 |
|
|
|
|
October 9th, 2013
02:27 PM ET
Creationists taunt atheists in latest billboard warBy Eric Marrapodi, CNN Belief Blog Co-Editor (CNN)– A new video billboard in New York's Times Square has a message from creationists, "To all of our atheist friends: Thank God you're wrong." The video advertisement at 42nd Street and Eighth Avenue in Manhattan is one of several billboards going up this week in New York, San Francisco and Los Angeles, paid for by Answers in Genesis. Answers in Genesis is best known as the multimillion-dollar Christian ministry behind the Creation Museum outside Cincinnati. The museum presents the case for Young Earth creationism, following what it says is a literal interpretation of the book of Genesis, which says the Earth was created by God in six days less than 10,000 years ago. Ken Ham, president of Answers in Genesis, said the idea for the advertisements came from an atheist billboard in Times Square at Christmas. During the holidays, the American Atheists put up a billboard with images of Santa Claus and Jesus that read: "Keep the Merry, dump the myth." “The Bible says to contend for the faith,” Ham said. “We thought we should come up with something that would make a statement in the culture, a bold statement, and direct them to our website. "We're not against them personally. We're not trying to attack them personally, but we do believe they're wrong," he said. "From an atheist's perspective, they believe when they die, they cease to exist. And we say 'no, you're not going to cease to exist; you're going to spend eternity with God or without God. And if you're an atheist, you're going to be spending it without God.' " Dave Silverman, president of the American Atheists, said he felt sad for creationists when he saw the billboards. "They refuse to look at the real world. They refuse to look at the evidence we have, and they offer none," Silverman said. "They might as well be saying, 'Thank Zeus you're wrong' or 'Thank Thor you're wrong.' " Silverman said he welcomed another competitor to marketplace, noting that after atheists bought a billboard two years ago in Times Square that read "You KNOW it's a myth," the Catholic League purchased competing space at the entrance to the Lincoln Tunnel for a sign that read "You KNOW it's true." "I would suggest, if they're actually trying to attract atheists, they should talk about proof and reason to believe in their god, not just some pithy play on words," Silverman said. Ham says part of the goal of the campaign is to draw people to the website for Answers in Genesis, where he offers a lengthy post on his beliefs for the proof of God. Ham insists that this campaign is in keeping with their overall mission. "We're a biblical authority ministry. We're really on about the Bible and the Gospel. Now, we do have a specialty in the area of the creation account and Genesis because that's where we say God's word has come under attack." Ham said Answers in Genesis made the decision to split its marketing budget for the ministry between a regional campaign for the museum and this billboard campaign, rather than a national campaign. IRS filings for the ministry in recent years have shown a yearly operating budget of more than $25 million. Ham said the marketing budget is about 2% of that, about $500,000 a year. Though they are waiting for all the bills to come due for this campaign, he said he expected it to cost between $150,000 and $200,000. Silverman noted that his billboards were not video and cost approximately $25,000 last year. He said another campaign was in the works for this year. "They're throwing down the gauntlet, and we're picking it up," Silverman said, adding that his group would "slap them in the face" with it. Ham said that despite criticism from other Christians for being negative and the usual criticisms from secularists he received on his social media accounts, the advertisements have been a success. "We wanted people talking about them, and we wanted discussion about this. We wanted people thinking about God," Ham said. The Creation Museum and the theory of Young Earth creationism are widely reviled by the broader science community. In a YouTube video posted last year titled "Creationism Is Not Appropriate For Children," Bill Nye the Science Guy slammed creationism, imploring parents not to teach it to their children. "We need scientifically literate voters and taxpayers for the future," he said. "We need engineers that can build stuff and solve problems." The museum responded with its own video. For the past 30 years, Gallup Inc. has been tracking American opinions about creationism. In June 2012, Gallup's latest findings showed that 46% of Americans believed in creationism, 32% believed in evolution guided by God, and 15% believed in atheistic evolution. For as long as Gallup has conducted the survey, creationism has remained far and away the most popular answer, with 40% to 47% of Americans surveyed saying they believed that God created humans in their present form at one point within the past 10,000 years. The Creation Museum said it recently welcomed its 2 millionth visitor since its opening in 2007. soundoff (8,748 Responses)« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 Next »
« Previous entrySenate chaplain: Shutdown is 'madness'
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Daniel Burke with contributions from Eric Marrapodi and CNN's worldwide news gathering team.  |
|
|
|
GOD CREATED and HE CREATED EX NIHILO because GOD IS GOD. But atheism is Total stupidity.
Atheists it's been in the Bible for more than 2,500 years, back then your were called fools and unbelievers. Using Fancy words with grammatical roots in the Greek or Latin is not going to make you escape. Dinosaurs means nothing else than large lizards, way back then were called dragons etc. Atoms, particles or any other elements did make themselves into existence. Don't confuse development with evolving, they are not exactly the same. GOD CREATED
Atheism is stupidity all over, here, there, anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, every single time and forevermore.
