wife or do you beat her to death?)

          While all people should learn about God it is also a responsibility that all God’s people learn of science as well. They do not conflict – unless you simply do not study enough.

  • just little ole me

    Okay here is my theory. I believe science is theory, hypothesis. We may have some things wrong. I think we need to stop teaching it as scientific fact in our schools and let children learn to form ideas for themselves on science. Stop it with the pettiness and bickering of many immature adults who put themselves above the welfare and education of children. Teach them all sides of ideas and let them decide for themselves, experiment with their ideas. Our schools stink because they don’t teach children to think for themselves or to be able to self teach (it seems to have turned into a me first adult society)they teach children that fact is fact and they should except it for that. Therefore we our sending out drones in a sense with an agenda. We were once a thriving society of ideas because we didn’t forget that learning was evolving itself. We have got to the point that science is considered absolute but I think it is always evolving (One subject that should be fact is History, events that have passed and are easily considered fact, but we have turned that on its head too, by many people trying to change or erase parts of it). How many times have facts (as many men call it in science) in science been found wrong and changed. Such as the idea of the atom and its idea of structures and parts. It through many scientists before its idea of structure has come to stand as it does today. Are we so arrogant to believe we have all the answers, therein lies our problem. Man is always evolving ideas and for us to set things as fact in science is arrogant in itself. The universe is a great mystery. I am glad that is so because it gets my imagination soaring, I question everything and stand in awe of all that is around me. I want to stay curious, it is exciting. I like to think for myself and not have someone shove a theory (or in some cases it has become a blind faith/belief). Science has come to a point that it seems to be a belief or leap of faith. Therefore how much different is it than a religious based belief (Science should be only a theory and not a faith based belief. I hope I am making sense here people could interpret this in another way other than what I mean. Tricky word belief.), it has come to that and it shouldn’t have. Science is evolving let us not say it is all fact. I don’t think it ever will be fact even a 1000 years from now. I myself side with God on this issue. We are small and can not hope to comprehend all fact and all things. I will leave that in his mighty power not mine.

    • 45caliber

      little ole me:

      I disagree with a lot you say. Some things can be proven and therefore are science. 1 + 1 = 2. Other things like evolution are “theories” – educated guesses. Theories have not been proven yet and may never be. The real problem with theories is that many consider them proven fact and refuse to consider any fact that comes up that disproves even the slightest thing in their theory. This becomes bad science such as global warming. They dismiss all the facts that don’t fit what they want to “prove” their theory is right.

      Kids “self-learn” at what they wish to learn. There are many attempts to teach them to think and many teachers do a good job of it. But allowing kids to “self-teach” themselves WILL NOT WORK! Their interests do not include things they will need later in life. And life is too short to wait until they do realize they need to learn something. In fact, many in school today won’t learn anything. I’ve met high school graduates that barely can write their own names because they deliberately set out to forget as much as they can of what they were forced to learn. They “self-study” things like playtime, drinking, partying, etc. Paris Hilton is a good example.

      • just little ole me

        Wait a minute. I agree basically with everything you have said as well. You are generalizing everything I said. I didn’t speak to the total specifics. Okay perhaps I confused everyone. I basically said what you said in a run around fashion. I am talking about most of science has not been totally proven. The basics yeah like gravity and so forth but there is so much that is not been totally proven fully. Yes we know there is gravity but we may have some tiny specifics that could be wrong. Duh we know there is gravity because we would float away. Children when taught science aren’t taught to question it. That is the point I am trying to make. Children are smart if given direction to both sides of an issue they usually come to the right conclusion.

        The self teaching you are generalizing too. Yes there are a few good teacher but if we are to be honest most are not teaching out of the interest of their students especially when you look at the teachers union. I am not saying all in the teachers unions are bad but there a good many of them who care more about their union and their dues than about their students, check out the rubber rooms in parts of New York. We should be paying them according to their put out. Yes children need steering in education as well but we don’t teach them to have fun with what they learn and to seek out information for themselves, no wonder they hate learning for the most part. Example: My daughter while going to 6th grade was told about global warming (my daughter disagreed) and when she questioned the teacher she was quickly ridiculed (embarrassed to the hilt) and shut down. She was told that was a stupid notion that their was no global warming (she lives in a seemingly conservative state). If the teacher felt he/she was right then she could have directed them to some information and then also encouraged my daughter to explore her own theory. Children are shut down at many schools for saying things that are out of the mainstream theories. Therefore we are teaching our children fact is fact and they should not question their high and mighty adults. Yes respect is key on both sides. Children are not just property as some would treat them as they are. Children need guidance to learn for themselves and to be curious and seek out truth for themselves. That is human nature and we have tried to remove that part from them. Benjamin Franklin and many of our ancestors before us taught much of what they know to themselves from other great learning explorers (likely books. How long has it been that children try to find facts from books, we are even removing many text books from schools) before them. Their curiosity was set on fire by the mothers/fathers and great theorists. On the whole our schools do not set our children’s learning on fire. Many parents have passed on all teaching to well schools. They could still teach children on the side as well and take interest in what they are learning (some do). Teachers teach our children to memorize to pass tests so they can get their money and approval from other adults. School has become boring and long. Many teachers get mad at students because they don’t get the answers they are suppose to write away, my daughter experienced this many times and came home crying. It took me many days of dragging her to school, I mean literally. It is called a school for a reason. A student should be able to ask the same question over and over until they get it without being yelled at. We have taught the children learning is not fun and school is to be hated. It should be a place for children to explore. We need to give our children the feeling of accomplishments and usefulness. I am sorry this is long but it is near and dear to my heart. I have since removed my children from public school. It is my responsibility to make sure my children are well educated. Parents can teach despite the high and mighty adults who think otherwise. Many home schooled children if taught by responsible adults thrive in the learning atmosphere and many are doing better than public taught students. Socialization, blah blah. That is what I get for the most part. My daughters learn to socialize with all age groups. They have friends who range from 2 to 72 and are very sociable. They do community activities. Therefore they are not tied down to one group. Schools stagnate socialization because they only teach children to socialize with one age group. Come on that is not real life. In your life when in the real world you must socialize with all age groups. They pick up bad language, peer pressure is rampant, and they pick up nasty habits from other kids at school. I don’t want my children to learn their moral values from other children and adults (many good out their please don’t generalize my statements again). They need to see everyday good examples. Okay sorry didn’t mean to turn this into a preaching session. Please my point is teach children to be excited about life and all that is around them. Teach them to form their own opinions. This makes them feel like they can contribute and that they are a true individuals. Many have forgotten who they are.

  • Nick

    I personally believe in God. Though we are assuming that either the people who believe in evolution are right or the people who are creationists are right. Could it be neither? There are other beliefs and philosophies that we were not taught in the American education system, maybe no one really knows. I do find evolution hard to believe, it bothers be how it is taught in school as absolute fact. How we are taught to believe authority with out questioning. How the education system has gotten away from presenting a broader education and promotes a certain political view point. Some people believe we were created by beings from other planets. I just know I choose to believe in God, but I also think both sides Christians and atheists should try not to hate each other but understand.

    • 45caliber

      Nick: The real problem is that there are two different types of atheists.

      One type does not believe in God at all. He will basically ignore you if you wish to talk about it and will try to get away due to boredom.

      The other type are the ones who worship the Atheist Religion. (And even the government considers it a religion.) They insist that there is not only not a god by that everyone else must believe the same. I actually believe that they do this because they are afraid there really is a god but believe if everyone else also disbelieves the god will die. The real problem is that they want to do whatever they wish to do and are afraid that if a god is around he won’t be pleased with them when they die.

    • Altaica

      I think if religion stopped being afraid us scientists are there to take their beliefs away we’d have a lot less problems. I am a scientist, I believe in the data of evolution, even more so since we began mapping and understanding DNA. I also believe in the Great Creator. A divine energy or force, devoid of sex or physical substance that brought about the very first life forms, which could have been by my beliefs beings of pure energy (Spirits). The biggest stumbling block out there is some people, of various religions think we are trying to destroy their faith when we are not. We are only describing a process we can see and using what evidence we have. I was taught evolution as a Theory. A theory in science is an idea that has proofs and data that supports it. It has been tested and holds a great deal of water. At this point it is tested, retested, studied, revamped and reworked. If it stands the test of time and the evidence remains substance it can be determined a law. A hypothesis is an idea that has been untested and unproven or minimally so, and a law is something that has been undeniably proven. I think part of the hard-line problem comes from a knee jerk reaction to some religious folks being aggressive and hateful and shoving their faith down our throats. What happens is eventually even the most sound minded and patient will lose patience and react in kind. Now we have violence (Social) begetting violence. Before we know it we have a shouting/insult war where no-one is getting anywhere and no-one is even learning a shred of anything.

  • Sam Whitley

    I am a scientist with four decades of daily practical experience. I am also a Christian. When I was in high school, probably the most brilliant teacher I had (or at least the most inciteful) was a full-time Baptist minister, a full professor at a Bible College, a full-time pastor, and a part-time high school history and English teacher. I mention his “jobs” because this leads directly into the heart of the matter. In the mid-sixties, he stated in the classroom that he nad no problem whatever with science versus religion. His guidebook on religion was the Holy Bible, and as he recited the Genesis account of creation, he pointed out that the “creation order” listed in the Bible was identical to the “evolution order” of our universe, planet, and its fauna. He further brought out that man’s lifespan is but a blink in the passage of eons of earth history, and as such, when the writings of the Old Testament were written it was mortal men trying to explain concepts beyond their very ability to comprehend. Thus the seven “days” of creation could have been seven millenia, seven eras, epochs, periods, or whatever. And that God in His infinite wisdom could have “let us evolve” with a careful nudge or just “poofed” us out with a snap of His fingers. I can accept his explanation and am one of “those” scientists who firmly conclude that there is insufficient evidence to support that man’s contribution to the “heat load” on earth significantly affects global warming. Curiously (or understandably) almost all the scientists pushing man-created global warming have a financial stake in finding evidence to support their point of view. No peer review. I also work with a group of scientists who feel as I do.

    • newspooner

      In my opinion, the biggest factor ignored in the “global warming” controversy is decay. The alarmists rant and rave about the negatives of “burning fossil fuels” and how that release too much heat and carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. They seem totally oblivious to the vastly more staggering amounts released by the decay of dead vegetation. The wood that I burn in my woodstove would release the same amount of heat by undergoing bacterial decay. And the gaseous products of that decay contain a much larger number of noxious and reactive chemicals than smoke. Since most of the wood (and all other vegetation) in the world dies and decays rather gets burned, by many orders of magnitude, the global warming alarmists are barking up the wrong tree.

      • 45caliber

        The big reason they believe in global warming is their belief that MAN is the most important thing in the universe. Therefore ANY change MUST be due to what man does.

        As I keep trying to point out, man – to Earth – is little more than ants. They build just like we do. And leave as little impression on the Earth was we do.

        • Altaica

          That’s a very similar view to my own. Man is no more important a creature than any other. We are all here together and would thrive if we, as humans, knew how to live in balance.

    • Caroline

      Well said! I totally agree.

      • Caroline

        Sorry, I should have said I meant that comment to Sam.

    • 45caliber

      Sam:

      I agree with you completely. The Bible even says in one place that time means nothing to God. It was along the line of “a thousand years to man is a day to God”. I can’t remember the entire comment.

      It is only man who insists that a day to God MUST be the same day to man.

      The one thing that has always awed me is: How did the writer of Genesis KNOW the same creation story as the scientists are now learning? It could only be told him by the Creator.

  • http://WTLMINISTRY.ORG ED DOHAR

    Evolution is a faith option that some like to espouse rather than faith in the Bible because Evolution has no reference to sin, Heaven or Hell and therefore has no responsibility factor, allowing the student to hold sway over the Evolution text rather than the Bible text holding sway over them. People do not want to be under authority, so they choose Evolution.
    Ed.

    • Karolyn

      Why do people need to be under an authority in order to be and do good? We, as our true selves, are all the authority we need.

      • Frank907

        For the same reason a child won’t steal a cookie in front of Mom but will when her back is turned.

      • FreedomFighter

        You only target gods authority as unneeded, while promoting totalitarian goverment authority by man, the most evil form of authority known.

        Laus Deo
        Semper Fi

        • TheRealBob

          Quite right – Karolyn is one of maobama’s brownshirts in Americorps and she supports every lieberal fascist idea that comes along. She is the biggest hypocrite on this blog.

          • Karolyn

            It would seem to me that a self-professed Christian who constantly displays un-Christian traits is more of a hippocrite than I could ever be!

        • FreedomFighter

          The spread of evil is the symptom of a vacuum. Whenever evil wins, it is only by default: by the moral failure of those who evade the fact that there can be no compromise on basic principles.

          AYN RAND, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal

          Laus Deo
          Semper Fi

      • Altaica

        Some people need that authority to keep them in check because they don’t trust themselves. Which do you think is Creepier? Big Brother is watching you or god is watching you?

        Authority whether spiritual or mortal is there to impose societal norms, some, like governments, are quite a bit more heavy handed. Of course fanatical mortals of any cause, religious, sports, whatever, can do their fair share of crazy things too. It’s all interesting. The difference between religion and government is you kind of have more choice who your voyeur is and you might even have a better relationship then with a government. Just pondering some things.

  • BUTTONMAN

    As stated, we will never know how the primordial mud was created. However, the evolution of the species is apparent in man. Study of old armor shows that the knights seldom exceeded five feet in height. When I was in high school 55 years ago, few of my classmates reached six feet. Now, when visiting schools, six feet is close to average. Is it because they are better fed? Possibly, but still they have evolved in stature in a very short time. Evolution of this type in other species is largly due to survival of the fittest. In most animals, the female, if she has a choice, will pick the male based upon some sort of characteristic of the male. In other situations, the male that wins a battle with his peers gets the female of his choice. So, the best charteristics of each go to the offspring – Thus a tiny bit of evolution. Other significant evolution in our time is the tiny garter snake. In some areas of the U.S. it evolved from a non-poisonous to a mildly poisonous animal in just 20 years. If that type of change can happen in 20 or 1000 years, what could have possibly happened in millions of years? I do not believe that this knowledge/belief diminishes belief in The Creator or His plan.

    • 45caliber

      There have been bones of men found in England and in the Mid-East that were about 8 feet tall. The Bible comments about “giants” and so does mythology. So the height of man isn’t that stable. But if you take small children from a race that has small men, feed them well, when they are grown they are generally several inches taller than their parents were. I’m not so sure man has changed as it is that man is normally taller but are restricted by food in most areas of the world.

      • Altaica

        A note on size comparisons. Check out some research on Island Dwarfism. If you put a species on an island it will often change in size to a smaller form. We have dwarf T-rexes in the fossil record and dwarf elephants today. I don’t know about the giants much, but a lot of other animals had giants and there are also a lot of extinct ape species that looking at the skeleton alone look very human. I would want to actually visit the skeletal remains of these giants to see them for myself, like I have many other fossils. We also do have cases of humans exceeding 7 feet and the tallest man on earth Robert Wadlow reached 8 feet 11.1 inches (272 cm) in height. So I certainly think it is possible. I am sure if the average height was around 5 feet they certainly were giants. We certainly do have the capability to grow very tall or in the case of the island of “hobbits” They discovered a few years ago, succumb to island dwarfism as well.

  • Mike

    Wow what a highly charged issue.

    We have people with vastly different skins color yet it has been proven that all human DNA can be linked back to one woman living in Africa (see “Mitochondrial Eve”). How do we explain these changes in pigmentation?

    So maybe we are getting a little too extreme with the definitions of these words… As something EVOLVES to adapt to an environment new traits are CREATED.

  • 45caliber

    I do believe in evolution – with a touch of help from the hand of God. It says that time, to God, has no meaning in the Bible. So why should we be trying to insist that a day to God is the same as a day to us? Isn’t that a little confining? Actually I believe God simply starts something and then makes changes as He wishes to bring about the changes. You can call it evolution if you like because it doesn’t happen instantly. Keep in mind that this is a THEORY – in other words a guess. It has never been proven.

    And if you compare the Big Bang Theory to the first book of Genesis, they both describe the same sequence of the creation. The only big guess is – what created matter to begin with and what set off the Big Bang?

    • home boy

      and which was first the chicken or the egg. nice to see you finally joined in on the conversation 45

  • Frank907

    I’d like to know why it is necessary to prohibit discussing a creation/evolution comparison in the classroom? Does that sound like censorship? What is to be feared in an honest discussion?

    • 45caliber

      The (liberal) fear is that if you discuss both, the young will begin to believe in God. And everyone knows that there is no such thing as God, right? After all, if there was a real God, they themselves wouldn’t be the supreme beings in existence. Besides, as the top atheist said, he prayed for a bicycle when he was a boy and didn’t get one, so this shows that no God exists.

    • Altaica

      Because one’s religious and the other is academic. The public school system is a government entity and by the establishment clause if the government were to teach Creationism they would be supporting an establishment of religion which is a clear violation of the clause. The only way they could avoid an all out war with all is they would also have to teach every other religion as well. So if kids are learning adam and eve they get to learn that America is suspended on the back of a giant turtle and is known as Turtle Island. We’d also have to teach Hindi, islam, and all the other various religions creation ideas. Zues, Odin, The Great Creator, Shinto. All of it. Either you teach all or you teach none. Anything less would be discriminatory.

      • denniso

        You make a good,logical and accurate argument for keeping anyone’s god out of the public classroom,but these people never seem to grasp it and clearly only have their particular Christian religious interest in mind…they want to force their brand of religion on all Americans,and never waver from that obvious goal.

  • Alex

    I find that science and scripture go hand in hand. For the most part, the order of events in creation match the proposed order of evolution.

    • God created the heavens and the earth, and it was formless and void.
    •Science says there was a big bang that created the universe. Our planet was dead and uninhabitable.

    • God created light.
    • Science couldn’t say for sure if there was light before the stars and sun or not.

    • God created a firmament, separating the waters from the waters.
    • Science says the earth developed an atmosphere.

    • God gathered the waters of the earth and made dry land appear.
    • Science says our oceans formed.

    • God created the grass of the field, the herbs, etc.
    • Science says that life began on earth as single-cell organisms that became algae, and that later became other plant life.

    • God created the stars in the heavens, and the sun and moon.
    • Science can only speculate when the stars began to ignite, or when it was our sun was born.

    • God created the moving creatures that came forth from the water, and the fowl of the air, and they populated the seas and skies.
    • Science says that life in the form of non-plant species began in the oceans.

    • God created the beasts of the field, and every creeping thing.
    • Science says that the creatures of the sea came to the land and evolved into the animals of the dry land.

    • God created man in his own image.
    • Man is the end result of the evolutionary scheme.

    So while there are some minor discrepancies, evolution and creation aren’t all that different, except to say that Moses wrote the sequence of creation about 1800 B.C. in a society so primitive by comparison that they were still making implements out of stone and bronze.

    Where science fails is that it can never answer any of the root questions of its own hypotheses. We can trace the universe, mathematically, to a big bang. Our universe is slowly expanding, and if you play the tape in reverse, you will find that it slowly contracts. That suggests that there was once a point that blasted outward.
    But science doesn’t know what went bang, why it went bang, or how it went bang. It’s called the singularity, and each alleged theory to explain it is as bad as the one before it. Most of them, in fact, suggest things even harder to believe in than an all powerful God. Some, in fact, unintentionally support a God. M Theory, for example, suggests that the singularity was the collision of two extra-dimensional galactic nodes. In other words, it admits to the idea of an alternate plane of existence, which is supportive of a spiritual God.

