Science in Adam and Eve?

A group for members of all religions, or no religion at all, to talk about religion

  1. parkurman123

    parkurman123 Fapstronaut

    82
    56
    18
    Adam lived 800 years in that time you can make a lot of children, to live so long you have to have a perfect gene and non-damaged chromosomes, so their children inherited it and there was no risk in incest like today. Today this is different, everyone in your family often have the same damaged genes but not always. If those damaged genes and chromosomes would not exist there would be no risk for incest.
     
  2. parkurman123

    parkurman123 Fapstronaut

    82
    56
    18
    The Fossil Record: Proof of Noah's Flood or Evolution
     
  3. this is absolutely fucking retarded. Evolution is a fact.
     
  4. parkurman123

    parkurman123 Fapstronaut

    82
    56
    18
    no transitional fossil has ever been found.
    5 Scientific Facts Prove the Theory of Evolution is False | Hidden Truth

    The Failure of Darwin's Theory
     
    Last edited: Nov 5, 2018
  5. Yeah this just tells me that you have never even bothered to educate yourself on the science of evolution. This is a fallacy that someone with even highschool-level biology education should be able to rebuke.
    No transitional fossils you say?
     
  6. parkurman123

    parkurman123 Fapstronaut

    82
    56
    18
    You do not believe me ask evolutionists, who devoted their lives to find them:
    Even Charles Darwin said "as by Evolution theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" and "Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory" .Today after 150 years and millions of fossils later the proof still does not exist. famous dr. Colin Patterson of the British museum of natural history was asked why evolutionary transitions were not included in his book Patterson said "I fully agree with your comments on the lack of direct illustration of evolutionary transitions in my book.if I knew of any I would certainly have included them I will lay it on the line- there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument." Dr. Karl Warner spent 17 years traveling to museums and dig sites around the globe, photographing thousands of original fossils and fossil layers were they were found. His research revealed a lack of evidence for evolution theory including no transitional fossils and clear evidence that shows animals remained the same over the supposed millions of years of evolution
     
  7. nice copy-pasta there buddy. I just showed you a list of "transitional fossils", you did not even look at them but went and copy pasted some bs not adding to the argument. So, where is this missing fossil that you are asking for? I just provided plenty.
     
  8. parkurman123

    parkurman123 Fapstronaut

    82
    56
    18
    Listen, if they have found them it would be on the news. Everyone knows about the fossils you showed (it is not a secret) but there is not one such fossil for which one could make a watertight argument. There are fossils that do not fit with a theory like the drepanosaurids which confused evolutionists and have no solid explanation. Even if they discover transitional fossils it would not help much, because they have to explain how the new information come to be.
     
  9. they wouldnt be news because that whole arguement for "transitional fossils" only comes from people who dont even understand evolution, that is only religious crazies. In the scientific community, evolution is an established fact, not only supported by archeology but also countless other fields, such as genetics.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 21, 2018
  10. Theinquiringmind

    Theinquiringmind Fapstronaut

    241
    7,336
    123
    We don't know if Adam actually lived that long for one and secondly science shows that it's not plausible. From what I've seen it's very possible that the Adam and Eve story was based off of preexisting Sumerian myth.
     
  11. Theinquiringmind

    Theinquiringmind Fapstronaut

    241
    7,336
    123
    If evolution were false, it would make headline news, all over the world. Don't trust everything you see on the internet.
     
  12. Theinquiringmind

    Theinquiringmind Fapstronaut

    241
    7,336
    123
    You're probably quote mining Darwin.
     
  13. yep. Bible totally stole the creation story from the babylonians while they were in exile there. Same thing goes to moses birth story, which was based off sargon
     
  14. I have several options with this thread:

    1) Report this thread for being posted in the off-topic section.
    2) Recommend a podcast I recently listened to.
    3) Quote St Augustine's The Literal Meaning of Genesis

    Think I'll go for the latter.