Still waiting for you to get past the blathering phase and to start providing actual evidence for your believer crap. . .
HotAir indeed,
Creation itself is the EVIDENCE for the Creator GOD The fool is unable to see it because he/she/them can't barely see beyond their noses.
"We don't know." is a way better answer than "Some (my) unproven god did it.". I'll take Dawkins, Hawking, Krauss et al, over a Babble Humper every day unless the Humpers come up with actual evidence.
Creation can also be used to "prove" the Big Bang theory or that a committee of zombies created the earth.
Summary: NO PROOF. ZILCH.
Well that statement is just a particle in the mountain range of Evidence that atheism is Total stupidity, all over, here, there, anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, every single time and forevermore.
Salero21,
I knew you had NO REAL ANSWER. Try again.
😀 😀 It should read instead Atoms, particles etc. or any other elements did NOT bring themselves into existence. To believe otherwise is Total stupidity; GOD CREATED THANKS GOD
Thank you, Salero21. Your posts have convinced me to give up Christianity. I'm glad people like you exist, because it will convince plenty of others about how illogical and ridiculous that worldview is and how most Christians don't even understand their own faith. Keep spreading the good news, my friend.
Cpt Obvious....vapid is analogous to empty.....and is a useful, non threatening way to discuss ones argument......stupid is a pejorative term, and as should be Obvious to you, you should know that.....cranberry sauce, or not?
"Vapid" was the word you used to justify the pejorative "ignorant." If I had called your statement "ignorant' instead of "stupid," you would have whined just as much. Stop being such a pvvsy.
I don't see a problem with calling a 2,000+ year old hypothesis with absolutely zero actual evidence, or the people clinging to it, stupid.
One more piece in the mountain range of Evidence that atheism is Total stupidity all over, here, there, anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, always, every single time and forevermore. Is forevermore because as Heaven is forevermore so is the other place that IS NOT Heaven. To that other place, all of those who choose not to believe will find themselves forevermore also.
Go ahead – provide us with a conclusive argument, complete with actual evidence, for heaven and hell. I bet you or any other Babble Humper cannot do that. You are foaming at the mouth, blathering, full of sh!t and most likely mentally ill.
Observer, to quote Ronald Reagan.....there you go again.....Harvard may give out honors and awards to intelligent people.... I concede that.....But, I will never concede that intelligence gives one the ability to put together a coherent sentence, or the ability to walk and chew gum at the same time.....Who was it that said, the world is full of educated derelicts???? Please, please, please stop making attacks on someone just cuz they ask questions, or pose statement and arguments you find unable to provide a factual answer for.....Are you and Cpt. Obvious having Thanksgiving dinner together????
vinster76,
"Please, please, please stop making attacks on someone just cuz they ask questions, or pose statement and arguments you find unable to provide a factual answer for"
lol. When do you fantasize that that happened? You are the one unable to support your claim that Harvard gave a law degree with honors to an imbecile and you are the one who claimed that Obama had the worst ratings ever. Ooops.
I heard someone recently voice an argument for atheism by asking this question: "why are 90% of scientists non-believers"? of course, according to this logic, the implied assumption is they were atheists AFTER acquiring their education because the evidence wasn't there. I have another theory...Perhaps they were unbelievers in a creator BEFORE they sought their education, and looked for the evidence to support their non-believing viewpoint. Let's face it: having a belief in God presupposes one having some humility in recognizing one doesn't have all the answers, cannot possibly know everything, and just maybe it was intended that way by God to reinforce to humanity that He, and He alone is God, we are not....Humbling oneself in the acquiescence that we are not the center of the universe, He is, is problematic for human beings. As C.S. Lewis once wrote, the greatest sin of mankind is pride.....puffed-up, conceited, selfish pride....Though Mr. Lewis has been dead a half-century, his assessment has stood the test of time....
This completely IGNORES the reality that scientists are considered to be among our smartest people. Looks like they were already smart BEFORE they got their education and already were atheists.
Observer – you put entirely too much importance to education. You seem to think that if someone graduates from Harvard, or is a scientist, then we need to roll out the red carpet, and prostrate ourselves before their presence....Really?? OMG – oops, did I just say that??? OMG???
vinster76,
You are the one to insist that Harvard Law School gives out degrees with honors to imbeciles.
It's safe to believe that you weren't academically qualified enough to get one.
I don't think that's what Observer was implying at all, and I think it's rather stupid to reply as if he was saying that.
If god existed, I think he'd be at least as knowable and provable as math or chemistry, and all muslim terrorists and Christian abortion clinic bombers use the same math and chemistry even though they disagree about god.