    In the end, science hasn’t proved anything. The whole case for evolution as an origin (as opposed to environmental evolution, or natural selection) is circumstantial. There are no hard facts.

    Comparatively speaking, I have personal experience with prayer being answered in ways that defy explanations of coincidence. For me, that one fact alone is proof positive in ways that science has yet to touch.

    That’s my take on this. As South Park once put it, evolution doesn’t prove that there is no God, but may in fact be the answer to how rather than why.

    • 45caliber

      Alex:

      The scientists say that when the Big Bang first happened, the matter was distributed in a cloud – it was formless in the void. The tiny gravity conditions started gathering the cloud together in different spots – and the friction between the dust particles heated them until they began to glow – light. Further collection of the dust particles created the sun and then the planets and moons – seperating the heavens from the earth as well. Then there was a seperation of the gases from the earth as there were volcanic eruptions. The gases had chemical reactions that created water (burn hydrogen with a lightning strike). The water will run to the lowest points and gather. The first life was microscopic and was algaes – plants. Later water creatures were created and then after that they moved onto land.

      So the creation and science basically coincides – except for time. The Bible says a day for each – God says time means nothing to Him. And who or what set off the Big Bang in the first place?

      One VERY interesting fact to me – how did ancient man, who first wrote the Bible, know the same sequence that scientists have “discovered” in the last century?

      • eddie47d

        As extensive as the universe is there could be thousands of big bangs going on into infinity. Scientists today are watching galaxies collide and suns explode. Something they couldn’t experience 100 years ago. These “bangs” could be creating new worlds or destroying old worlds. Every star is a sun and every sun could easily have a solar system. There are more than likely trillions of people out there somewhere. Did our God create them too or does each and every inhabitable planet in the universe have their own god? None of us knows that answer and I certainly wouldn’t at this time and place.

      • Altaica

        Time is one of those things that is relative. 24 hours to some flies is a lifetime while it is but a day of our time.

    • hicusdicus

      South Park, God and evolution. Now there is a trinity that could devastate the Father, son and holy ghost!

      • Jay

        hicusdicus, you’re beyond sick!

        • hicusdicus

          Jay, apparently you did not read what Alex said. I was a tongue in cheek comment. You jumped the gun again. I will gracefully accept your apology.

    • Jay

      The cause of finite can only be INFINITE!

      Definition of finite: Something or someone that has a Beginning. ie. Universe, mankind.

      Definition of Infinite: Something or someone that has no beginning, or, always was. God!

      God transcends his creation, therefore He cannot be discerned through His creation, for God is spirit, and God is a personal being, and can only be discerned spiritually. However, science does point to his creative genius through the study of assembled matter!

      • hicusdicus

        Come on Jay, that is like saying music is just structured noise. Time was created by man not God. Then man created God. The cosmos had no need for time. There is a theory that it always was and always will be. This is beyond humanities ability to perceive. But I am sure you have a ready answer.

        • Altaica

          Here’s one: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. This is a scientific law. So by this logic energy has always been and always will be. What if science’s energy and religions creator deities are the same thing? Just food for thought.

  • http://yahoo jeff

    This is tough. The earth is 4.5 billion yrs old. What was here 4.5 billion yrs plus 1 day? Something or someone had to start the whole thing. Big Bang theory, someone or something had to create the energy for this to take place. I don’t think something can create itself from nothing. Therefore something or someone had to create the energy to start it all. GOD.

    • home boy

      how do you know the earth is 4.5 billion years old? show the proof.

      • Jyrine

        Candles on the cake.

        • hicusdicus

          Jyrine that is the perfect answer for the demented.

    • Michael J.

      jeff,
      The reason you are struggling without being able to formulate a logical conclusion is because you haven’t been given all the pieces to the puzzle. The Big Bang was not the beginning and you are correct in believing that everything in the Universe was not created out of nothingness. There was an event known to a few as The Big Crunch that preceeded the Big Bang. The Big Crunch was responsible for compressing all the matter in the Universe into that tiny space which ignited The Big Bang.

      To make this understandable I will try to analogize utilizing events that most people are familiar with. In the 1950′s our government made videos while testing nuclear weapons in our western deserts. Most people will remember these videos where were depicted simple wooden houses which were sparsly furnished and occupied by test dummies who looked like the Cleaver family. I guess the point of these tests was to gage the effects on structures and people. Anyway, when the device was detonated while the cameras were rolling, one of the things you saw was the trees being blown over, though not up-rooted as a result of the initial pressure blast. The next thing you see is the trees bending back again in the direction of the blast.

      What just happened there? When there is an explosion, any explosion, there is almost simultaneously created a vacumm. When the energy of the pressure blast is nearly expended, the energy accumulating in the vacuum pulls back to the epicenter of the blast.

      In another scenario that is analogis to this subject, those who have been in battle and have experienced artilery shells exploding in close proximaty and were lucky enough to servive agree that as the pressure blast passes it breaks your eardrums and you bleed from the ears. The next thing you notice is the wind being sucked right out of your lungs. This is because a vacumm was created in the wake of the blast.

      The point of all this is that a vacuum exists in space as a result of the Big Bang. The question to be asked here is, is the level of vacuum in space increasing or decreasing as this would indicate wether or not the pressure wave we are riding is still expanding or retreating?

      In a nut shell, the expansion and contraction of the Universe is cyclical. The same energy created by the push and pull of The Big Crunch and then The Big Bang is also demonstrated in the internal combustion engine that powers the car parked in your driveway. The only difference is scale.

  • chuckb

    if you look out into the heavens there is no end to the skies, it is beyond human intelligence to understand there is no end to space. we claim there was a big explosion and the remnants made up our universe.
    some scientist say there is no other universe out their, how can they prove that, can they look into forever and make that statement.

    • 45caliber

      chuckb:

      There are a lot of people out there who make statements as if they were facts. It makes them feel good to be an “authority” on something. They even do it in politics. That doesn’t mean they are correct.

      “Theory” basically means “guess”. Facts can be proven; theories are only guesses until they can be proven. And if they are wrong – and many are – then they have to be revised as new facts are discovered.

      • Raggs

        Your almost correct .45
        The liberals and democrats FORCE the issue of a theory even when proven to be wrong… global warming… They simply dream up an idea and say that we have to prove them wrong and when we do they like everything else dismiss any notion of the truth… you can certainly see this in how oblama blames Bush for everything….

    • hicusdicus

      Chuckyboy, the last I read is that astronomers have been able to see out to 45 billion light years which is the boundaries of our known universe. The theory is we are but one of many universes. Apparently God has been quite busy. I wonder how man figures into all of this?

      • Altaica

        Aliens?

  • cerebus23

    Evolution is certainly the best game in town, when compared to oral traditions passed down for 100s and more likely 1000s of years before anyone bothered to put them down into writing. NM assuming that god is so inept that he would have to micro manage every tiny detail of evolution or any species change.

    Early life forms pretty easy, put some water on a planet, have the right temperatures and bacteria and other simple lifeforms begin to take hold, we have a lot better grasp of the ease of finding life this day and age, and it is more apparent than ever that life forms a heck of a lot easier than most of you seem to be willing to give it credit, and given the right range of conditions life can thrive and start to evolve.

    Humans have evolved, considering that every single human being on this planet migrated out of africa about 40 million years ago, from a stock of about 300 to 1200 homo sapiens aka human beings, we were probably dark skinned if not black, as tribes of people migrated out after the last ice age began to receed, as some moved into europe we began to loose our skin pigments our noses shrank to protect them form the harsh winter cold and dry, the lighter skin made is so you got more vitamin D and other minerals and such you need to survive when you have little sunlight during the winters.

    There are plenty of regions you can go see today where you can witness evolution at work. Golapagos is famous for it, but the mountains of south america all the way up the coast are a wild and isolated and varying bio zones where you can see vast interspecies differences in lamas and such depending on altitude and what food sources there are to exploit.

    Whales still have feet that are inside their bodies from when they used to walk on land, they have no purpose now however.

    No species spontaneously comes into being, there can be occasional rather large genetic gaps even within species, but no creature is going to mutate wholecloth into another something on the spot.

    Gaps are simply there because it is hard to find bones, especially hard to find really old bones, they are probably out there heck they might be under your house if you dig deep enough. But intact fossils of extreme age are rare finds, to find a missing gap fossil is like hitting the 1 powerball if 7 billion humans were playing, type rare.

    So yes there will be gaps, but between fossils and genetics and dna typing we are getting a better and fuller view of evolution, i hope we genome every species on the planet it will give us a amazing look into the histories of all these species but should go a long way to supporting or debunking parts of evolution.

    Our universe is expanding in a very specific way, our planets and our stars are hurtling through the cosmos are speeds that would shread a humans conscious if we were at all aware of it. One day this universe will be a cold lifeless shell, or we will be all anniliated when the next big bang occurs, or you could call it a big smack i guess thanks string theory.

    Either way i guess i look for god in the where did “stuff” come from areas, where did space come from? how did our dimension come into being? when did this stuff come into being? if the universe or god is really infinite where did that infinity come from? Have you ever really tried to visualize infinity? Or think about what space would be like if there was nothing.

    We are certain we live in a multi dimensional universe and it is a just a question of how many and what these other universes are like, some of our sister dimensions could be very much like our own, one or two string theory models say our universe exists on a membrane and is running paraelle with our sister universes membrane and occasionally these touch and cause “big bangs” creating whole universes with the amount of energy released.

    Which is rather handy and a very attractive theory since it solves the hows and the whys of the big bang itself, since noone can really figure out how all this energy and matter just came into being in a matter of milliseconds, but an supermassive energy release of say another dimension sumoing into yours and creating all what we see now.

    I think some of you god god far far far too little credit, when you constrain him to fairy tales that are probably so far off the original
    tales that if could read them to the original tellers they would not know wth you were talking about. Add to that you all stole the same stores off other cultures like noah and a few others apparently had a bunch of allieses and ran his scam all over cause that flood story makes it all over and its always the local guy that builds a boat and saves the world.

    So to take the telling of genesis as a literal telling of the creation of the universe is just near so laughable to me because it is clearly not a literal telling, a mountain of evidence, fossil records, genome findings, heck general physics and laws of the universe contradict just about everything in the first few books of the old testament. Genesis is a children’s story about how people, probably their supposed ancestors, but all this supposedly happened 6000 years ago or w/e we got human skeletons in africa that are older than 6000 years by a good chunk.

    But yea i do not mind if people believe in god, just do not try to shove your personal beliefs down my throat, and surely do not try and argue to me anything about the old testament being literal word of god stuff i might just ram my head into a wall.

    • TheRealBob

      Dog23: Go ahead and ram your pointy little head in to a wall because the Bible is truth and evilution is a lie. And as far as shoving things down peopl’s throats – please don’t shove the lies, fables, and fantasies of evilution down my throat.

      • eddie47d

        Please go to anger management class “Real” Bob. Jesus would approve of you doing so.

      • Karolyn

        Well, Bob, you know you don’t have to read the posts you don’t agree with. Nobody’s shoving anything down anyone’s throat, but the only one showing un-Christian-like demeanor is yourself.

      • hicusdicus

        realbob, What exactly is it you would really, really love to have shoved down your throat????????????

      • Altaica

        Bob, I am really starting to worry that you are going to give yourself a heart attack. Maybe you should stop reading these forums if all you want to here is yourself speak. I notice you troll around for specific intelligent conversations and always have something derogatory to say and never backed with any kind of fact or commentary of any real substance. You need some serious help. May I suggest a proctologist?

    • Altaica

      Well written. Have you ever pondered the law of energy: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed only transformed. I have been thinking about it a lot…what if the creator stories refer to energy. Certainly it is reasonable to consider that if energy can neither be created nor destroyed then it must have always been and always will be. That really gives a lot of weight to the power of energy.

  • acstaff

    Just a few quick thoughts:

    Whether you’re a Christian or not, I think you’ll find the ideas in The Creator and the Cosmos by Hugh Ross, PhD, very interesting.

    Many years ago, some of my coworkers were carrying on the creation vs. evolution debate. I’m a number cruncher by nature, so I started crunching some numbers. First, a quick disclaimer: This was years ago and I have no idea where my calculations are now, so I’m quoting from memory. However, based on what I recall, if evolution is a valid theory, a new minor species – such as a new insect – should appear at least every 1,000 years, and a new major species – such as a new mammal – should appear at least every 10,000 years. Now, I’m not talking about a minor derivative species here. I’m talking about a completely new species. So, where are they?

    As far as global warming, imagine a sine wave with a wavelength of about 150,000 years. This is what I call the Global Year cycle. Approximately every 150,000 years we hit the peak low point of Global Winter – which we call an Ice Age. About 75,000 years later we hit the peak high point of Global Summer.

    The last Ice Age peaked in about 18,000 BC. Let’s call that Global January. At that point in time, Minneapolis was covered by a sheet of ice that was over a mile thick. The reason that Minneapolis not still covered by a huge sheet of ice is that the climate has been warming up for the last 20,000 years. This whole Global Warming thing has been happening for a very, very long time – at least in human terms.

    The next Global Summer will peak in about 57,000 AD. Let’s call that Global July. Given that it’s now 2011, we’re in the Global Spring phase of the cycle and it’s approximately Global March. So, yes, the climate is warming, but it’s part of a natural cycle. And, no, there’s not a thing we can do about it. We can’t stop Global summer from coming any more that we can stop next summer from coming. We can prepare for it, but we can’t stop it.

    • http://web.mac.com/stankerns Stan Kerns

      Animals don’t pop out of the box fully changed–that is why they call it evolution. Right now we see actually most everything changing. The thing that drive the change is that environmental change you speak of. We now know that there are mechanisms within the cell that continuously rearrange the order of the basses in the DNA–generally they are useless, even fatal (and only about one cell in a trillion is lucky enough to be a germ cell that actually gets to reproduce–but when things change, and change they will, somebody is going to be ready to go.

      • acstaff

        You are correct, animals don’t just pop out of the box fully formed. And we do see small changes – or adaptations. Just go to the Galápagos Islands and you’ll see all kinds of adaptations.

        However, based on all those small changes, every 10,000 years we should see a new species of some kind appear somewhere. It could be some new species of bird. Or new species of fish. Or new species of mammal. But somewhere there should be a new species appearing of its own accord.

        So, if adaptations are proof of the theory of evolution, where are the new species? If a theory is valid, it should be observable. Mathematically, 100 new species should have appeared over the last 1,000,000 years. Where are they? What are they?

        I always question things when the math doesn’t work. Since the math doesn’t seem to be working, I have questions.

        • Altaica

          We are having new species arise in bacteria, viruses and insects. One of the underlying problem here is we have drastically reduced our chances of seeing what you numbers suggest. In the last decade alone how many species do you think we have discovered and also made extinct? I think that number would be pretty scary. We simply don’t know all the species that are out there, and we do a pretty good job of killing of a hec of a lot of them…that we know about. Whatever the ones we haven’t ever even seen and we wipe out through destroying and entire forest. It gets pretty scary when you think about it. Humanity has been a pretty destructive force when it comes to our various ecologies. Perhaps if we were mucking it all up your calculations would have correlations. Or there may be examples, but since we haven’t seen that species previous, we may only discover it after it has changed. Another thought is that when we discover new creatures sometimes we find some that are very similar but enough to be two distinct species. What if before we found these species there were three. One that connected the two, but it couldn’t compete and before we get there it dies off. There are a lot of variables that do make the math hard to nail down. I’m have calculus nightmares all over again at the sheer thought.

  • Henry Ledbetter

    NO CREATOR equals NO RIGHTS such as life liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

    • TheRealBob

      And morality – without God, there is no objective morality.

      • Karolyn

        WRONG! Moral societies have existed without a belief in your concept of God, and many of them a lot more moral than our own! The Native Americans discovered in the 16th century were WAY more moral than the Spaniards and Portuguese who came upon them!

        • TheRealBob

          I guess I am going to have to show my Christian trait of telling the truth. Native Americans routinely butchered and tortured one another. They raided each other for slaves and wives. By the way, who are you, a liar and a fool, to comment on what is or isn’t a Christian trait? I am only speaking the truth to your lies and that is what God expects us to do.

          • Karolyn

            Read some history, Bob. The Spaniards wrote of the friendliness, charity and gentleness of the native Americans they met upon landing here and how they took advantage of their gentle natures. The Indians only wanted to share whatever they had and were butchered for their friendliness and naivete.

          • hicusdicus

            Karolyn, The reason the Indians were butchered is because they did not have any guns.

          • Altaica

            Yes, some did. But not all tribes warred and killed each other. Each tribe was like a nation. Some peaceful, some not. Not really any different than any other society. How many trials have we had to deal with our own American troops killing innocent civilians and raping and torturing others? Too many I think.

            Have you even read Numbers? Pick up your bible, read it and then tell me how many men, women and children were killed in that book. Tell me how many women were raped and tortured. How many people taken as slaves. Your religion is no better. The very Bible you purport as truth demonstrates this very clearly. So if your bible is absolute truth, then you have a very violent, barbaric past that was continued by various “Christian” sects during the crusades and their invasion of the Americas.

        • SC Murf

          karolyn, wrong again, the native americans were hell on each other. They made war,rapped and when one of their own men died, what was left of his family became outcasts. Now not all tribes were like this but enough were and made life miserable for other tribes.

        • 45caliber

          Karolyn:

          WRONG! Moral societies have to have a set of morals fostered on them by some outside source. If they try to develop a list of morals themselves, these morals are always changing depending upon what the person wants to do at that moment. That is called “chaos”.

          All civilizations believed in a god of some sort. And their morals were those stated by gods.

          And don’t believe that the natives were loving and peaceful until after you see what the Mayans, Aztecs, and Incas believed in. I’m not sure if the Europeans every reached those levels. Most Indians tended to believe that “enemy” and “stranger” were the same word.

        • TheRealBob

          Karolyn: Again you prove yourself to be a liar – you are the one who needs to read history. The Aztecs and other SA Indians practiced human sacrifice and worshipped horrific gods. They enslaved one another and wreaked havoc on the environment. You are nothing but a liar and a fool karolyn.

          • eddie47d

            Your way too hateful “Real” Bob to be truthful so that makes you the liar. (That being your favorite word in case you are wondering why I used it). Sure Indians fought each other and so did the Christian white man.If you look real hard at history it was the Christian settlers/soldiers who killed the Indian and each other in terrible wars. Our Civil War took 620,000 lives and each side claiming to have God on their side. When the Spanish Christians “found” Mexico they took over the whole nation within a few years. The Aztecs were brutal to say the least but Cortez conquered them with only about 310 men. The Aztecs were weak and passive towards the Spanish and these good Christians took advantage of that fact. Over 11 million natives died by the hands of these invaders and most of the rest were enslaved. (most of those who died were from new diseases brought to the new world). Christian charity? Kindness? I highly doubt it so keep your arrogant and pious behavior to yourself Real Bob.

          • hicusdicus

            realbob, Wow you are eloquent. Did you larn your sophisticated ways from reading the bible?