    A non-Christian knows something about the earth, the heavens, and the other elements of this world, about the motion and orbit of the stars and even their size and relative positions, about the predictable eclipses of the sun and moon, the cycles of the years and the seasons, about the kinds of animals, shrubs, stones, and so forth, and this knowledge he holds to as being certain from reason and experience.

    Now, it is a disgraceful and dangerous thing for an infidel to hear a Christian, presumably giving the meaning of Holy Scripture, talking nonsense on these topics; and we should take all means to prevent such an embarrassing situation, in which people show up vast ignorance in a Christian and laugh it to scorn. The shame is not so much that an ignorant individual is derided, but that people outside the household of faith think our sacred writers held such opinions, and, to the great loss of those for whose salvation we toil, the writers of our Scripture are criticized and rejected as unlearned men.

    If they find a Christian mistaken in a field which they themselves know well and hear him maintaining his foolish opinions about our books, how are they going to believe those books in matters concerning the resurrection of the dead, the hope of eternal life, and the kingdom of heaven, when they think their pages are full of falsehoods and on facts which they themselves have learnt from experience and the light of reason? Reckless and incompetent expounders of Holy Scripture bring untold trouble and sorrow on their wiser brethren when they are caught in one of their mischievous false opinions and are taken to task by those who are not bound by the authority of our sacred books. For then, to defend their utterly foolish and obviously untrue statements, they will try to call upon Holy Scripture for proof and even recite from memory many passages which they think support their position, although they understand neither what they say nor the things about which they make assertion.
    (St Augustine, The Literal Meaning of Genesis, AD 415).

    Translation: Christians who bring science into the creation story make Christianity look stupid.

    The comments in this thread are proving his point. I don't really care for converting people because I think all shall be saved if they want to no matter what, but if you're someone who thinks people need to convert... Well, to quote Augustine you're being reckless and incompetent.

    It's amazing in AD 415, we had Christian leaders saying such wise and now in 2018, we have Ken Ham and Answers in Genesis. Why did we turn this wonderful work of literature into some sort of crazy dogmatic theological scientific rulebook? SMH
     
    Theinquiringmind likes this.
  15. Anyway, if anyone's interested here's Adam and Eve's rap battle that was left out of the Bible.

     
  16. Castielle

    Castielle Fapstronaut

    Never underestimate humanity's stubbornness when it comes to avoiding the idea of a God who holds them responsible for their actions. It's much less threatening to one's way of life to simply tell yourself God doesn't exist and all of the intricacies of the universe just created themselves over time than it is to accept that their is an intelligent design to the earth and the universe that could only have possibly come from a creator.
     
    Deleted Account and Hros like this.
  17. yeah guys its all just a big conspiracy by the world's scientific community because theyre scared of jesus!
     
  18. Castielle

    Castielle Fapstronaut

    Not what I said at all. And there are plenty of scientists who recognize the universe could not have created itself, because they are logical and understand that that would be impossible.
     
  19. Theinquiringmind

    Theinquiringmind Fapstronaut

    241
    7,336
    123
    I'm not saying God doesn't exist or the universe wasn't designed. I don't believe the universe created itself or that everything came from nothing; I don't know where everything came from. I would really love to know if God exists or not. Remember, I'm agnostic not atheist. Also what do you say to Christian scientists and layman Christians who accept evolution? I have faith that scientists would be intellectually honest enough to admit that they wrong about evolution if it were proven to be false. On the matter of intelligent design, I have trouble believing that God is all-loving when I see a supposedly fine tuned universe that is mostly devoid of life along with issues on the human body such as: male testicles that are outside of the body being exposed to the rough elements of nature rather than being protected inside of the body, the fact that our eyes naturally see things upside down but that our brain corrects it so that we see everything upright and also the fact that God made it so that humans have to go through the uncomfortable, disgusting process of pooping in order to get rid of waste among with many other imperfections... I'm sorry but I don't see love or compassion in that design.
     
  20. Theinquiringmind

    Theinquiringmind Fapstronaut

    241
    7,336
    123
    Again I also ask if humans are God's highest creation then why are we created from the dirty dust of the earth with a body that's vulnerable to disease and damage?
     

Share This Page