          • Altaica

            bob,

            I think you need to pick up your book and read numbers and some of the other old testament books. I think you could also benefit from reading some history. It is true that some South American tribes performed human sacrifice, but not all of them did. The Mayan were pretty peaceful people, and the very few sacrifices they did were from volunteers. I am going to guess based on the way you portray the native peoples that you are very likely of European Descent? If this is the case you should have a look at the very bloody history of human sacrifice throughout Europe. How do you think those people in the bogs got there with ropes around their necks? Did you know the Wickerman is based off a real European tradition from ancient times? Your ancestors were no more innocent then others. Yours just happened to be more efficient at wholesale slaughter and genocide.

    • Altaica

      Morals or laws are societal norms. While most morals are based on a society’s religious beliefs you can have a moral society without a creator deity. A society decides what is best for the survival and prosperity of that society and so those codes are their morals. A very moral non-creatorcentric religion is that of Tibetan Buddhism. They believe they can reach a point where they can help all others, but that anyone can also reach this point.

      Nature provides the best example of non-religious moral societies. Keep in mind, that morals are a societal code that works for that society to help it thrive and that there are punishments for a member of that society for breaking them.

      The best example I can think of is meerkat society. Meerkats actually have a very complex society and footage of meerkats is very readily available thanks to the popularity of the nature shows called meerkat manner. It is very easy to see from watching a few episodes that the society needs it’s members to work together and follow the rules. Now nature is pretty cruel, but cruel as she may be, the things the meerkats do are for the good of the whole. Meerkats stand guard, they help watch the babies with nursery duty, have hunting patrols and war with neighboring meerkat groups over territory and resources. Apparently they can also commit treason. There were a couple of episodes that showed a few of the younger meerkats attempting to supplant the current leaders of the society. Their coup failed and the leader of the coup died in the process. Punishment for treachery. The remaining traitor was exiled and ostracized from the group and forced to scavenge scraps and live on her own.

  • Raggs

    What is the FIRST thing that people do when they are in a dire situation or death is closing in on them?… Regardless of belief or the lack of they Acknowledge and accept GOD….

    • 45caliber

      There is an old saying: There are no atheists in a fox hole.

      • hicusdicus

        .45 calibur,So what your saying is fear is the catalyst for believing in God.

        • denniso

          You’re exactly right! Fear is and has always been the impetus behind all religions,except maybe fundamental Budhism,which really only ‘preaches’ the mitigation of suffering by it’s followers.

          Fear of death,pain and misery are the motivations used by religion to attract the flock…the very things that this kind,loving Father created in his grand creation,are used by priests/preachers to keep them in power over the ignorant. The ultimate fear,right out of God’s mouth,is the threat of burning in a lake of fire for eternity…yikes,I think I’ll go to church right now and give some of my money over to the cause…whatever it takes to keep me out of hell.

    • Altaica

      Actually the first thing I say in those situations (Been in em a few times) is Oh F***!

  • 2WarAbnVet

    Pay no attention to Huntsman. I am convinced that he is Obama’s “Judas Goat”.

  • http://www.drbarbier.com DrBarbier

    On February 18, 2011 I posted an article on my blog http//www.drjosephabarbier.blogspot.com which was a Report I did on May 5, 1961 while attending Fairleigh Dickinson University, English 2- THE CONFLICT BETWEEN SCIENCE AND RELIGION CONCERNING EVOLUTION

    In my opinion matter cannot beget SPIRIT. SPIRIT is energy. The Cause of The Uncaused Cause (GOD, Yaway, Jehovah, Ala or whatever the name of the deity of ones religion may be) is what makes INFINITY.

  • http://web.mac.com/stankerns Stan Kerns

    Good grief–how behind the times can you get? All you need is a scanning electron microscope and a little time and you–that’s right you–can watch flu virus evolve right before your eyes. Evolution is a done deal–After all, surely none among you doubts we have a changing world (Check out the Grand Canyon.) Would it not seem requisite to have changing animals to live there? In any event, the fossil record certainly shows that what was once here certainly is no longer, and what is here now wasn’t then. Believe how you will where the first animals came from, but know they came able to evolve and certainly have.

    • Raggs

      Prehaps… BUT… that theory ascertains that man evolved from a monkey… Can you prove that?… ( NOPE )… So which came first the chicken or the egg?… Where did the chicken come from? likewise where did the egg come from?… a monkey?… Doubt it… WAY too many loopholes in your theory..

      • http://web.mac.com/stankerns Stan Kerns

        Man no more came from monkey than monkey from man–but both came from a common ancestor–in the case of monkeys we diverged about 30-40 million years ago, and both have changed quit a bit since. In the lab we already have molecules that can reproduce themselves–are they alive? No, but headed that direction. Once self reproducing molecules happened–and lightning, carbon, oxygen, nitrogen, and sea water are about all you need, then the cycle is started. Should a better combination occur naturally it will become more abundant. Should a structure happen that is able to assimilate other molecules it comes upon then it will do even better–give that a few tens of millions of years and you just might have something you could call alive. Right now anything that started in that direction would be recognized as food by very simple forms and removed from the environment. I can’t immagine why you would want to be “Poofed” into existance–think of the 60,000 kinds of beetles–not to mention the 100,000 kinds of round worms.

        • TheRealBob

          More pseudo-science fairy tales. Evilution is a lie and all who proclaim it are liars.

          • George

            This is simply an assertion without any evidence to support it. I did not provide evidence for evolution since I was not debating the matter but simply presenting a thesis. If you wish to attempt to rebut what someone says, you should have the courtesy to provide a reason.

          • Altaica

            Bob

            You have that on a notepad and just cut and paste it? You sure type the exact same thing a lot. You’re like a little robot that only has a few phrases programmed that you can say. Are you even capable of original thoughts or just spitting out what was programmed in your head?

            Hello McFly?!

        • hicusdicus

          Actually we evolved from the primordial soup brewed up by the big bang. What ever caused the big bang needs to be hog tied and horse whipped.

    • FreedomFighter

      Use the same scope and view the primordial goo, nothing will make it come alive, except…

      once life exits, of course it evolves.

      A group of scientist finally created life from elements from the earth and claimed:

      See, no god is needed, we can create life from the elements of the Universe.

      God said: Try it again after you create your own Universe.

      Laus Deo
      Semper Fi

      • Cawmun Cents

        So that means intelligent design is correct then?
        I have an issue with the conditions.
        First I would very much like to see them perform this task instead of taking their word for it.Secondly,since it is human design and a human definition of created life,even if it is possible…(something I find highly suspect)for that life to develop into something other than primordial ooze,is also suspect..
        -CC.

  • Raggs

    People just cannot grasp onto something that they can not see or touch physically and so the nest best thing for them to do is make something up in order to explain what they dont know…

  • Ray

    It does not matter what anyone “believes in”; “the way it is – is the way it is”.

  • George

    I don’t think we can make God dependent upon science, nor do I think that the bible is a textbook on science. I can accept evolution without it having an impact on my faith. I do not accept man-caused global warming, but that has nothing to do with my faith. It is simply bad science. I think there is considerable evidence for evolution, but nothing but manipulated evidence for man-caused global warming. The earth may indeed be warming, but the climate has fluctuated many times in earth’s history without man’s intervention.

    • TheRealBob

      There is no evidence for evilution and those who call themselves “theistic evilutionists” are doing nothing but whoring with the world.

      • CJM

        therealbob: You have a nasty way of debating, but the truth is God gave man a brain to use; with that usage, man has developed and created many things–and learned how to adapt to things he has no control over (as in one’s environment, natural or man-made disasters). It is man’s ability, through God, that he has evolved. I would love to see the look on your face when you see a good number of those who believe in evolution entering the Heavenly Kingdom–because Evolution and Creation are Partners in the development of man.

        • Karolyn

          That’s the word that describes Bob best – NASTY!

          • Raggs

            ~NASTY~ … I just have to wonder… Well maybe not.

      • hicusdicus

        Now we know for sure that Bob was put in charge of passing the collection plate.

        • Altaica

          I am convinced his real name is Baaaaahb. Seriously has anyone heard anything even remotely resembling an intelligent debate or discourse from this troll? I swear he has a bunch of responses on a notepad and just cuts and pastes them. I’m still trying to figure out why he’s even here when he doesn’t believe in science. Is there a way to access the internet without use of a machine created by science that I don’t know about. If there is I want to know how to do that. I’d have the best connection everywhere.

  • hicusdicus

    This article proves that the internet is the worlds greatest venue for fabrication and moronic thought processing. It makes one wonder just what the IQ was of the so called intelligent designer.

    • Jay

      Well hicusdicus, judging by your comment, you appear no smarter then a fifth grader. You obviously have a hate-on for anything that smacks of the supernatural. I remember you made mention that you were rather involved, and have studied under a couple of religious societies.

      You stated: After spending a few years studying under the Jesuits and Dominicans and a year in a monastery I lost all interest in religion. I have no problem with other peoples paranormal beliefs unless it entails removing my head if I don’t follow their ways.

      So what happened there, hicusdicus? Where you molested? The organizations didn’t meet your expectations? Were you, and are you, a communist mole sent to subvert Christianity? Whad up? Take a chill psycho boy!

      • hicusdicus

        Well Jay, after spending a few years of listening to lectures and studying the meaning of god and his omnipotence I finally understood the meaning of don’t make a ripple!!!!

        • Jay

          In your case, you create waves. Is it, as you say: God and his impotence, or the fact that you cannot control God, or mould him in your image, that finally made you say: “The grapes were probably sour anyways, the hell with it”. You should not torture people with your misunderstanding and disillusionment regarding God, the fact that you torture yourself, should be enough, why add to the misery?

          • hicusdicus

            Jay, You have to recognize the two primary purposes of religion. One, The creation of stories and myths that address the deepest questions we can ask ourselves. Where did we come from, Why are we here? What does our ultimate future hold? The production of moral systems to provide social cohesion for the most social of all the social primates. God['s] figure prominently in both these modes as the ultimate subject of myth-making and the arbiter of moral dilemmas and enforcer of ethical precepts. Why did this capacity to tell stories, create myths, construct morality, develop religion, and believe in God evolve?

          • hicusdicus

            I guess my last comment went over every bodies head.

          • denniso

            Religion began many thousands of yrs ago,before humans knew much of anything about everything. They were as good as blind when it came to understanding the laws of nature and knew nothing of a thing called the universe. They thought stars were just lights in the night sky,out ther by some god for our purposes. Their knowledge couldn’t compare to a modern 4th grader. The wonder isn’t that primitive people created gods and myths to try to deal w/ the world,but rather that modern humans still find a need to continue what began as comfort to early man.

          • hicusdicus

            Denniso, The oldest profession on earth is not prostitution it is the witch doctor. The witch doctor started the first organized religion. His collection plate consisted of telling the tribe that if you feed and house me I will tell what ever you need to hear to make your life less scary. Nothing has changed except the houses and tribes are bigger.

          • denniso

            In place of the old time witch doctor, who at least did no harm and lived much like the rest of the tribe, we now have two entities…medical doctors who sometimes actually do harm and live more like minor kings/queens…and preachers,priests and ministers,some of whom live in mansions and own private jets,many of whom molest children,and all who do real harm by indoctrinating gullible people and children into believing pure mush,while putting their brains on hold.

          • hicusdicus

            WE are pretty much in agreement. I personally think the witch doctor fulfilled a useful function. He helped calm peoples fears so they could cope with the unknown. But he still traded BS for free sustenance. The same still holds true today except on a much grander scale. What ever you think about doctors they are still all we have when it comes to trauma and disease. I don’t think you would want to wait around for god to remove your appendix or get your heart back to beating.

  • Glynn Hair

    I believed the nonsense about the validity of evolution until my senior year at a state university. One day when the professor was lecturing on the second law of thermodynamics in a senior chem course, Physical Chem, as it related to reversable and non-reversable reaction. Essentially all chemicals naturally go to a lower energy/complexity state unless “work” is done on them. In other words iron rusts, meat rots, etc. Suddenly it hit me what a fairy tale evolution was. Thus the fairy tale of evolution is proven wrong by a very basic scientific fact. Don’t believe it? try taking fresh cuts of beefand laying them out in the sun or rain. How many billion steaks would you see rot before a calf would spring from one? It will never happen, even though you have all of the complex chemicals required to do so, without extroardinary (supernatural?) intervention, all you will ever get is rotten meat. So why the lie? If there is no creator, man has no boss and is free to do any thing he pleases.

    • hicusdicus

      Hair, this is not so. Man is not free to do as he pleases He must conform to the standards of society or be willing to pay the price. Society calls this prison or even the death penalty depending on how free someone decided to be.

    • Altaica

      Hair-you’re missing a very important part of the 2nd law of thermodynamics. This law of Chemistry only works in a closed system. The earth is an open system and evolution does not violate the 2nd law because it is happening in an open system. A lot of people miss that part (or in some cases people misquote the law intentionally leaving this part out.) I know there are a lot of science sources on the law in it’s entirety, further up I pasted some links. The law does not work on earth because of the outside influences. The moment you put it into this system is becomes invalid.

  • D Smith

    Half of you want to make it a religious argument and the other half
    makes it a political one. I say, who cares. As long as I and my loved ones or you and yours can live out a reasonably happy life till we
    die, nothing else matters. Unless you just like pontificating.

    • hicusdicus

      Amen brother Smith. Why is this so difficult for people to understand? Why can’t they just accept the way things are and not how they want them to be?

    • Jay

      Dr. Smith says: Half of you want to make it a religious argument and the other half
      makes it a political one. I say, who cares. As long as I and my loved ones or you and yours can live out a reasonably happy life till we die, nothing else matters. Unless you just like pontificating.

      Dr. Smith, isn’t it interesting how no-one seems to be able to resist the temptation to pontificate, including yourself, as your missile, through which you pontificate god-less atheism, confirms!

      • Altaica

        Jay–where the hec did you get godless atheism out of his statement? I didn’t see any kind of religious stand in his statement. Seriously, how the hec did you go from his statement to godless atheism? I’ve looked at it several times and I’m scratching my head. I am very curiously how you arrived at this conclusion, were there posts I missed?

  • ONTIME

    Nature hasn’t changed it’s mind about “survival of the fittest” and evloving is a matter of all the right stuff, your species comes up short when a demand for change is put out and you come up short, your toast. Your species is in a concentrated area and the parameters change or your involved in a major catastrophe from whatever, only the lucky and the brave survive.

    We humans are as species, we are somewhat varied by factors but we are a common species and unless we destroy ourselves, meet with worldwide horrible circumstances or the sun explodes, we may adapt, evolve and survive and that might mean devolving to a degree until we can get back on track….say your prayers other species don’t as far as I know.

    • hicusdicus

      Maybe the other species know something that we don’t and are not saddled with the arrogance of man thinking he is something special. Pray all you want just please keep it to yourself.

  • James

    OK Jon Huntsman, You’re crazy! The Bible says God created Adam in 5407 BC. Obviously Adam didn’t evolve from anyone here before that, and the Black and Yellow who were here for many thousands of years before Adam was created, could not have descended from him. Adam fathered the white race and that race can’t be traced back prior to the creation of Adam. Kind begets like kind, and that is all that man has ever seen. Evolution takes hundreds of thousands of years for even small changes to occur, and there hasn’t been enough time for Adamites to evolve at all. The oldest race on earth is the Black race, and there does appear to be some evolution from ancient primates there. National Geographic documents that frequently.

    • 45caliber

      James:

      As a good Christian (I hope!) who reads the Bible regularly, I can tell you that there isn’t a thing in the Bible that says that Adam was born in 5407 BC. That is something a man came up with.

      Further, you can find the race back far further than that so don’t say the white race decended from Adam. It goes back to at least the Pony Warriors who first immigrated into Europe. And they came from the Gobi Desert – which is where the darker skinned India Indians came from, the American Indians (who are basically the same color as the whites) and the Chinese who are considered to be yellow.

      The black race MAY have originiated in Africa but that isn’t certain either. But the Jews (who are supposed to be decended from Adam along with all other peoples) were probably NOT white. They were almost certainly brown since they decended from the Sumarians who were decendents from those in India.

      • James

        45caliber, Genesis 5:3 reads: “Adam lived two hundred and thirty years, and begat a son in his own likeness, and called his name Seth. Genesis 5′s chronology takes us up to Noah. Bishop James Ussher’s chronology dated Adam’s creation at 4004 BC, but he used the Massoretic Text, which had been altered. The Septuagint Text gives us 5407 BC. And it says “God created man (Adam)’, it does not say Adam was born

        • Altaica

          I don’t know about the numbers and years, but I think the Bible really only pertains to a certain group of people for lineages. I remember in the Bible when Cain was kicked out and sent into the world he met other peoples, the Canaanites. These peoples were not created as Adam was, so where did they come from? They existed elsewhere and Adams descendants mated with them, so they were viable enough to reproduce with one another. I kind of think of it as the story of the creation and history of one religious group told through generations and written later.

          It has been a pondering of mine for awhile now since I started re-reading the bible. These people were separate and not from Adam’s line. So what is going on here?

          • James

            Altaica, The Bible doesn’t say where the pre-Adamites came from. Cain was the son of Satan and Eve, not Adam. Cain was the beginning of the seedline of Satan in the white race.

          • Altaica

            Wow, what bible are you reading from. I don’t remember that in the Methodist Good News Bible. I was taught that Cain and Abel were Adam and Eve’s sons.

          • denniso

            If you are going to read the bible as anything more than a bit of ancient history combined w/ many myths and fables and metaphors,then you better suspend all reason and logic…read the science that has been accumulated for several hundred yrs if you want to learn about human history,as well as the geologic history of the earth. Science never knows absolutely everything,as religion claims,but it is always a work in progress w/ new discoveries and more info all the time…even changing theories. The bible explains essentially nothing compared to the science developed by humans,not mythical gods.

          • James

            Altaica, Genesis 3:13 says: “The Lord God said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat.” ‘Serpent’ is one of Satan’s names (see Rev. 12:7-9) the serpent in the garden was the fallen archangel Lucifer.

    • CJM

      Sorry James—it appears that the oldest race is the Jewish race, not Negro (black in today’s lingo). If you believe everything that NG puts out, you have a very stilted mind. I also watched those specials by NG–and someone is really desparate to make Africa (and on other occasious, it’s Ethiopia or Egypt)the “cradle of mankind.” That is a fallacy–no one knows where man first made his footprint in the dirt/sand. We all know of Adam and Eve as the first and only residents of the Garden of Eden, but there were others outside the Paradise God presented to Adam and Eve (as noted by Cain’s wife–where did she come from? It wasn’t a sister!) and Cain’s fear that someone would harm him for slaying Abel, hence the mark of protection. So get over yourself and accept the fact that man is man, regardless of race/ethnicity, and we were all put on this earth TOGETHER.

      • James

        CJM, I don’t believe everything NG puts out, but there is considerable evidence of Black presence in Africa for many thousands of years prior to the creation of Adam. I do not believe Africa is the ‘cradle of mankind’. The notion that the oldest human fossil found is the ancestor of all earthlings, is an assumption based upon another assumption, that alll mankind had a common origin. The Bible’s chronology fixes Adam’s creation at 5407 BC. Both the Black and Yellow races were here thousands of years prior to that. Luke’s genealogy (3:23-38) traces Mary’s origin back through Juda, Jacob, Isaac and Abraham, and on jback to Adam, which was the son of God. The two-tribed House of Judah, within which the termj ‘Jew’ originated, was thousands of years after Adam.

        • Altaica

          At least 60000 years for the oldest known hominid, but the scientific community is looking at some evidence from DNA and I think perhaps a new fossil I don’t know too much about that suggest that the first humans may have actually come from Asia. At any rate humans are a pretty prolific species and have managed to find a way to even places we don’t really want to live, like Antarctica. Brrr too darn cold for me.

          • James

            Altaica, I have many books on the subject and they all agree that the oldest human fossils are in Africa. They are now traced back to a few million years ago.

          • Altaica

            James:
            I don’t know much about the ASian claim, I only heard one news report on it. This claim is only at most a month old. I haven’t done any research into the article yet, but it could be possible. But since I haven’t seen the proofs and this is new speculation I am reserving judgement on the discovery. I have always thought Africa, but I am curious to see what they use to support this new hypothesis.

          • James

            Altaica, If you are getting around to the idea that the oldest humans on earth are the cradle of mankind, then I would disagree. Kind begets like kind. No race is capable of reproducing another race. The origin of the three basic races is blacks (in Africa, first); yellows (in Asia, second); and whites (in Euro-Middle East, third).

      • James

        CJM, The people outside the Garden of Eden were here before Adam and Eve were created. When Cain was expelled from Eden, he worried that “every one that findeth me shall slay me.” So God said: “whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold.” Those possible slayers of Cain, did not descend from Adam and Eve. God obviously placed more value on Cain, the murderer, than those who might slay him. And the purpose for the Flood was to destroy the Adamites who had intermarried with the “sons of God”. Indeed, Noah found grace in the eyes of God, because he was “perfect in his generations.”

    • hicusdicus

      Wow James, you must be preparing to start your own religion. Keep huffing on your bong and pass the collection plate and I am sure you will succeed.

      • James

        The religion I have accepted has been in the Bible for over 3000 years, its racial theme is simply being ignored today.

        • hicusdicus

          That’s interesting. I did not know the bible was that old.

          • James

            Hicusdicus, The Great Flood’s Deluge ceased on Dec. 10, 3145 BC; Noah’s Ark settled on Mt. Ararat on Mar. 5, 3144 BC; and Noah disembarked from the Ark on Nov. 5, 3144 BC.

          • denniso

            And again,what did Noah feed his family and all the animals for that length of time? You have noticed that the Bilbe says nothing of food for all on board.

            Adults should not be believing in myths like Noah,anymore than you believe in Superman or the Easter Bunny. I’m not joking!

          • James

            Denniso, Genesis 6:21 reads: “And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.”

          • denniso

            So because there is a sentence in a book that says take food w/ you on the boat,you think it’s remotely possible to take pairs of all the animals in the area that Noah lived in as well as enough food,no refrigeration of course,into a primitive and small boat and remain at ‘sea’ for any length of time at all?

            You should accept the reality that the book is made of of myth,not reality. Noah’s ark is one such example…a nice little story,but only fit for children.

        • James

          Denniso, You’re being silly. In the town I grew up in, most homes didn’t have a refrigerater. My maternal grandparents lived their entire lives without one. Fruits were dried in the sun and meats were smoked and cured with salt. Noah was in the Ark a little over a year, and in such small quarters physical activity was diminished and the need for food would also be diminished. Also, the Ark was not a small boat, it was big enough to house the local animals, Noah’s family and all the food and water necessary for that period of time.

          • denniso

            You believe that Noah and family, and how many animals no one knows,lived on a small boat by todays standards for a year,and you call me silly for suggesting that it would be very difficult to keep enough food in those primitive conditions? even if there were very few animals aboard and only a handful of people,a year at sea back then would be sure death for all. Remember scurvy? No one knew about that and the need for vitamin C when the ark story was written…no one was ever at sea for a year at a time back then…no one ever has been. The myth is very convenient because there is no mention of the number of animals,or the need to seperate the predators from the prey. I remember the story saying that there were 2 of every animal,nothing about it just being local animals.

            At best the story is a metaphor for the many real flood events though history,which had catastrophic results,and maybe some people did construct boats to survive when they had no help from any gov’t agency or State,just what the rightwing wants to return to.

            At worst,the Noah story is simply a childish myth just like Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny. If it was sort of a real event,but only local and just one family and their farm and household animals,then it has no significance anyway.

            Isn’t the moral of the Noah story that all the evil people were washed away? That somehow only Noah’s family was good and so they were apsred? How did the human species flourish again from one family a few thousand yrs ago? Are we also talking incest here,which was mostly acceptable back then and appears repeatedly in the bible?

            Anyway you chose to view the story/myth,it has no significance other than as a parable and cautionary tale. If it was real at all,it was too small an episode to matter.

          • James

            Denniso, The Ark was 300 cubits long (450 ft.); 50 cubits wide (75 ft.); 30 cubits high (45 ft.); and it was 3 stories high (Gen. 6:15-16). The Ark has been discovered and rediscovered, at least once, on Mt. Ararat.
            The animals were 7 pairs of ‘clean jbeasts’ and 2 pairs of the ‘not cllean’ beasts. Clean beasts are those that chew the cud and have cloven hooves (like cows & sheep) and unclean beasts are like hogs, horses and camels. These are all domesticated animals, there is no mention of wild beasts being on board, and that the animals that were on board were local, derives from the fact tht Noah had noaccess to any other animals.
            And as I have stated elsewhere, many ancient writers from all over the world, have recorded the Flood’s destructive effect in their areas. And No, the moral of the story is not about ‘evil people’ being washedd away. It’s about the Adamic Children of God, who had intermarried, being washed away. The collateral damage to other people, whether they were good or evil, isn’t mentioned. Noah was spared because he hadn’t intermarried.
            The Flood didn’t destroy all humans save Noah’s family, the idea that all humans descended from Noah’s perfect generation family is as silly as all humans descending from Adam and Eve. As to incest, I would say that’s a given. If you do a search on the “Great Flood’, I’m sure you can find extra-biblical verification of it.

          • denniso

            There are no other credible histories that mention Noah’s flood. The ark has not been found,there have been hoaxes and always talk about a real find,but how would anyone ever prove that fragments of wood found buried on a mountain were indeed the ‘ark’? No one has found an intact wooden boat of the same dimension mentioned in the bible.

            Nevertheless,there is no connection between any kind of god and a local flood,despite what the bible says.

  • chuckb

    karolyn, “the native americans were far more moral than the imvaders”

    the american indians had their own set of morality, however, it didn’t extend past the camp fire. these people stole from their neighbors, murdered and raped were constantly at war with most any tribe that came close to them. sounds something like watts in los angeles. evidently, you have been reading our revised history books. maybe one written by rodney king.

    • 45caliber

      chuckb:

      Their morality included theft, murder, and many other things. The morality that karolyn and many others assume they had is more due to Boy Scouts than the Indians. When the Indians moved to reservations, they basically abandoned their old customs and tried to adopt the white man ways. When Boy Scouts of the USA were founded, the founders did not want the BS to be part of the military as they are in other countries even today. It was decided to emphasis Indian culture. They approached the old Indians about teaching the BS and most agreed. As one old Indian said, “Why not? My own kids aren’t interested in learning!”

      But the BS also included other things such as environmentalism. It was some den mother who was tired of boys shouting all the time who invented the “talking feather”. And so on.

      In the 1960s the Indians decided (with government encouragement) to “rediscover their roots”. But only the BS knew any of that. So they went to the BS to learn. And they liked and adopted all the stuff the BS had as their own “culture” whether it was or not.

      For instance, Indians weren’t all that thrifty with their resources as they say today. There is at least one documented case of them running five hundred buffalo off a cliff to get a meal for the tribe. Why not? There were many more. And they generally moved their encampment frequently because the stink got to them.

      And don’t say that I don’t know what happened or that I hate Indians. I’m quarter breed and actually like them. I just don’t believe in lies.

      • CJM

        45C: It is also well documented that European man ran their live meat off the cliffs by the hundreds and they also moved frequently (not because of the “stench” you speak of) because they followed the seasons for hunting, fishing, farming. Native Americans were FORCED onto the reservations because the expansionists of America wanted their lands; not one Native American was willing to give up their home, but they were forced or put to death. What European man could not understand is that the Native American’s religious beliefs entailed the correct notion that man did not own the earth, but the Creator did; therefore, no man could ‘own’ land. The idea that the Native American did not do anything with the land is a fallacy; they fully recognized that there were things one could not do to Mother Earth if man were to survive. As for the loss of their culture, European man is responsible for that. The children were beaten and otherwise severely abused for speaking their Native language; parents lost their chidren at age 6 because “religious” groups stole the children and transplanted them to the houses of horrors like Carlisle Indian School. The children were not returned to their homes until they were between 18 and 21 years; many returned to find their families were deceased, so they had no one except for the elders. You want to talk about he history of the Native American after European man arrived in America, then read some really great books on the subject and get your facts straight. As for the Native American children not being interested in their own history, that is sheer bunk.

        • Altaica

          The problem is trying to return the roots is very hard. I have ancestry on both sides of my family tree. I am still unsure of my father’s side, but we have it narrowed down to one of the Siouxan tribes or the Hopi, of which the Hopi are the most likely. On the other hand there’s not a chance of me even finding the actual heritage of my Great Great Grandmother’s tribe as the entire tribe no-longer exists. It’s pretty hard. There are some of us who search. One of the problems I run into is finding Native Americans born on the Rez that are willing to share information with those of us of descent that didn’t suffer on them. I’ve been doing a lot of reading and I have managed to find a half Apache elder to help me. Not my ancestral tribes, but I’ll take what I can find and learn.

      • hicusdicus

        .45 caliber, The .410/45 judge says it agrees with you 1oo percent. Old Indian magic and wisdom what a crock. When they finally woke up to the real world they changed their name to the casino tribe.

    • CJM

      Chuckb: That is a blatant lie and you know it. The Native American WAS more moral than the European cult that floated to America. They did not believe in rape, let alone condone it—that came to America with the Puritans and others with them. Murder? Well, la-dee-dah, you think the European and Spanish invaders never committed such crimes? You don’t think these illustrious ancestors didn’t commit the first murder of the Native Americans who stood in their way of “taming the wild country?” Don’t forget, it was the Natives who WELCOMED the first settlers, and they were repaid with brutality for their acts of kindness. The Europeans weren’t territorial? Where do you think the idea of expansionism came from? It certainly wasn’t the Native American. Had the Europeans and Spanish Conquistadores had TRUE friendship in mind, things would have evolved differently; instead, the notion was to annhilate all Natives (and the Spanish succeeded in many areas).

      • Jay

        Many different Native American groups lived on the East Coast of what would become United States.  They spoke many different languages.  Some were farmers, some were hunters.  Some fought many wars, others were peaceful.

        Their names are known to most Americans…the Senecas, the Mohawks, the Seminole, the Cherokee to name only a few.

        These tribes had developed their own cultures many years before the first European settlers arrived.  Each had a kind of religion, a strong spiritual belief.  Many tribes shared a similar one.

        The Indians on the East Coast shared a highly developed system of trade.  Researchers say different tribes of Native Americans traded goods all across the country.

        The first recorded meetings between Europeans and the natives of the East Coast took place in the 1500s.  Fishermen from France and the Basque area of Spain crossed the Atlantic Ocean.  They searched for whales along the east coast of North America.  They made temporary camps along the coast.  They often traded with the local Indians.

        The Europeans often paid Indians to work for them.  Both groups found this to be a successful relationship.  Several times different groups of fishermen tried to establish a permanent settlement on the coast, but the severe winters made it impossible.  These fishing camps were only temporary.
        The first permanent settlers in New England began arriving in 1620.  They wanted to live in peace with the Indians. They needed to trade with them for food.  The settlers also knew that a battle would result in their own, quick defeat because they were so few in number.

        Yet, problems began almost immediately.  Perhaps the most serious was the different way the American Indians and the Europeans thought about land. 

        A major factor in the treaty disputes was Native Americans’ concept of land. Indians fought among themselves over hunting rights to the territory but the Native American idea of “right” to the land was very different from the legalistic and individual nature of European ownership. John Alexander Williams describes this in his book, West Virginia: A History for Beginners:
        The Indians had no concept of “private property,” as applied to the land. Only among the Delawares was it customary for families, during certain times of the year, to be assigned specific hunting territories.

        Apparently this was an unusual practice, not found among other Indians. Certainly, the idea of an individual having exclusive use of a particular piece of land was completely strange to Native Americans.

        The Indians practiced communal land ownership. That is, the entire community owned the land upon which it lived.

        This difference created problems that would not be solved during the next several hundred years.

Land was extremely important to the European settlers.  In England, and most other countries, land meant wealth.  Owning large amounts of land meant a person had great wealth and political power.

        Many of the settlers in this new country could never have owned land in Europe.  They were too poor.  And they belonged to minority religious groups.  When they arrived in the new country, they discovered no one seemed to own the huge amounts of land.

        Companies in England needed to find people willing to settle in the new country.  So they offered land to anyone who would take the chance of crossing the Atlantic Ocean.  For many, it was a dream come true.  It was a way to improve their lives.  The land gave them a chance to become wealthy and powerful.

        American Indians believed no person could own land.  They believed, however, that anyone could use it.  Anyone who wanted to live on and grow crops on a piece of land was able to do so.

        The American Indians lived within nature.  They lived very well without working very hard.  They were able to do this because they understood the land and their environment.  They did not try to change the land.  They might farm in an area for a few years. Then they would move on.  They permitted the land on which they had farmed to become wild again.

        They might hunt on one area of land for some time, but again they would move on.  They hunted only what they could eat, so the numbers of animals continued to increase.  The Indians understood nature and made it work for them.

        The first Europeans to settle in New England in the northeastern part of America were few in number.  They wanted land.  The Indians did not fear them.  There was enough land for everyone to use and plant crops.  It was easy to live together.  The Indians helped the settlers by teaching them how to plant crops and survive on the land.

        But the Indians did not understand that the settlers were going to keep the land.  This idea was foreign to the Indians.  It was like to trying to own the air, or the clouds.

        As the years passed, more and more settlers arrived, and took more and more land.  They cut down trees.  They built fences to keep people and animals out.  They demanded that the Indians stay off their land.

        Philosophical differences regarding land ownership was the fuel that ignited the war between european settlers and the American Native indians.

        • hicusdicus

          Jay I don’t think any body who has bothered to read a little history would disagree with you. The problem was that the white man had the guns and the Indians had what he wanted. Guns talk and arrows walk.

        • James

          Jaay, As an aside, Indians migrated when seasons changed and when they left, whites assumed that land was available to settle on. Also, when Christopher Columbus sailed west he was looking for an easier route to India – the overland route had too many taxes imposed onj goods and tea from there – when Columbus discovered North America, he thought it was India, thus the people here became known as Indians.

  • Jay

    I’m reposting this article i posted in a previous thread.

    Just for the record, Darwin did not believe in the theory of evolution as a scientific fact. He did, however, postulate the mechanisms as a way of explaining evolution; natural selection, and survival of the fittest. Yet, even at the end of his life, Darwin expressed deep reservations in regards to the un-aided process, coin-phrased, evolution, particularly, as Darwin pointed out, to the assembly and function of the human eye–he states: To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.

    We must also consider the fact that, Darwin did not posses the sophisticated technology by which to peer into the human cell that scientist greatly benefit from today. When Darwin, at his time, peered into the human cell, he described the contents of the cell as being, so-much jelly. Today off-course, the description of the cell’s inner contents are well known. As you read these words, electricity is zinging through your brain, voracious killers are coursing through your veins and corrosive chemicals bubble from your head to your toes. In fact, your entire body is like an electrical company, chemical factory, transportation grid, communications network, detoxification facility, hospital and battlefield all rolled into one. The workers that drive these activities are your cells.

    Our bodies contain trillions of cells, organized into more than 200 major types. At any given time, each cell is doing thousands of routine jobs, like creating and using energy, manufacturing proteins and responding to environmental cues. Different cell types also have special duties, like building skin or bone, pumping out hormones or making antibodies. This description of cells, and their many functions is strangely absent from Darwin’s notes, and, as stated, for obvious reasons.

    As well, Darwin was blissfully unaware of the existence of DNA. What exactly is DNA and its function? DNA serves as the information storehouse for a finely choreographed manufacturing process in which the right amino acids are linked together with the right bonds in the right sequence to produce the right kind of proteins that fold in the right way to build biological systems.

    Another words, DNA not only performs a critical function(s), it is only capable of doing so due to the necessary INFORMATIONAL content. Another words, no specific information, no function.

    Our computers perform functions, how? Intelligent programers design and develop software. What is software? A set of codes, or instruction(s), or specific information in order to perform desired function. What is the origin of information, or from where does information originate? Intelligence!!! Information is a by-product of intelligence, there is no other source!!! Another words, information precludes intelligence, intelligence precludes a designer. Therefore, without original intelligence, or intelligence designer, there could be no information, without intelligent information, there could be NO LIFE!!! Curiously however, there is life!

    Question: Why do evolutionists refuse to deal with the evidence of biological information?

    Answer: Because biological information blows their theory of evolution out of the water.

  • Philip

    Huntsman is an obummer Trojan Horse

  • iam

    When I was in school, during the ’50s, I began to believe that evolution was a product of God’s plan. However, the more I associated with “religious” people, who adamantly rejected any form of intelligence, the more I was pushed away from religion. Their refusal to accept anything that didn’t fit their narrow interpretation of the bible seemed ludicrous. That’s why this new “Intelligent Design” movement is a fraud. It’s the “religious” who have always suppressed intelligence. If we are required to ignore what we learn by studying the world around us, why do we have a brain? The more we learn about biology, chemistry, physics etc., the closer we come to understanding God.

    • CJM

      iam: I agree with you except that I do not believe humans evolved from some amoeba or in Darwin’s interpretation of the world–he is too narrow in his thinking. Humans have always been human. Evolution does not replace Creation, nor does Creation replace evolution because both go hand in hand. If humans had not evolved over time we would not be where we are today–but we would still be living in caves or huts made of tree branches. To me, evolution is adapting to the environent in which we live and learning new things by experimentation (otherwise, we would have no inventiveness to build or create what we have). Just my thoughts.

  • SC Murf

    What is great people is the fact that when Jesus of Nazareth the Christ returns, when His feet touch down on the mount every man, woman and creature will know and understand that he is Lord. The earth will shake violently the second he touches and everyone will know that He has returned. Some 30 years ago I had a good friend who claimed to be an atheist and I often called him on it. One day while riding in his pick-up, he was driving, we rounded a corner and at the same time a small child was crossing the street, he immediately slammed on the brakes and praise Jesus we stopped short of the child. The first words out of his mouth were “oh GOD”. Even an atheist cries out to God in times of trouble. To this day he believes, praise Jesus. Remember getting down on your knees puts you in good standing with God.

    up the hill
    airborne

  • TheRealBob

    In the end, God will expose the liars like eddie, karolyn, altaica and the rest for what they are. He will then commend those of us who did not just stand by with smiles on our faces while they lied. Keep the faith and let no lie go by unchallenged and let no liar escape unscathed. Evilution is a lie against God and reason and we must fight against those fascists who would force it on our children in the public mis-education system.

    • hicusdicus

      Real Bob, I bet you are the one in charge of passing the collection plate.

      • Altaica

        God needs your money pay up or you’re eviiiiil. That’s what I imagine when you add Baaahb and collection plate together. If he was in my church when I was younger I would have run out those doors and left Christianity in the dust a lot sooner.

        • hicusdicus

          Altaica, What do you think came first. God or the collection plate? I would my money on the collection plate. With out the collection plate there would be no need for a god.

    • Altaica

      Yes, BeezelBob will be real happy with your progress of trying to hide the truth. So do those of us exercising our free will and freedom of choice keep you awake at night bob? Is that why you are so cranky? Well at least you seem to be getting the idea of the keyboard. Not bad for someone who doesn’t believe in science. You’ve managed to peck out a few things that weren’t your standard copy and paste. I’m proud of you. Maybe in a few billion years you’ll have written something that resemble and intelligent discourse. You know every time you speak I can just imagine your god doing a cosmic face palm. It seems the intelligence was left out of your design.

  • Joe_Ks

    It would be interesting to see the math on the probability of a planet such as earth coming into being by means of time + matter + chance.

    I am not a mathematician, but some of the variables would be

    1) A star like our sun, which is not at all “common” in the universe. Though others like it do exist, most are much larger or much smaller.

    2) That star would have to exist in what is called “the galactic habitable plane” which means it couldn’t be just anywhere in the galaxy. (look it up if you want to know more).

    3) The planet would have to be the exact distance earth is from that star.

    4) The gravitational pulls of the star and the planet would have to find a perfect match to keep the planet from wandering away from or to close to the star. Very little distance either way and we would either be frozen or fried.

    5) the planet would have to have a just the right amount of water, which seems to be very scarce in the rest of our solar system.

    6) The planet would have to have the exact right tilt on it’s axis, as does earth in order to sustain life as we know it here.

    There are probably hundreds of variables that could be added into the equation. Suffice it to say that for earth to develop and the life that is on it, by “accident” is all but mathematically impossible.

    Just a note: Any “real” atheist hates the “big bang theory” because it does not explain what banged or who banged it. What was the first cause? Atheist have no answer other than time plus matter plus chance, we think.

    As a Christian, I have no real problem with the idea of a big bang. I have heard lightning on a stormy night make a pretty big bang. “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth” …. sounds like one inconceivably big bang to me.

    • hicusdicus

      For things to be the way they are it takes trillions of contingent necessities. The uncertainty of our past and unpredictability of our future created by contingency is what makes a lot of controversy and calls for a search for unifying generalities, not capricious happenstances. You got all that?

      • denniso

        There are billions and billions of stars out there,and our sun is roughly an average size,so there are probably many millions of suns like ours. There are likely many billions of planets,and the odds are pretty good that there are millions like ours…the distance to the sun is not all that important,since we could be further if the sun was larger,and still recieve the same solar radiation. The axis is pretty common because of the way planets form from material swirling around the star,and the tilt is not so important it just affects where animal life can reside. Water is probably not at all rare,comets are made of it. The odds for there to be more earthlike planets are not so high,and there are probably many thousands at the least. We will probably never know or connect w/ them,but that’s OK. Our earth is not so unique that it would have been singled out by some creator…the odds are very good that there is much more life out there than we can imagine,whether like us or not.Did they get there own Bible?

        • hicusdicus

          I don’t know if they got their own bible but I feel certain that have some form of collection plate. People don’t want to spend time talking about invisible friends if they can’t get reimbursed.

  • BigBadJohn

    I have been watching the series “Ancient Aliens” on the history channel.
    I truly believe that there is as much chance of the Ancient Alien theory being true as the theory that God created the universe or God creating man in his image. If there were ancient aliens, primitive man would have called them “Gods”.

    Some scientists just found proof that life on earth is 3.4 billion years old. That is a lot of time for evolution to work.

    • Raggs

      Yeah sure… Beam me up Scotty… :)

    • Joe_K

      If there were ancient aliens who somehow seeded planet earth, a question: Where did they come from? I don’t mean what planet in what galaxy. I mean what was the first cause that resulted in the creation of the ancient aliens? The thing about “In the beginning God…” is that with God, the buck stops with him. He is the first cause. With ancient aliens, there is no more first cause than there is with man. Where did it all begin? How did it happen? What are the mathematical possibilities of life being the result of time + matter + chance? I would think they are some what less than the mathematical probability of a Rolls Royce assembling itself by process of time + matter + chance. In other words, it takes at least as much blind faith to believe in either evolution or ancient aliens as it does to believe in God. For those who disbelieve in God, that is because for them, there is no starting point, no empirical scientific evidence. Where is the empirical, irrefutable scientific evidence for either evolution or ancient aliens? One guess is as good as another, huh?

      • Kate8

        Joe_K – It’s amazing how many people believe that life on Earth has no relevance to the rest of the universe. Many still even doubt that life exists anywhere but here.

        I believe that life is abundant throughout.

        Since all things in existence mirror all other creations, I believe that Earth is to our galaxy as a cell is to an organ, and the galaxy is to the universe as an organ is to the body. And every cell in the body has an energetic connection to each other part of the whole. You can take a cell from one organ, transplant it into another organ, and it will take up the new function. Each cell contains the intelligence, the blueprint, of the whole.

        Just as with a hologram. You can take a tiny piece of a hologram, and it will project the complete image.

        I believe that this is true throughout all of Creation.

    • Altaica

      If you like that show you might like the book “Gods, Genes and Consciousness, nonhuman intervention in human history.” It’s a good read.

  • Loretta

    This article is correct, evolution is sublimely illogical. Any effect demands a competent cause and evolution and the Big Bang Theory are both an effect causeless.

    The book of Genesis is far more congruent with the archeological evidence than many realize:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNaVRARsrgg

    • hicusdicus

      Loretta, how many repeat courses did it take for you to master how to turn on a computer.

  • CJM

    It would depend on what school of thought one follows where evolution is concerned. Everything evolves in some form or fashion, but man has always been physiologically the same, just as the lesser animals have been. Intellectually, we have allegedly evolved to a technocratic era and man, along with the animals, has adapted (or evolved)to the environment in which he lives. Case in point: people who live in extremely high altitudes find it difficult to live in sea level environs and those who live in low altitude environs are seriously handicapped at higher elevations. For those who continuously reside in cold climates, warm climates can be unbearable and tropical natives would most likely die in places like Siberia. Furthermore, all species that breathe and have beating hearts have a brain–therefore, they can be taught to do extraordinary things. I had a client who had scads of fish that would swim to the surface of the acquariums when she entered the room–no joke–it was really impressive! She explained that she and the children talked to them every day, called them by name (yes, she named every ne of them–about 50 of the varigated fish), and, of course, they associated her with the feedings. Dogs, cats, horses, and other animals are taught how to track humans, perform tricks, use a typewriter, and so on. Did these animals evolve? Yes–because they have adapted to things they would not ordinarily do if left to live with their own species. If man had begun as an amoeba or a tiny little speck of sand, don’t you think Genesis would read: “And God said, let us make man, but first as an amoeba (or speck of sand)” and then provided the criteria by which man would become a human as opposed to listing the genealogy from which we sprang? Bill Mahar is the last half of the horses’ azz, in my opinion–who even listens to that foul-mouthed, poor excuse of a human?

  • slayerwulfe

    Creation:Land divided from the water,plant life,fish,animals and lastly man.
    Evolution:Land divided from the water,plant life,fish,animals and lastly man. what is the difference between the two,just time and the book says a thousand yrs is but one day to god.

    Every male mammal that has ever existed has breast glands including us.
    Why? because we have commonalty with a point of reference that is our starting point.

    If god has decided to use the process of evolution as the means to an end. Who is the person that is qualified to say “I know god would not do it that way because I understand god and I’m special and have power from god” as in blessing things maybe. If god created everything did god not touch everything at the moment of creation and is it not blessed already. Power mongers like the pope making magic signs in the air while holding his Harry Potter golden wand and claiming to have power from god to bless, for the illusion of power. God is not evil religion is through the people that want power over other people.

    • Raggs

      In your words so much I posted the same thing that you say above…
      the theory of evolution and global warming is a man made concept to impower those that sit on the duff on the golf course… It is a sad fact that people are willing to follow blindly a hoax because their favorite politicans say… This is divided, the more that people like oblama divide the better it is for him to control the outcome… However the outcome for him is BLEAK…

  • Mad Max

    We like to deny reality in this country because most us are too ignorant or lazy to deal with it. But then reality will alway catch up with you.

    “WAKE UP PEOPLE!” -
    Read “Common Sense 3.1” at ( http://www.revolution2.osixs.org )

    FIGHT THE CAUSE – NOT THE SYMPTOM
    We don’t have to live like this anymore.

  • Raggs

    As far as I’m concerned… We can give oblama back to the monkeys….

  • David M

    Evolution is a myth, there is and has never been any evidence to support it. Everything they use, has either been a hoax, or a lie.
    Evolution is a religion and requires faith, not facts, not proof.
    It is the biggest lie made to man. Now we could go on and prove God’s existence easily. The Big Bang, did happen when God said let there be light.The laws of thermodynamics state no new energy can be created, but only transformed into a different state. Therefore to believe two atoms could create all the matter that exist now is insane, there is no source of energy that keeps growing everything cools down or burns out. So how did we get to where we are right now! God! Fear Him, for we all will have to meet Him one day.

  • Mark
  • Nora Smith

    Why when a hot topic is presented, people get too excited?
    Pope Pius XII in 1950 and Blessed John Paul 2,in 1993,both accepted the theory of evolution as a valid explanation of the development of life on Earth, with one major exception: the HUMAN SOUL. “If the human body has its origin in living material which preexists it, the spiritual soul is immediately created by GOD,” said Pope Puis XII.
    Now, don’t start calling names to the Church of Christ, please, for this comment is not regarding Her but regarding “Is Evolution A Crazy Idea?
    Remember that no other Institution has championed science as the Catholic Church has done.
    Have a Catholic Day, all
    Mrs. Nora Smith,
    Hates Science,
    Roman Catholic residing in the USA.

  • Raggs

    I still say that we should give oblama back to the monkeys.

    • David M

      Why would you want to give Obama back to the monkeys. What did they ever do to deserve that?

      • hicusdicus

        DAvid, I will tell you what the monkeys did to deserve that. They let him climb down out of the trees.

      • Randy

        They originated in Kenya?

  • American Citizen

    Most people misunderstand the reason the Bible was written. IT has some history as we know it, yes, but its reason for being is for us to understand Salvation History.

    • Joe_Ks

      The Bible serves two purposes. First is the glorification of God. Second is the salvation of man. Unfortunately, many people believe both are fairy tale pursuits. Many of those who believe this accept evolution, which is a fairy tale pursuit.

    • hicusdicus

      Everybody knows the bible was written to give credibility to the collection plate.

  • oldbill

    Evolution is a theory. It is presented as a fact. It is taught in school as a fact and other theories are discouraged and have been made illegal. To be scientific, all theories should be presented and their merits discussed. Until these theories are proven, they should not be presented as fact. God intentionally hid His presence and left no evidence of his creation. He also left scripture. I can only conclude that those who don’t read scripture and dismiss it as not being “scientific” are stupid because they have contempt prior to investigation.

    • hicusdicus

      Old bill, I am pretty sure that in general evolution has passed the theory stage. But God is definitely still a theory and will remain so until the end of time.

      • Joe_Ks

        You are incorrect. As pointed out by the writer of the above column, evolution remains a theory that is taught as if it were a fact. The principle works like this: If you can convince enough people that green is purple, then green becomes purple because it is the accepted “correct” opinion to have. Any one who says “NO, green is still green, it is not purple” would be branded as an ignorant, colorophobic bigot, I am sure.

        • hicusdicus

          as soon as can, try to master the art of reading then hit the books big time.

          • hicusdicus

            I am sorry I did not mean to insult you. I meant the art of comprehensive reading. Its obvious that you must know how to read. You managed to read the manual on how to turn on the computer.

          • Joe_Ks

            You make me laugh. Was Don Rickles your daddy?

          • hicusdicus

            No Don Rickles was not my daddy but he was ugly enough to be close kin.

  • melissa

    Thanks for being honest.

  • DanB

    I sort of skipped through a lot of the arguments. The whole evolution and global warming topic can be quite, um, heated. So I was not surprised by the arguments I read on both sides.

    Here’s what I was surprised not to see in what I scanned. We are so caught up in the arguments that not many seem to have noticed that Jon Huntsman’s tweet shows a difference in personal beliefs and that of his religious affiliation. The LDS Church does not come out and say that evolution is false, however, it does teach the story of Adam and Eve as truth. I know some LDS faithful do believe in evolution…. I was once one of them. When I was young, I believed in both evolution and the biblical creation. When I was but a boy, I did not realize there was a conflict. It is one of the advantages of being young and innocent. You don’t see those sorts of things. As I grew into a teenager, I tried to reconcile the two, so I believed in a variation of intelligent design. It wouldn’t be later until I would learn that there was a whole “science” devoted to this theory of intelligent design. I suspect that a lot of LDS that believe in evolution fall somewhere in this category. As an adult, I would find that I needed to make a choice for myself. Now, many of us don’t believe that evolution versus creation is not essential to resolve before one can find their way to God. Find your way to God first, and then the details can be discovered later. What is interesting about the whole debate and the odds of life on earth, I will say this much–if there is a God, and God created the universe, and God created the earth, and God created man, does not then the odds of spontaneous creation of life substantially increase.

    Take the awful example of the monkeys. If you are just talking random pushing of keys, yes, the odds of recreating the great works of literature are the equivalent of zero. Impossible. However, what if the monkeys were given some training, and put into a system that worked together? Could not a few simple changes to the system increase the odds substantially? Well, if God created the universe, and the earth, could not the system be actually rigged to increase the odds of life? Could it be such that the system of the universe actually had 100% odds of creating life on earth? Not a matter of if, but rather how soon, how fast, and how often.

    • Joe_Ks

      The Bible does say that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth and goes on to say that he created man from the dust and breathed into him the breath of life. We know that chemically, physically, we are just common elements, as is dust. But to instill that physical body with life could could not be the result of random process of time plus matter plus chance. If it could then one could say scientifically that one can get something from nothing which is an absolute no no in light of true scientific principle. Also, If it did not happen as the Bible claims it did then there is something in the Bible that cannot be believed. If there is anything in the Bible that cannot be believed then the whole concept that the Bible itself originated with God (through man) cannot be believed and nothing in the Bible can be believed. Either it happened as the Bible says it did, or it did not. Two contradictory ideas cannot both be true, and creation and evolution are contradictory in that one acknowledges the handiwork of God and the other says God was unnecessary and is therefore irrelevant.

      Ultimately, though, you are right to say that it is not necessary for man to explain the creation in order to achieve the salvation the Bible offers. One can indeed know God, but one cannot know God perfectly. So it is with the universe. Man can know the universe, but cannot know the universe perfectly. Man has pretty much proven that he cannot even know himself perfectly.

      • hicusdicus

        All man needs to know is how to earn a living and where the beer and remote are. The wife takes care of the rest.

  • Melody

    Doesn’t really matter how we got here, but it does matter where we go from here. And, as much as I want to know the mysteries of our beginning here on earth…. what is to be gained from that knowledge… I would much rather be made in God’s image, than to be a product of random cells bumping into each other and magically came together, along with a conscience mind to question and think. I know there is a higher being that is in charge and sooner or later… I will know… and that is worth waiting for.

    • hicusdicus

      Fortunately for the world in general that wait won’t be to long.

      • Joe_Ks

        If you can’t argue successfully against them, just insult them, huh? I’d be willing to bet a dollar to a donut that if you vote at all, you are a democrat. LOL

        • hicusdicus

          Joe I am not yet old enough to vote but when I am I won’t. One does not argue with the intellectually incapacitated. God put them here to be annoyed and irritated and then created the internet so it could be done safely.

          • Joe_Ks

            I am not surprised that you are not old enough to vote. A word of caution, you are in a dangerous decade of life. You know, that 10 year period where most of us really screw up our lives. Generally that would be between the ages of 16, when you think you know everything, and 26, when you begin to discover that you don’t. LOL

  • RightGunner

    God is Great is a slogan. God is the Creator of the Universe, whatever it may include, is a definition. All religious, and most other discussions, require definitions of the terms so everyone understands what is meant by the words that usually have different meaning to different people.

    And a thousand monkeys banging on keyboards will likely only create many more monkeys.

  • rick

    You can believe whatever you wish… but for me and my house, we believe the Word of God. That means we were made in the likeness and image of God on the literal sixth day of creation… about 6000 years ago. By the way, that makes the earth four days older than the sun, moon & ALL the galaxies!

    • denniso

      Do you really believe that the sun is only 6,000 yrs old? If so,you shouldn’t vote or talk to children. Adding up the preposterous ages of the Biblical characters and coming to an age for the earth is as absurd as anything out there. If God could create the universe in 6 days,why not in one day? If he is not bounded by time then why not in a snap of his fingers? The stories in the Bible were written when most men were utterly uneducated and frightfully ignorant about the earth,sun and stars…they didn’t know what the stars were! And, the Bible doesn’t say they are other suns,because the men who wrote the book didn’t know.No God wrote an individual book,it was men. Why would he/she/it stop at one hard to interpret book? Why not write another to clarify things so people wouldn’t continually fight over the meaning? Was that done for God’s entertainment?

      • Joe_Ks

        Isa 40:22 It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:
        (KJV)

        How did Isaiah know that the earth was round some 3 or 4 thousand years before science did?

        The contention that man wrote the Bible is a common one. That there have been some variations from the original texts is known. But what is not such common knowledge is that the Bible was “written” by over 40 different writers over a period of 4500 years. The men who penned it were from various backgrounds and educational levels. Yet there is in all 66 books of the Bible a common thread. That thread is Gods plan of salvation of human beings. and that thread is unbroken and time seems to have proven it unbreakable.

        Also, there is more historical evidence for the authenticity of the Biblical writings than there are for the authenticity of the writings of Homer, Aristotle and Copernicus.

        The problem is that people just accept the so called “logical” assumption that the Bible was written by man and do not dig very deep by means of study to verify that claim. Or, put another way, they just don’t bother to investigate the authenticity of the Bible because it is so much easier to just accept the “logical assumption”.

        I can guarantee you this: If you can lay aside seemingly logical assumptions, the debates of others either for or against the Bible, any concerns over evolution or creation and just read read and study for a while what you will find written in it are your own heart and your own mind. How many men do you know that could do that?

        • Jay

          Joe, there is also Amos, who makes mention of the 7th constellation of Orion, which, of course, was not discovered until the invention of the “Hubble Telescope”. So, since the ignorant beduins did not posses such technology, and Orion could not be observed with naked eye, it then begs the question: How did Amos know about the constellation? Answer: God told him!

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            Wrong Jay,

            It was indeed known to the ancients and is highly visible as a constellation.The Greek name it the Orion the hunter.Check it out.

            Poseidon gave Orion the power to walk on water. Homer in the Odyssey describes Orion as a giant hunter, armed with an unbreakable club of solid bronze.

            http://www.ianridpath.com/startales/orion.htmOrion, the Hunter | StarDate Online
            Orion is one of the most beautiful of all constellations, and one of the easiest to find. It looks like a large rectangle high in winter’s south-southeastern sky.

          • denniso

            Good post Coal Miner! These people will twist themselves into all sorts of wacko positions,lie,spread lies ans myths, all to be able to keep ‘believing’ in myth.

          • Altaica

            The Mayans knew these things and more. Their deities however are different, but if you want to use astronomical examples from the ancient world, no other race but the Mayans had such an expansive knowledge of the heavens.

            Did you know humans also used to see more stars and planets, but due to our artificial lights and our change in living styles and the sheer fact that there is so much light pollution in most inhabited area it’s no wonder we can no longer see things our ancestors did with the naked eye. We have to make tools to compensate.

  • rick

    You CANNOT believe the Bible and believe in evolution.

    Adonai said at the end of day six that He looked at ALL He created and it was VERY GOOD (that is perfect); a perfect God cannot create anything LESS than PERFECT.
    No sickness, No desease, NO DEATH; death came as the result of SIN.

    • denniso

      Death is the result of sin? So turtles sinned? Trees sinned? All the birds sinned? You need to look at the Bible as metaphor,which it is,along w/ a bunch of hokey stories about incest,adultery,war…

      • hicusdicus

        Denniso you left out the key factor of the bible and religion. The passing of the collection plate.

    • bob wire

      Wow! Ringer , was this “thread”
      a test balloon ?
      ~~~~~~~~~~~

      “You CANNOT believe the Bible and believe in evolution.” ~

      Who says? ~ Now I know that I can’t put my feet over my head and then jump, but I have the power to believe anything that I want too!

      Are you attempting to say that the two conflict? If so, just say so and leave it at that.

      Life has a beginning and a end. ~ God is outside this accepted notion.

      God quite simple “IS”

      Human-kind attempt to humanize God but God is not human. Sorry, I know that comes as a blow.

    • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

      Jay,

      More on highly visible Orion.You better go back to school.

      Orion is the most splendid of constellations, befitting a character who was in legend the tallest and most handsome of men. His right arm and left foot are marked by the brilliant stars Betelgeuse and Rigel, with a distinctive line of three stars forming his belt. ‘No other constellation more accurately represents the figure of a man’, says Germanicus Caesar.

      Manilius calls it ‘golden Orion’ and ‘the mightiest of constellations’, and exaggerates its brilliance by saying that, when Orion rises, ‘night feigns the brightness of day and folds its dusky wings’. Manilius describes Orion as ‘stretching his arms over a vast expanse of sky and rising to the stars with no less huge a stride’. In fact, Orion is not an exceptionally large constellation, ranking only 26th in size (smaller, for instance, than Perseus according to the modern constellation boundaries), but the brilliance of its stars gives it the illusion of being much larger.

      Orion is also one of the most ancient constellations, being among the few star groups known to the earliest Greek writers such as Homer and Hesiod. Even in the space age, Orion remains one of the few star patterns that non-astronomers can recognize.

      Orion raises his club and shield against the charging Taurus in this illustration
      from the Uranographia of Johann Bode (1801). Orion’s right shoulder is marked by the bright star Betelgeuse, and his left foot by Rigel. A line of three stars forms his belt.
      In the sky, Orion is depicted facing the snorting charge of neighbouring Taurus the Bull, yet the myth of Orion makes no reference to such a combat. However, the constellation originated with the Sumerians, who saw in it their great hero Gilgamesh fighting the Bull of Heaven. The Sumerian name for Orion was URU AN-NA, meaning light of heaven. Taurus was GUD AN-NA, bull of heaven.

      Gilgamesh was the Sumerian equivalent of Heracles, which brings us to another puzzle. Being the greatest hero of Greek mythology, Heracles deserves a magnificent constellation such as this one, but in fact is consigned to a much more obscure area of sky. So is Orion really Heracles in another guise? It might seem so, for one of the labours of Heracles was to catch the Cretan bull, which would fit the Orion–Taurus conflict in the sky. Ptolemy described him with club and lion’s pelt, both familiar attributes of Heracles, and he is shown this way on old star maps. Despite these facts, no mythologist hints at a connection between this constellation and Heracles.

      Tales of Orion
      According to myth, Orion was the son of Poseidon the sea god and Euryale, daughter of King Minos of Crete. Poseidon gave Orion the power to walk on water. Homer in the Odyssey describes Orion as a giant hunter, armed with an unbreakable club of solid bronze. In the sky, the hunter’s dogs (the constellations Canis Major and Canis Minor) follow at his heels, in pursuit of the hare (the constellation Lepus).

      On the island of Chios, Orion wooed Merope, daughter of King Oenopion, apparently without much success, for one night while fortified with wine he tried to ravish her. In punishment, Oenopion put out Orion’s eyes and banished him from the island. Orion headed north to the island of Lemnos where Hephaestus had his forge. Hephaestus took pity on the blind Orion and offered one of his assistants, Cedalion, to act as his eyes. Hoisting the youth on his shoulders, Orion headed east towards the sunrise, which an oracle had told him would restore his sight. As the Sun’s healing rays fell on his sightless eyes at dawn, Orion’s vision was miraculously restored.

      Orion is linked in a stellar myth with the Pleiades star cluster in Taurus. The Pleiades were seven sisters, daughters of Atlas and Pleione. As the story is usually told, Orion fell in love with the Pleiades and pursued them with amorous intent. But according to Hyginus, it was actually their mother Pleione he was after. Zeus snatched the group up and placed them among the stars, where Orion still pursues them across the sky each night.

      There is a strange and persistent story about the birth of Orion, designed to account for the early version of his name, Urion (even closer to the Sumerian original URU AN-NA). According to this story, there lived in Thebes an old farmer named Hyrieus. One day he offered hospitality to three passing strangers, who happened to be the gods Zeus, Neptune and Hermes. After they had eaten, the visitors asked Hyrieus if he had any wishes. The old man confessed that he would have liked a son, and the three gods promised to fulfil his wish. Standing together around the hide of the ox they had just consumed, the gods urinated on it and told Hyrieus to bury the hide. From it in due course was born a boy whom Hyrieus named Urion after the mode of his conception.

  • steve campbell

    You are an idiot. You want to talk about fables? You would have us believe that the whole of humanity has arisen from two people in a garden who had a conversation with a talking snake and therefore committed original sin which Neanderthal loonies like you have been blaming women for-for the last two thousand years? The monkey story is also a fable. Some other idiot made it up and it is not applicable to evolution. There are Christians who believe that people rode dinosaurs in the ancient past of a few thousand years ago. Ever heard of a fossil? These are carbon dated to have existed millions of years before people. You count the begets in the bible, another fable, and determine the earth is six thousand years old.This can be proven beyond a shadow of a doubt to be untrue. Who are you to talk about fables when the whole of your beliefs are based on an imaginary friend you made up to keep people in line. You have a right to your opinion but it would be nice if you did not base it on your own fable which you would like us to believe just because you say so.At least science is based in fact not the hot air of a right wing wacko who thinks people come back from the dead. By the way it is physically impossible for a population to have a healthy gene pool based on two people. It is simple Mendelian genetics which children learn in high school. We can follow the path of species evolving even as we read this. it is a fact that species adapt to changing surroundings.We see this all the time. However, you choose not to because you are ignorant and refuse to see what is happening in the world around you. You are a fool wearing blinders and probably care more about unborn children than the ones who are borne to women who cannot support them. You make me sick. Go hide behind your God and leave the rest of us alone.

    • hicusdicus

      They are hiding behind their God and they will never leave you alone. And don’t you ever forget, they have guns.

      • Joe_Ks

        I gotta admit, that one made me laugh :o)

        • hicusdicus

          My only reason for being on this forum is to make people laugh at themselves or each other. But I forgot that a sense of humor requires a better than average intellect. I welcome you to the group that realizes that life is just a series of humorous tragedy’s not to be mistaken for anything serous or with substance.

    • Jay

      Carbon dating is a highly questionable science, which can be manipulated, and distorted, much like the fabricated junk-science that supports the myth of global-warming! I suppose that atheists are quite talented at generating myths! Such as; global warming, scarce resources, the over-population myth, evolution, obama loves America, liberals have a heart, and on and on….

      • denniso

        Carbon dating is not highly questionable!

        • Kate8

          denniso – So, I assume that you have evidence making you the voice of authority on this?

          Oh. I suppose you can come up with a link.

          • denniso

            Do I have to Google everything for you? Read up on it as many of us have,then open your mouth about it. You fundamentalists want to challenge any and all science that doesn’t fit w/ your primitive beliefs,but you won’t even read real science. Afraid the Devil will get you?

          • Jay

            Kate, denniso never provides sources or links to back up his ludicrous statements!

          • denniso

            Links on the internet are a dime a dozzen. Like I said,it’s not my job to educate you…you chose to not believe any science that conflicts w/ your religion,you should be courageous enough to read it and deal w/ it. I’m not going to waste my time giving links to people who won’t read the science anyway.

          • Kate8

            Sorry. I was being sarcastic about the link.

            I agree that links are a dime a dozen. Some people just think that a link is proof. I wouldn’t even bother to check it out.

            LOL.

      • hicusdicus

        Well Jay, you just messed in your pants on that one. You have sounded pretty credible until that statement. My wife has her masters in paleontology and has worked the field for many years. Her dad who is in vegetable storage in the health care system is a retired rocket scientist. He was also one of the leading experts in thermal plastics research. I don’t think you would get much agreement out of them on your comment. They are real scientist including my wife’s brother the chemical engineer. I will have to go with them and not some anonymous internet fabricator.

        • Kate8

          hiccup – Actually, recently I listened to a scientist admit that carbon dating is questionable. Come on, be logical. How in the name of Heaven can someone determine, by any means, with any reliability, the age of something when you are talking about millions of years or more? It’s pretty laughable, if your honest about it.

          Face it. Any scientist who is truthful will admit that they make stuff up.

          • hicusdicus

            I bet you believe that somebody could die and bring themselves back from the dead. The only thing I can tell you is that if ignorance is bliss you must be the happiest person on the planet.

          • denniso

            You’re right…those who don’t trust scientists,think they fabricate facts are the same people who believe in the ‘virgin birth’,’imaculate conception’,’raising the dead’,’the resurection of the dead Jesus’,’water into wine’…pretty amazing! They remind me of others who will believe in anything paranormal,mostly because it sounds cool.

          • Kate8

            hicus and denniso – Neither of you understand the first thing about Scripture. You aren’t meant to. “For those with ears to hear”. It’s obvious that you don’t.

            Scientists are mortals. They have a lot of theories and not much else. But go ahead. Just keep putting your faith in them. That way, you don’t have to do any real thinking.

            You two are pathetic.

          • denniso

            ‘Thinking’??? Are you really going to say that religious people who follow ONE book,a book that tells them how to live,w/ preachers who tell them what to think and how to conduct their lives…actually do any real thinking???? That’s exactly opposite of what religions push…taking comfort in knowing how to live,as decided by Jesus,Mohammed and others,as well as being directed by preachers,priests,pastors,ministers…

        • hicusdicus

          Denisso you forgot to mention that the BOOK is a whole lot of small cobbled together transcripts that have no known authors and are changed at the whim of anybody who doesn’t agree with what they say. People stake their life on the contents which are at best weird and confusing.

          • denniso

            You’re right! And blind adherence to the Bible,w/ it’s contradictions between old and new testaments,is the surest path into non thinking and dangerous to any society. It’s funny,yet tragic to the country,that so many Christians praise every word of the Bible,then turn around and ignore the liberal,pacificist and socialistic teachings of the ‘son of God. How do they do that so easily? Blatant hypocrisy or blind self interest,sometimes stupidity.

    • Jay

      steve says:You are an idiot. You want to talk about fables? You would have us believe that the whole of humanity has arisen from two people in a garden?

      Remember steve, evolutionary theory states that everything evolved from a common ancestor that climbed out of the primordial soup. This ancient ancestor gradually evolved. Its evolutionary progress branched out into different paths and these different paths led to the creation of increasingly complex and divergent organic forms. The paths continued to branch out resulting in the great diversity of life we have today. Now, if this is true, what would you expect to see in the fossil record? Of course you would expect to see simple organisms in the lowest layers and a gradual increase in diversity and complexity of life as you progress to more recent layers in the geologic time scale. But what do we really find in the fossil record? We find the exact opposite. Not something ambiguous like everything found in each layer. No, you find the exact opposite of what is predicted by evolution. From a correlation perspective you do not find a factor of 1, meaning perfect correlation, or a 0, meaning no correlation, you find a -1, meaning perfectly uncorrelated to the prediction. Now I don’t know about you, but I find this compelling proof that evolution did not happen. This begs the question, how much proof do evolutionary scientists need anyway?

      • hicusdicus

        That is total gobbledygook. But I must say you make it sound authentic. But isn’t that the talent of the snake oil salesman?

  • http://www.easyinvest.co.za peter

    For those who do not believe that we are evolving right now just take a stroll down to Walmart.

    • http://N/A Glen

      As a Christian I don’t beleive in evolution. First and foremost it can not be proven. Now as far as the Bible goes thats different. First if one reads thwe first 3 chapters of Gensis (God created everthing). 2nd Paul says in Romans capters 1 and 2 that creation, heavens, and stars declare God’s glory and proven his very exsistence. Now whether people want to beleive it or is irrelevant. Science cannot prove evolution or disprove the exsistence of God. There are more than enough arechological discoveries to prove what the Bible says.

      • bob wire

        So tell us, what makes you a Christian?

        and the bible offers a lot that is hard to believe. ~ Like where did all the people come from , just Adam and Eve? That would be an inbred bunch.

        or the ARK business, ~ two of every animal aboard 40 x 40 cubits as it rained for 40 days and 40 nights? Old Noah was a busy man.

        There is a host of old testament stories that simply don’t hold up to the naked light of day or the nature of man.

        But I can over look these things until someone like yourself paints me in a corner and claim to be a devout Christian because they believe everything in the bible.

        There a lot to be said for having the faith of a mustard seed, but I think that you are missing the point of text and misapply it.

        • Jay

          Your problem bw is that, you view God through your limited finite capabilities. So naturally, if you, can’t perform it, or think it impossible, neither can God! Silly, arrogant old man, and your supposed to be the brightest of the left? Yikes!

          • hicusdicus

            Jay, try reading, By any other name by Tim Callahan. Its a research paper on people who have researched who and how the bible came to be. It does not condemn it just verifies.

        • hicusdicus

          Bob, All these hard nosed religious folk are genetically wired into the paranormal and nothing is going to make any difference. They can’t survive with out it. This is fine with me as long as I also have a gun.

          • Altaica

            Get a bow and arrows too. They’re quieter and you can shoot over walls. also they aren’t tracked by the government and they even let adolescent buy them :)

    • hicusdicus

      Walmart, that is hilarious. We could be seeing reverse evolution. If the world lasts long enough monkeys will be buying their bananas in Walmart.

  • Peter

    Well Robert, no need to hold your breath against any tirade here! I am a very very convinced Christian, and I believe God is big enough to have created this world in any way and in any time-frame He saw fit. I believe God may well have told the story of His creation miracles to the early Church fathers in a way they could understand for their time. I have nothing against those folks who choose to believe that literally, as we will all be enlightened come the day of Christ’s return to earth. But I also believe Jesus gave John the vision of Revelation in images he could understand as well, such that things that may well be helicopter gunships etc, are described as winged animals for example. My humble opinion only, and I don’t expect anyone else to take it on board.

    • hicusdicus

      Peter do you really think Jesus is going to return to this polluted, violent, gritty little planet. He may be the son of God but I doubt he is that stupid. Crucify me once, your fault. Crucify me twice, my fault.

      • Peter

        hicusdicus, you really don’t have any understanding, do you? You obviously underestimate the Power of God, in that WHEN Jesus returns to this earth, He will do so NOT as He did before, being born of a virgin and living among us as one of us. He will in fact return in His Power and Glory such that NOBODY, not even you in your feeble understanding, can withstand His Authority. He will crush those who oppose Him with a single Word. Nobody could even attempt to crucify Him again. Grow a few brain cells my friend, you obviously need them.

        • hicusdicus

          The only power God has is what comes from the fantasy of his believers. What evil people will do in the name of their mythical God is what I fear.

          • Altaica

            Ain’t that the truth. I saw this shirt once I wanted to buy, it read, “Science fly airplanes, religion flies airplanes into buildings.” It’s the fanatics of any religion that worry me. If they believe in an apocalypse they make it happen with self fulfilling prophecy.

  • http://aol Kimbo

    I believe where most of us disagree has do do with understanding what The Word says. It was in the beginning,……”let US make man in OUR image.” As Spirit has no image,….we were created in THEIR spiritual and intellectual image. Carbon based life forms do evolve and change. Characteristics are developed as adaptations to environment and other stimuli. The understanding was given to man and he recorded what he understood in terms normal for that period in history. I don’t think many of us actually believe that an old bearded man sits in the clouds and pulls our strings. If it makes atheists and agnostics feel more intelligent to belittle and laugh at others it is but a temporary enjoyment. Everyone will have their chance to decide. Meanwhile it’s back to each of our realities.

    • hicusdicus

      KImbo the reason most people disagree is because they are arrogant, pompous, self serving and stupid. Fortunately for the planet they don’t live very long.

      • Joe_Ks

        you forgot to mention ignorant, conceited, judgmental and self-righteous. Self-righteousness relieves any personal need to wonder if God may know something you don’t.

        • hicusdicus

          I do know that God does not have a clue as to how to create a harmonious loving group of people to populate his planet.

  • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

    rick
    1

    Boy are you out for lunch.Ha ha ha ha
    How do you explain quasars?They are 15 billion light years away.It takes its light source to reach earth,that is 15 billion years.The universe has to be at least 15 billion years old.

    Rick says
    “You can believe whatever you wish… but for me and my house, we believe the Word of God. That means we were made in the likeness and image of God on the literal sixth day of creation… about 6000 years ago. By the way, that makes the earth four days older than the sun, moon & ALL the galaxies!”

    According to the big bang theory, the universe began by … at the beginning, the big bang nucleosynthesis could create deuterium because the expansion of the universe …

    http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~yukimoon/BigBang/BigBang.htm

    • denniso

      It’s laughable and scary that there are people who can actually believe that the earth is only 6,000 yrs old,because one book written over hundreds of yrs by men just slightly less ignorant than the masses is purported to say so. You have to basically deny all science to come up w/ that,ignoring the carbon dating and geology that gives us the real age of the earth.

      If people want to believe in any sort of god,fine…just don’t try to pretend that the belief makes any logical sense,because that’s where it usually becomes farce…especially when a belief contradicts all of science. And don’t try to force any brand of religion or god on the country. Keep religious beliefs where they belong,and that isn’t in gov’t or gov’t supported facilities.

      • hicusdicus

        People are laughable and scary and on top of this they have guns.

      • James

        Denniso, the 6000 number came from Bishop James Ussher’s chronology which dated Adam’s creation in 4004 BC. A later, more accurate figure is 5407 BC. My point is the Bible’s chronology dated the creation of Adam, not the universe. The planet has obviously been here for millions of years.

        • denniso

          No, the planet has been here for about 4 billion yrs,not just several million…there are fundamentalist Christians who ‘believe’ the earth is only 6,000 yrs old,and they base it upon the Bible. Scary…

          • hicusdicus

            Denniso, these people also have guns.Lots of long guns with big magazines. They have scopes so they can reach out and touch you if you don’t believe. But you are usually safe as long as you help out with the collection plate.

    • hicusdicus

      Rick say man was created in gods image and likeness. Hicusdicus says that if man was created in gods image and likeness this explains why everything is such a mess and I am not at all interested in meeting your god.

      • Jay

        hicusdicus: and I am not at all interested in meeting your god.

        Perhaps, on the other hand, you seem rather obsessed that no one else does either! What would you call that, reverse proselytizing? There is no question that the atheist is as committed to his religion, as is the theist. In fact, many atheist appear more fundamentally radical then most theists! Atheists are a scary lot. One need only look to the history of the Christian persecutions to confirm the religious zealotry expressed by the half-baked, and maniacal fanaticism, that is the result of the atheistic religion!

        • hicusdicus

          Jay have no fear there is no possibility of ever meeting my god. I am not an atheist. I am a skeptic. There is a difference. I don’t know and l will remain that way until proven otherwise. WE both know that ain’t going to happen. So I will remain in limbo till I meet your God. I will then explain to him that what ever he thinks it was all your fault. I will then escort you to hell with me. Don’t despair. Heaven is going to be full of boring born again Christians. Hell will be populated with near do well interesting folk.

        • Altaica

          I think Christian Fanatics…well any religious fanatic, hell fanatic is a scary thing. You better believe I don’t want to be anywhere near the sports fans when their teams lose in some cities.

      • Joe_Ks

        The good news is, God does care that you are not interested, but he will allow you to remain as you choose. The bad news is, He is waiting for you :)

        • hicusdicus

          OOOOOOOOOOOHHH!!!!!!!! That is so scary. Let me give you a hint to how things really are. If there is a God who actually cares about man. I will stand before him and base how I conducted my life with no fear in my heart. He wired us and made what we are. Only god can judge our merits and since I am in his image and likeness he will also have to pass judgement on himself. Unless it is a woman then I am forever lost to the land of PMS.

          • Altaica

            uh oh, you’re screwed then. j/k.

  • Sam

    Reference Planet X or Nibiru .. Darwin’s ‘missing link’, the sudden jump from primate to upright hominids, some 400,000 years ago, can be attributed to the Annunaki. I don’t argue with anyone. Do your own research. I would suggest a start, by reading Zecharia Sitchin, a highly respected expert on the Sumerian written language (earths first written history)and in the knowledge left to humanity, by the Sumerians. We have been given the ability to question and seek the truth in all things, and above all else, we were given the ability to reason. If you research and determine that blind faith, rather than reasoning, is your choice, then so be it. Thankfully, we still that ability, although government would rather that we didn’t.

    • hicusdicus

      Yes I read all his books and still have them. It all sounds very plausible until you realize that each book he writes helps jack up his bank account. People love mystery and science fiction and he gave them a big helping of that. Ron Hubble, does that name ring a bell.

      • Kate8

        hicus – I suppose the authors you read don’t want money for their books, and don’t care about making a living?

        The most successful people got that way by pursuing what they love best. That doesn’t take away from their integrity.

        I’m not promoting Sitchin, although I find him fascinating. I’m jus’ sayin’.

        • hicusdicus

          I also found his books fascinating. If just 25 percent of what he said was true the whole god thing goes straight down the tubes. If what he said is true it does make the bible more comprehensible. There is so much printed BS that I am skeptical of everything. The worst thing that ever happen to man was learning to talk. Its hard to fabricate BS if all you can do is grunt.

          • Kate8

            hicus – Good for you!

            Of course there is so much printed BS. Books are written by men writing down things as they see them. If it’s absolute facts you want, no man has them. All they have is ideas.

            That is why we cannot put our faith in other people. Don’t you see how ridiculous that is? Man is not only utterly ignorant about things, but he has biases. It’s impossible for a man to be completely neutral. He will be influenced by his own life experience.

            Perhaps it’s time to put away childish things, and realize how much we do not know.

    • Altaica

      I haven’t read Sitchen but he is referenced in the book I am reading. “Gods, Genes and Consciousness, Nonhuman intervention in human history by Paul Von Ward. It’s pretty good, those of you that like Sitchen may like this as well, He references Sitchen’s work in support of other sentient life forms.

  • Jay

    Hugh Montefiore, the former bishop of Birmingham, a year or two ago wrote as a book review in the Church Times the following letter. It was in the style of one of C.S.Lewis’ Screwtape Letters and entitled, “a theory unnaturally selected”. (It is here reprinted with permission).

    Dear Wormwood,

    I am writing because I want more precautions taken to safeguard our position on the scientific front. The general belief in the West that Darwinism explains the evolution of species has been our greatest triumph, and has given enormous satisfaction to our Father Below.

    The assumption that mankind has emerged from a purposeless process of evolution resulting from the accumulation of small random mutations which were to the advantage of individual members of a species, and made them fitter to survive, has robbed millions of faith in the existence of the Enemy, or reduced him to the status of a “blind watchmaker”.

    But I scent danger ahead. You have done very well to prevent reviews of small and easy-to-read books like Darwin on Trial (Monarch, 1994). The eminence of its author Philip E. Johnson, a Berkeley law professor, and his disclosure of the threadbare nature of our arguments, could have done us great damage.

    Fortunately, we have been so successful that anyone who tries to debunk neo-Darwinism is generally regarded by society as a crank. You must keep on preventing those scientists who are adherents of the Enemy from criticising evolution through natural selection. You must try to spread abroad the idea that the only alternative to Darwinism is the belief that the world was created by the Enemy in six days. Don’t try to persuade people that Darwinism is true – we know it isn’t – but that there is no alternative explanation that is credible today.

    A few practical hints. If anyone objects that there is no concrete evidence that any new species has actually evolved by micromutations, divert attention from the facts by saying it is logically possible. Suggest that major changes might in principle come about through small mutations in an embryo, but never try to explain how, for example, a reptile producing eggs could turn into a mammal producing live young.

    When it comes to fossils, beware of the palaeontologists, because they tend to be against us. No transitional intermediates have ever been found in the vertebrate sequence or elsewhere; so hammer on about animals with similarities to two classes, and never mention the differences, or why there were sudden extinctions or why some species persist for millions of years. So you should hide the fact that the fossil problem is getting worse, not better. Pretend that we simply need to find more fossils. Assert that similarities in molecular structure between species prove a common ancestry – although, of course, they don’t.

    What really scares me is the thought that some well-known biologist may say that anyone looking objectively at the evidence would regard Darwinism as highly improbable. But it’s unlikely: too many vested interests are at stake.

    Your affectionate uncle,

    SCREWTAPE

  • Jay

    Evolution

    The old certainties with regard to evolution are being challenged today. As Philip E. Johnson says:

    Every history of the twentieth century lists three thinkers as preeminent in influence: Darwin, Marx and Freud. All three were regarded as “scientific” (and hence far more reliable than anything “religious”) in their heyday. Yet Marx and Freud have fallen, and even their dwindling bands of followers no longer claim that their insights were based on any methodology remotely comparable to that of experimental science. I am convinced that Darwin is the next on the block. His fall will be by far the mightiest of the three.

    And that will be highly significant because popular Darwinism has been used to dethrone God. As the philosopher of science Del Ratz puts it, “Evolution, along with the new cosmologies and backed by the undentable prestige of science, became part of a gratifyingly sophisticated excuse for unbelief – a ticket out of an oppressive universe with a God who set boundaries and made demands, into one where we set the rules and the cosmos itself was the only limit.” Darwinism became a new secular “religion”. The serious consequences have especially been seen in our schools. An official American 1995 “Position Statement” for biology teachers, excluding any divine design or control, reads as follows:

    The diversity of life on earth is the outcome of evolution: an unsupervised, impersonal, unpredictable and natural process of temporal descent with genetic modification that is affected by natural selection, chance, historical contingencies and changing environments.

    So how is this confidence being challenged?

    There are three areas that come together in the debate on evolution: one, the scientific; two, the philosophical; and three, the theological. In all areas there are now serious questions being asked.

    In the scientific area it is now being seen that Darwin’s The Origin of Species had a level of plausibility in 1859 more because of the culture of unbelief that was developing at that time than because of its scientific merit. That unbelief was evidenced, for example, in the book of theologically liberal essays published the following year and entitled Essays and Reviews.

    There was nothing new in “evolution” as such. Lamarck, a French zoologist had earlier published Zoological Philosophy in 1809. This spoke of life in its simplest form emerging from nonlife by small steps and in increasing complexity. But Darwin’s theory caught on where Lamarck’s had not because of the theory of “natural selection” which gained natural law status and seemed a hidden power. It told how it all happened. T.H.Huxley, who described himself as “Darwin’s bulldog”, referred to the hypothesis of natural selection like this:

    That which we were looking for, and could not find, was a hypothesis respecting the origin of known organic forms which assumed the operation of no causes but such as could be proved to be actually at work. The Origin provided us with the working hypothesis we sought. Moreover, it did the immense service of freeing us for ever from the dilemma – refuse to accept the creation hypothesis, and what have you to propose that can be accepted by any cautious reasoner?

    http://www.church.org.uk/resources/csdetailpf.asp?csdate=3/1/1998

    • hicusdicus

      Jay, where do you come up with this stuff. Evolution does not challenge God. It just dismisses parts of the bible which are fabricated stories for unknowledgeable people. Biology does not prove any thing in the respect that you are claiming. What you are doing is called confirmation bias. You believe in something so strongly that you see only things that qualify it as true. You are now proclaimed a typical human just a mere mortal unwilling to face your own mortality.

      • Jay

        hicusdicus: It just dismisses parts of the bible which are fabricated stories for unknowledgeable people.

        hicusdicus, enlighten me. How does evolution dismiss parts of the bible which are fabricated stories. Which parts of the Bible?

        • Joe_Ks

          Jay, don’t hold your breath. When dealing with hiscusdiscus, you are dealing with a master of confirmation bias. Evidence is not required by such masters of the universe.

          • hicusdicus

            I like the evidence that the bible is the word of god inspired by god. How do I know this? the bible says so. Now that what I called real evidence. Your wrong about me being the master of the universe. That title go to the guy that dreamed up the collection plate.

          • Kate8

            hicus – Let me get this straight.

            You prefer to put your faith in mortals who couldn’t possibly have any real answers, but only conjecture. And you are willing to take their word as gospel.

            How does this make sense?

          • hicusdicus

            Kate I don’t need answers. I am not asking any questions at least about the god stuff. The only answer I need is how to avoid dying slowly and painfully. You might want to think about it. Its coming up on you a lot faster than you think.

          • Karolyn

            hicus – How to avoid dying painfully and slowly? Take a handful of sleeping pills! Either that or a quick shot to the head. However, I prefer just going to sleep and waking up outside this cumbersome body!

          • hicusdicus

            Karolyn, What if they hide your gun and the DEA won’t let you have any pills? Instead they keep you alive artificially at a cost of about 7000.00 a month and bill the taxpayers. All this in the name of human dignity. The other side of the coin is they allow abortions and in some case even foot the bill. I sincerely believe that this sort of rationale is the reason Jesus has decided to never have his second coming.

          • Kate8

            hicus – Well, there you have it. You don’t get an answer if you don’t ask the question.

            That’s what life is about: discovery. He who seeks, finds. But it’s the Pearl of Great Price, and only a very few ever ask the right question.

            The rest stay held in bondage by delusion.

            BTW, what makes you think Christ cancelled His Second Coming?

            It just may not be exactly what people expect. But be warned, a fake one is planned.

          • hicusdicus

            Kate, How can Jesus have a second coming when has not even had a first one. Ask questions to whom? Other evolved apes who wear shoes and drive cars. All they know is what some other over developed ape told them. People can not face the fact that they are nothing special in the scheme of things. They must have their myths to justify their lives. If one really gets in their face, they will show you their gun and tell you to smile and wait for the flash.

          • Jay

            Karolyn says:hicus – How to avoid dying painfully and slowly? Take a handful of sleeping pills! Either that or a quick shot to the head. However, I prefer just going to sleep and waking up outside this cumbersome body!

            Hmm, the “The Queen of Death” promoting suicide, what a surprise!

        • hicusdicus

          Jay let me see. There is the first part, Genius and there is the last part. The end. Then there is everything in between. I guess that about covers it.

          • Jay

            Interesting that you spelled Genesis as Genius. Freudian slip, hicusdicus?

          • hicusdicus

            Jay give me a break. I did not know you were a member of the spelling police. Are going to write me a ticket or send me to death row?

        • Altaica

          Hiscus- Don’t worry, unless they pave all of nature there is plenty of stuff out there that can kill you pretty quick ;)

          • hicusdicus

            If I don’t have a gun or pills I will just read comments on this forum. That should be good for a massive stroke.

  • http://personalliberty.coml Larry Bullington

    You can’t prove or disprove God with science,otherwise faith would have no value….Without faith it is impossible to please God. So put your card’s on the table and see who win’s……..Just pray to ……..that you’r not wrong.

    • hicusdicus

      If one could prove God then it would no longer be God it would be science. The things that people attribute to their thousands of Gods is mind boggling. The only thing that is known for sure is that this will not stop until the sun burns out. And who knows it may somehow continue to plague eternity.

      • Joe_Ks

        True, one cannot scientifically prove that there is God (likewise, neither can one scientifically prove that there is not God). However, one can scientifically prove the possibility of the existence of God, at least to as credible a degree as one can prove evolution theory. Einstein’s relativity has been proven. It states that the faster a body moves, the slower time moves. This is proven. Einstein also stated that at the speed of light, time would cease to pass. Quantum mass states that mass also increases with speed until at the speed of light, mass becomes infinite. In such a state, one would be able to see all of time, forward and back, as one can look at wall in front of himself, focusing on any particular point at any time. One would also, if in such a state, be in every place at the same time. If one can believe that life can originate by process of time+matter+chance, can one not also believe that a life form could exist in such a state? If it did, it would be omniscient, omnipresent and all powerful. What would you call it? (I do not recommend “The Man Upstairs”

        • hicusdicus

          There is a law that says if a body can move fast enough it can escape the long arm of the law. That the law that is really important. The man upstairs! I ain’t going up no stinking stairs.

      • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

        hicusdicus and Joe_Ks

        Very good.God can’t be proven or disproven.

        • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

          hicusdicus and Joe_Ks

          A new theory(check it out)

          Science News
          Is Our Universe Inside a Bubble? First Observational Test of the ‘Multiverse’
          ScienceDaily (Aug. 3, 2011) — The theory that our universe is contained inside a bubble, and that multiple alternative universes exist inside their own bubbles — making up the ‘multiverse’ — is, for the first time, being tested by physicists.

          Cosmic microwave background radiation
          Two research papers published in Physical Review Letters and Physical Review D are the first to detail how to search for signatures of other universes. Physicists are now searching for disk-like patterns in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) radiation — relic heat radiation left over from the Big Bang — which could provide tell-tale evidence of collisions between other universes and our own.

          Many modern theories of fundamental physics predict that our universe is contained inside a bubble. In addition to our bubble, this `multiverse’ will contain others, each of which can be thought of as containing a universe. In the other ‘pocket universes’ the fundamental constants, and even the basic laws of nature, might be different.

          Until now, nobody had been able to find a way to efficiently search for signs of bubble universe collisions — and therefore proof of the multiverse — in the CMB radiation, as the disc-like patterns in the radiation could be located anywhere in the sky. Additionally, physicists needed to be able to test whether any patterns they detected were the result of collisions or just random patterns in the noisy data.

          A team of cosmologists based at University College London (UCL), Imperial College London and the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics has now tackled this problem.

          “It’s a very hard statistical and computational problem to search for all possible radii of the collision imprints at any possible place in the sky,” says Dr Hiranya Peiris, co-author of the research from the UCL Department of Physics and Astronomy. “But that’s what pricked my curiosity.”

          The team ran simulations of what the sky would look like with and without cosmic collisions and developed a ground-breaking algorithm to determine which fit better with the wealth of CMB data from NASA’s Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP). They put the first observational upper limit on how many bubble collision signatures there could be in the CMB sky.

          Stephen Feeney, a PhD student at UCL who created the powerful computer algorithm to search for the tell-tale signatures of collisions between “bubble universes,” and co-author of the research papers, said: “The work represents an opportunity to test a theory that is truly mind-blowing: that we exist within a vast multiverse, where other universes are constantly popping into existence.”

          One of many dilemmas facing physicists is that humans are very good at cherry-picking patterns in the data that may just be coincidence. However, the team’s algorithm is much harder to fool, imposing very strict rules on whether the data fits a pattern or whether the pattern is down to chance.

          Dr Daniel Mortlock, a co-author from the Department of Physics at Imperial College London, said: “It’s all too easy to over-interpret interesting patterns in random data (like the ‘face on Mars’ that, when viewed more closely, turned out to just a normal mountain), so we took great care to assess how likely it was that the possible bubble collision signatures we found could have arisen by chance.”

          The authors stress that these first results are not conclusive enough either to rule out the multiverse or to definitively detect the imprint of a bubble collision. However, WMAP is not the last word: new data currently coming in from the European Space Agency’s Planck satellite should help solve the puzzle.

          • http://marcum1@wildblue.net coal miner

            Also,

            The Fate of the Universe Where Did We Come From? Where Are We Going? UW Astronomers Use New Tools to Help Solve the Mysteries of the Universe.

            http://www.washington.edu/alumni/columns/march96/universe.html

          • hicusdicus

            Thanks for the heads up but I have already read it. It was interesting. It kind of makes gods plan for mankind rather insignificant or not at all.

  • http://personalliberty.coml Larry Bullington

    reply to denniso,,,,just because it doesn’t make sence to you doesn’t mean it doesn’t make sense….and belief compelled is no belief at all, and I won’t ever force my theology on you or yours if you would just abide by your same demands on me and mine.And last but not least do you ever in the quite of night ever ask yourself,,,,,what if I’m wrong,,,,,I have and I some how KNOW I’m not.

    • hicusdicus

      You are wrong and I some how know you are!

      • Jay

        Wow hicusdicus, you and the rest of the left-wing lemmings are on a rip, or a crusade. Nothing seems to get you and your ilk more excited, and frothing at the mouth, than people expressing faith in the God of the Bible. You, and your atheistic, religious fanatics, make even the radical muslims appear moderate!

        • hicusdicus

          Your right Jay. Comedy makes for excitement laughter and frothing at the mouth. There is not anything funnier than born again Christians trying to make their case using science and logic. I sometimes get the feeling that god created this planet to be his personal south park and we are all no more than a paranormal joke.

        • denniso

          When you are young you read,study and learn,and question. Hopefully,as we get older we consolidate information and come to conclusions that we can’t do so honestly as kids. I was raised w/ religion,as most Americans are…I have read,talked,argued,wondered,thought about religion/politics for most of my life. Now,w/ decades under my belt,I am as convinced in my lack of belief in any kind of god that makes any sense to imagine, as you are in yours. No kind,loving,fatherly god would ever preside over the mess that is humanity. He/she/it could not bear to witness the torrents of pain and suffering that exists every second of every day in the world…he/she/it would do something about it,assuming the all powerful nature and the loving kindness that is ascribed to God.

          • Jay

            “There are more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history.” – Sir Isaac Newton.

          • hicusdicus

            All sir Issac newton knows is that if he sits under an apple tree an apple might fall and hit him on the head. And if that does not happen a bird will most likely crap in his hair.

      • SC Murf

        With all of your ranting and disbelief does not change the fact that Jesus IS and you will stand in judgement before Him. Also you will be held accountable for all the lies you spew and all the hearts you talk into turning away from God. Good luck with that and I’ll see you at the crystal wall

        up the hill
        airborne

        • hicusdicus

          The crystal wall! Boy howdy have I ever been misinformed I always thought it was the pearly gates.

          • Altaica

            Damnit the Christians got into my crystal collection again! I thought for sure they’d be happy with pearls. Get out of my rock garden. I shake my fist at you!

          • denniso

            I always enjoy it when my Xtian friends condemn me to hell for my doubt or disbelief of their specific religious tenents.Oh the Xtian joy of it!!

        • hicusdicus

          altica, What if that is a wall of Christal meth? I think I would rather have that than pearly gates. Particularly if I was going to have to spend eternity with a bunch of born again Christians.

  • Jay

    The list below presents 101 scientific facts found in the Scriptures. Many of these facts were penned centuries before they were discovered. Scientific foreknowledge found only in the Bible offers one more piece to the collective proof that the Bible is truly the inspired Word of the Creator. How does this affect you? The last items provide the answer – you need to read them carefully.

    1.The earth free-floats in space (Job 26:7), affected only by gravity. While other sources declared the earth sat on the back of an elephant or turtle, or was held up by Atlas, the Bible alone states what we now know to be true – “He hangs the earth on nothing.”

    2.Creation is made of particles, indiscernible to our eyes (Hebrews 11:3). Not until the 19th century was it discovered that all visible matter consists of invisible elements.

    3.The Bible specifies the perfect dimensions for a stable water vessel (Genesis 6:15). Ship builders today are well aware that the ideal dimension for ship stability is a length six times that of the width. Keep in mind, God told Noah the ideal dimensions for the ark 4,500 years ago.

    4.When dealing with disease, clothes and body should be washed under running water (Leviticus 15:13). For centuries people naively washed in standing water. Today we recognize the need to wash away germs with fresh water.

    5.Sanitation industry birthed (Deuteronomy 23:12-13). Some 3,500 years ago God commanded His people to have a place outside the camp where they could relieve themselves. They were to each carry a shovel so that they could dig a hole (latrine) and cover their waste. Up until World War I, more soldiers died from disease than war because they did not isolate human waste.

    6.Oceans contain springs (Job 38:16). The ocean is very deep. Almost all the ocean floor is in total darkness and the pressure there is enormous. It would have been impossible for Job to have explored the “springs of the sea.” Until recently, it was thought that oceans were fed only by rivers and rain. Yet in the 1970s, with the help of deep diving research submarines that were constructed to withstand 6,000 pounds-per-square-inch pressure, oceanographers discovered springs on the ocean floors!

    7.There are mountains on the bottom of the ocean floor (Jonah 2:5-6). Only in the last century have we discovered that there are towering mountains and deep trenches in the depths of the sea.

    8.Joy and gladness understood (Acts 14:17). Evolution cannot explain emotions. Matter and energy do not feel. Scripture explains that God places gladness in our hearts (Psalm 4:7), and ultimate joy is found only in our Creator’s presence – “in Your presence is fullness of joy” (Psalm 16:11).

    9.Blood is the source of life and health (Leviticus 17:11; 14). Up until 120 years ago, sick people were “bled” and many died as a result (e.g. George Washington). Today we know that healthy blood is necessary to bring life-giving nutrients to every cell in the body. God declared that “the life of the flesh is in the blood” long before science understood its function.

    10.The Bible states that God created life according to kinds (Genesis 1:24). The fact that God distinguishes kinds, agrees with what scientists observe – namely that there are horizontal genetic boundaries beyond which life cannot vary. Life produces after its own kind. Dogs produce dogs, cats produce cats, roses produce roses. Never have we witnessed one kind changing into another kind as evolution supposes. There are truly natural limits to biological change.

    11.Noble behavior understood (John 15:13; Romans 5:7-8). The Bible and history reveal that countless people have endangered or even sacrificed their lives for another. This reality is completely at odds with Darwin’s theory of the survival of the fittest.

    12.Chicken or egg dilemma solved (Genesis 1:20-22). Which came first, the chicken or the egg? This question has plagued philosophers for centuries. The Bible states that God created birds with the ability to reproduce after their kind. Therefore the chicken was created first with the ability to make eggs! Yet, evolution has no solution for this dilemma.

    13.Which came first, proteins or DNA (Revelation 4:11)? For evolutionists, the chicken or egg dilemma goes even deeper. Chickens consist of proteins. The code for each protein is contained in the DNA/RNA system. However, proteins are required in order to manufacture DNA. So which came first: proteins or DNA? The ONLY explanation is that they were created together.

    14.Our bodies are made from the dust of the ground (Genesis 2:7; 3:19). Scientists have discovered that the human body is comprised of some 28 base and trace elements – all of which are found in the earth.

    15.The First Law of Thermodynamics established (Genesis 2:1-2). The First Law states that the total quantity of energy and matter in the universe is a constant. One form of energy or matter may be converted into another, but the total quantity always remains the same. Therefore the creation is finished, exactly as God said way back in Genesis.

    16.The first three verses of Genesis accurately express all known aspects of the creation (Genesis 1:1-3). Science expresses the universe in terms of: time, space, matter, and energy. In Genesis chapter one we read: “In the beginning (time) God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)…Then God said, “Let there be light (energy).” No other creation account agrees with the observable evidence.

    17.The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; Hebrews 1:10-12). Starting with the studies of Albert Einstein in the early 1900s and continuing today, science has confirmed the biblical view that the universe had a beginning. When the Bible was written most people believed the universe was eternal. Science has proven them wrong, but the Bible correct.

    18.The earth is a sphere (Isaiah 40:22). At a time when many thought the earth was flat, the Bible told us that the earth is spherical.

    19.Scripture assumes a revolving (spherical) earth (Luke 17:34-36). Jesus said that at His return some would be asleep at night while others would be working at day time activities in the field. This is a clear indication of a revolving earth, with day and night occurring simultaneously.

    20.Origin of the rainbow explained (Genesis 9:13-16). Prior to the Flood there was a different environment on the earth (Genesis 2:5-6). After the Flood, God set His rainbow “in the cloud” as a sign that He would never again judge the earth by water. Meteorologists now understand that a rainbow is formed when the sun shines through water droplets – which act as a prism – separating white light into its color spectrum.

    The rest of the list can be found here: http://www.newchristian.org.uk/scientificfactsinbible.html

  • Jay

    Examples of the more striking scientific accuracy in the Bible include

    The Universe:
    Time and Space
    The Beginning
    An Initial Void
    An Expanding Universe
    Space is Empty
    That Hole In The North
    Air Has Weight
    Those Singing Stars
    And There are Quite a Few of Them

    The Earth:
    Atoms
    The Earth is a Sphere
    The Rotation Of The Earth
    The Orbit of The Sun
    Gravitational Properties of Constellations
    Pangaea and Peleg
    First and Second Laws of Thermodynamics
    Talking Lightning?
    The Treasures of The Snow
    The Hydrologic Cycle
    Measuring The Waters
    Air Currents

    The Oceans:
    The Paths Of The Seas
    Mountains Under The Seas
    Springs Under The Seas

    Misc:
    The Dinosaur
    Precise Dimensions of Noah’s Ark
    Mathematics

    Man:
    Man from Dust
    Adam And Eve
    The Seed of Life
    All Humanity is One Blood
    Life is in the Blood
    Blood Clotting in Infants

    Medical Knowledge in Ancient Times:
    The Egyptians
    Moses
    Sanitary Practices in the 19th Century
    Sanitary Practices in Moses’ Time
    The Minoans and The Romans
    Leprosy and Plague.. Hansen’s Disease or a Variety of Infectious Sicknesses
    Those Old Time Dietary Guidelines

    The End Times:
    The Second Coming Takes Place During The Day AND Night

    http://www.inplainsite.org/html/scientific_facts_in_the_bible.html

    • hicusdicus

      Wow! All that is in the bible? I guess I will have to read it sometime that is when I get really, really, really bored. I may be getting close as to commenting on forums puts me in the really, really classification.

      • Jay

        Yes hicusdicus, all that is in the Bible. Go figure huh? I’m surprised professor denniso made no attempt at rebuttal! Hmm..perhaps he’s at the moment desperately trying to come up with one. Could be he’s conferring with one of his liberal professors as we speak. LOL! As for you hicusdicus, i would refrain from reading the Bible when you’re really, really, really bored, rather, when you have dealt with, and set aside your childish bias!

        • Kate8

          Jay – Great stuff.

          It’s true. There are many things in the Bible that weren’t known until centuries later.

          Isn’t it interesting how those who have no clue what’s in the Bible can have such a negative opinion about it.

          It’s also funny that they are simply buying into someone else’s supposed “higher learning”. And they think they are thinking for themselves.

          We humans are so easily influenced by intellectual trends.

          • denniso

            Some of that stuff was just accumulated wisdom over thousands of yrs,like blood clotting. Other statements are just flat wrong of fabrications. How did God command the sun to stand still in the sky if they knew that the sun only appeared to move through the sky because of the earth’s spin? Things are made of that which we can’t see? That’s supposed to be atoms? Besides, Aristotle theorized atoms before Jesus was born,so it wasn’t exactly all that radical an idea.

            The Bible was written by men,many men,over a long time period…there is history and culture in it,not surprisingly,but it is also full of childish myth,incest,adultery,murder…you try to prove that the Bible was written by god through men by listing things that seem ahead of the times,but it doesn’t work. If an all powerful god had written it,why would it be so convoluted and veiled? Why would it be written so that the vast majority of people 2000 yrs ago, and more for the old testament, would be unable to comprehend the writing? Why is it written confusingly enough that modern educated people argue over the meaning? Why would a god want to hide his meaning in an overly confusing and contradictory book? Why didn’t ‘he’ write more than this book? Why not update it for modern humans?

            It’s a losing battle for you to try to use logic w/ your bible promotion and only makes you look all the less educated.

          • Jay

            One who is convoluted in his thinking, and confused to begin with, will naturally have difficulty understanding, not only Holy writ, but reality as well. You should not blame yourself denniso. Years and years of liberal indoctrination, through the education system will produce confusion, and disorientation, naturally. As the Apostle Paul wrote; Bad company spoils good character. Perhaps it is high time you changed that flat tire denniso, there should be a spare in the trunk!

            As to your question; “Why is it written confusingly enough that modern educated people argue over the meaning?

            So-called, modern-educated man argues over meaning regarding everything else. The fact that we argue over what is written in the Bible should come as no surprise. Name one thing, that educated man doesn’t argue about, excluding mathematics of course. It seems man has developed a penchant for argumentation, or perhaps it is through the process of debate that we come to a finer understanding of the issue(s). Perhaps your harsh critique of the Bible, is only a mask that disguises your inner desire to truly understand it. Unfortunately, your pre-desposed bias impedes you, and prevents you from being a true scholar!

          • denniso

            I don’t pretend to be a ‘scholar’,just informed and rational….something that almost all ‘believers aren’t. There are many things that humans around the world agree on,but certainly not religion. If a god actually cared about ‘his’ creation,and wanted to help the creatures that he had created,his omnipotence would allow ‘him’ to easily and clearly communicate his ‘message’ to the people. It would make no sense at all for ‘him’ to be clever and convoluted and confusing,unless ‘he’ really didn’t care and was more devil than kind god,or did it for his own entertainment. There is absolutely NOTHING more devisive and disagreed upon than religion,even w/in one particular religion. You want to stay blind to what’s obvious to many of us,that’s your perogerative,but to try to connect the irrational to ‘facts’ or science is just laughable. Be honest and just believe if you want,w/o evidence,proof or logic,because that’s what it really is,blind belief.

          • Jay

            It seems that you, denniso, are the only one that seems confused, and have somehow determined that Scriptures are convoluted. So naturally, you reason that, since you are confused, and have trouble understanding, naturally therefore, everyone else must feel the same way! You assert that it is all nonsense, while at the same time you admit that you are confused, and have difficulty understanding. This being so, as you plainly stated, clearly disqualifies your initial assertion, since in order to assert that it is all nonsense, precludes that you have full understanding of the subject you claim to be all non-sense. Therefore, your convoluted and contradictory arguments reveals three possibilities; Either you failed to seriously consider your argument before posting, or, you have difficulty with transfer of thoughts to words, or, you lack intellectual integrity! It is also possible that you are just another by-product of the intellectually bankrupt, educational system!

          • Jay

            Unfortunately, that is the case, kate. They seem to be possessed of a predetermined hatred for the Bible, or anything Christian. They claim it is all non-sense, without providing a logical reason for such, except that, as they they claim, it is all non-sense, yet they barely understand any of it, while claiming to be great scholars. Clearly, they project their confusion, and lack of understand to anything, or any subject they tackle! What a bunch of empty, brainless sacks!

          • denniso

            I didn’t say that I am confused by the convoluted and contradictory bible. The evidence that most people and religions are is that very few can agree on what it says and means in total.

            You won’t answer questions,because you apparently can’t…why is there only one book supposedly written by God? Why did it take so long before your God decided to write a book? Why didn’t he/she/it write it so that the ignorant and uneducated masses of 2,000 yrs ago comprehend it? Why did Jesus speak in parables rather than just telling people what they should do to please God? Why did it take maybe hundreds of yrs to write the old testament? Why didn’t God chose to inform and help all the billions of humans who lived before Jesus appeared?

            Believe if you want,but don’t try to justify it w/logic and science.Like I’ve already said,it doesn’t work,and it’s obvious to many.

          • Jay

            You won’t answer questions,because you apparently can’t…why is there only one book supposedly written by God? Why did it take so long before your God decided to write a book? Why didn’t he/she/it write it so that the ignorant and uneducated masses of 2,000 yrs ago comprehend it? Why did Jesus speak in parables rather than just telling people what they should do to please God? Why did it take maybe hundreds of yrs to write the old testament? Why didn’t God chose to inform and help all the billions of humans who lived before Jesus appeared?

            Believe if you want,but don’t try to justify it w/logic and science.Like I’ve already said,it doesn’t work,and it’s obvious to many.

            Your multiple questions confirms the fact that you understand nothing about it! That being the case, you should have the humility to admit that you are not qualified to criticize one way or the other, rather then blather on like an empty headed fool. By the way, the Bible is not just one book, but it is comprised of 66 books, referred to as the canonical collection. The main trust, or message in it, is referred to as, the canon!

          • denniso

            Too many questions for you? Then answer just one! Take your pick…I was raised in the fog of religion that people like you haven’t escaped from yet,though it’s always possible. I know the Bible is more than one book,but it’s obviously been a single book for centuries and that is the common term for it,right? ‘the book’? I know that church leaders removed much of it that was too unflattering or bizzare or contradictory.

            So, answer one of my questions,instead of simply saying nothing at all repeatedly. Why do most of the believers argue over much of the meaning of the ‘book’? Why would your god not make it simple enough that all people could understand it clearly w/o yrs of study,argument and work at it,if your god really wanted to communicate w/ his creation?

          • hicusdicus

            denniso, The fog of religion. I love it. I bet all the Christians are just waiting for Gabriell to blow his fog horn. If he doesn’t blow it pretty soon the ship of religion is going to run aground on the reef of science.

          • Jay

            hicusdicus: If he doesn’t blow it pretty soon the ship of religion is going to run aground on the reef of science.

            hicusdicus, if it wasn’t for the Bible, there would be no science!

          • Jay

            denniso:So, answer one of my questions,instead of simply saying nothing at all repeatedly. Why do most of the believers argue over much of the meaning of the ‘book’? Why would your god not make it simple enough that all people could understand it clearly w/o yrs of study,argument and work at it,if your god really wanted to communicate w/ his creation?

            As to your first question, that is false. There are millions of Christians who are in agreement as to what the Bible says, and what the Bible means. Of course, as in any organization, religious or secular, there will be some who disagree, as well as some who do not have a clue.

            As to your second question, why not say that about everything else. Why isn’t everything just plain and simple, and easily understood, without having to spend years, and years of study in order to understand. A bit of a moronic question, don’t you think? Do you not think that there is a process to learning? Step by step, level by level. Do we not structure our educational system in that way? Grade by grade, establishing pre-requasites, before moving to higher levels. Why is that? Why not just make it simple, without years, and years of study, in order to understand the more complex theories, and information? Why must a musician, or a scientist, or a professor, spend years, and years of study, and education before they receive their qualifications, or degrees. Well, you see where i’me headed with this, and hopefully have made it clear enough for you to see how idiotic your second question was. As for me, I began studying the Bible many years ago, and although i don’t profess to be an expert, I have discovered, oddly enough, that if one is determined, and consistent in their endeavour, one will succeed in understanding that which they are studying. You should know that denniso, you do posses an engineering degree, do you not? How did you achieve it, pray tell?

          • denniso

            Surely you jest! You equate learning a science or trade w/ a god trying to tell his creatures how to live? If your god wanted you to live in a certain way,all he had/has to do is say it…clearly and firmly. It’s not exactly rocket science,or even engineering like I studied. If a parent wants to tell a child to stay out of the street,or don’t take candy from strangers,that’s what you say. You don’t speak in riddles,or make convoluted alusions that take yrs of ‘Biblical study’ to unwind or decipher. That’s the joke! Learning a high skill or trade takes time because you have to LEARN many aspects of it and practice it. A teacher can’t just tell you how to be a scientist,you have to learn it over time. Any god worth his omnicience could figure out how to speak directly to his creation if he cared how they lived.

            The moral of the story…there is not likely any god at all as we define God,and there is possibly no god at all in the universe at all,even one who could care less about we peons. Realizing and accepting that near fact is very freeing and let’s humans work on themselves and live on their own…hard,but very rewarding to think deeply and know that we hold the key to life w/in ourselves.

          • Jay

            denniso:Surely you jest! You equate learning a science or trade w/ a god trying to tell his creatures how to live? If your god wanted you to live in a certain way,all he had/has to do is say it…clearly and firmly.

            God did say it, clearly and firmly! Yet, it seems clear language remains elusive to you, and befuddles you! In the words of one who suffered from similar ailment: “I guess that would depend on what the meaning of “is, is!

          • hicusdicus

            I read the bible once. I did not find it that interesting. In fact it was rather boring. I would rather watch Heston in the greatest story ever told. At least I can sleep through it.

          • Jay

            denniso says:‘Thinking’??? Are you really going to say that religious people who follow ONE book,a book that tells them how to live,w/ preachers who tell them what to think and how to conduct their lives…actually do any real thinking???? That’s exactly opposite of what religions push…taking comfort in knowing how to live,as decided by Jesus,Mohammed and others,as well as being directed by preachers,priests,pastors,ministers…

            Glad you asked those question denniso. Allow one of your own, Michael Ruse to point out your HYPOCRISY!

            Michael Ruse, professor of history and philosophy and author of The Darwinian Revolution (1979), Darwinism Defended (1982), and Taking Darwin Seriously (1986), acknowledges that evolution is religious: ‘Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion—a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. I am an ardent evolutionist and an ex-Christian, but I must admit in this one complaint. . . the literalists [i.e., creationists] are absolutely right. Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today.’4

            Ruse didn’t always espouse the religious foundation of evolution. But since evolution asks the same questions as religion—telling us where we came from, where we’re going, and what we should do on the way—he had to admit the religious nature of his chosen materialistic worldview. For Ruse, and he is correct, ‘evolution is a kind of secular ideology, an explicit substitute for Christianity.’ If evolution is a ‘substitute for Christianity,’ and Christianity is religious, then evolution, as Christianity’s substitute, is religious.

            The distinction in this debate, therefore, is not between religion and science, as so many claim, but between one religion and science (materialistic evolution) and another religion and science (creation science).

            Is it any wonder that Darwin’s most vocal defender, Thomas Henry Huxley (1825-1895), in addition to being called ‘Darwin’s Bulldog,’ was also known as ‘Pope Huxley’? ‘Huxley personalized “nature,” referring to it as “fair, just and patient,” “a strong angel who is playing for love.”’5 How can this be when evolution is described as ‘blind’?6 Huxley’s