Cpt. Obvious: you refer to my comments as "rather stupid". Is this a character trait of liberals and atheists that they call names when someone disagrees with them? You may not realize that Observer and I were on another post together earlier tonight. He did make some rather farfetched implications to my posts..So, since you don't know that, I will forgive you for your ignorant rant...And no, ignorant as used in this sentence is not name calling, but rather, a description of your vapid argument.....By the way, what are you having for Thanksgiving, turkey or ham?
Why is it not "name calling" when you call my argument "vapid," but it is name calling when I call your statement "stupid?"
Cpt. Obvious refers to comments by Vinster76 as being "rather stupid" for making claims that I NEVER made.
Vinster76 says "Is this a character trait of liberals and atheists that they call names when someone disagrees with them?" and refers to our Harvard educated president as "imbecilic". Ooooops.
Christians are most always whiners and hypocrites. We see both exhibited above. If I call his statement "stupid," I'm calling him a name, but if he calls my argument "ignorant," it's perfectly fine. And lets all whine about it for ten days, too.
@Cpt. Obvious,
"If I call his statement "stupid," I'm calling him a name, but if he calls my argument "ignorant,"
Ignorance means without knowledge.
Stupid means unintelligent and lacking the capacity to learn things.
Ignorance can be fixed. Stupid is permanent.
Paul,
Please support a reference dictionary that says "stupid is permanent".
Sadly, as entertaining as I found both Obvious and Cpt. Observer, I will not spar with either of you anymore.....Neither of you provided intelligent rebuttals to my statements re Obama, atheism et al......Both of you utilize the ad hominem attack due to an inability to present cogent arguments....I have a strict rule not to engage in protracted debate with those below my intellectual capacity. You both fall into that category.....Have you been schooled in the Bashir school of argumentation? When all else fails, attack personally?? I have toyed with you long enough, I grow tired of your childish antics....And what really ticks me off is NEITHER of you have answered my questions as to your Thanksgiving dinner! Annoying to say the least....My wife is looking at me with longing eyes, so I must attend to business......This pause in the action allows both of you to lick your wounds and regroup......Next time you come on here, please be polished and ready for rational debate.....Ciao......
typo: should be "please supply"
vinster76,
Good one. Lack FACTS, lose battle, declare victory, retreat. lol.
Congrats on having a spouse who finds whining hypocrisy attractive.
I don't know about anyone else, but I started out a believer but facts just didn't support the belief.
and I started as an atheist, and became a believer....I just found the evidence for a Creator God too compelling....
None of your evidence is verifiable by measurement and/or independent observation.
What evidence? There is no actual evidence for any god.
Sure you did.......
tallula13,
In your experience, where does information come from?
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGgXpsfcnw0&w=420&h=315]
Meyer speaks of "information" as evidence for ID; however, his colleague William Dembski has conceded that his "Design Filter" cannot distinguish between "actual" design as opposed to "apparent" design. This is because there are natural mechanisms which can generate novel "information" content and select from among the variants containing this novel "information" to yield functional systems, i.e. evolution is itself a designer of "complex-specified information." Again, the difference returns to proposed mechanisms generating this "information" where evolution has clearly observable, testable, applicable and falsifiable mechanisms as opposed to the untestable, unverifiable and unfalsifiable "mechanism" of ID/creationism.
I must concede I could be wrong about God and evolution. God could be real and evolution could be false. To falsify evolution in my mind (and the minds of virtually all evolution supporters), one need only show a rabbit fossil in the pre-Cambrian, human fossils alongside dinosaur fossils, a true chimera, or the special creation of an organism ex nihilo. Not sure what evidence I would require to believe in a god, but if a god exists, I'm sure it knows and could make this evidence available. Still, I'm willing to admit I could be completely wrong and I am ever open to new evidence.
Paul, I'll ask you again: Is there any evidence that would cause you to accept evolution? Is it possible that the God of Bible does not exist?
Regardless of what anyone has believed at any point in time, there is no actual (factual, objective, independent, verifiable, repeatable) evidence for the existence of god. None, zip, nada, nothing, zero.
They get hungry, too. And then there's ye ol' peer pressure thang if they wanna eat.
So you think it is not possible to "humble" oneself because they do not believe?? You are kidding us right? Atheists DO NOT CLAIM to have all the answers. We leave that to religion. We do not claim to have absolute truth and we change our faulty theories when they are proven wrong by correct theories in lieu of factual evidences. We do not claim to be god....how can we? We don't believe because the evidence is not there to prove there is a god. Self pride is the contaminant of a false sense of reality and one's SELF. It has nothing to do with god and has it's roots in psychology and behaviorism. These are two other sciences.You would'nt make a very good scientist. You need to know there are very well developed and understood fields of evidences sciences that are much more revealing and truthful than the bible.
It is really not that hard to find the evidence of supernatural God. Here in our small Christian community, remote viewing, miraculuous instantaneous healing, creation of matters are quite commonplace. My son has strong atheist tendency since he is a strong independent thinker but even he could not deny them. Within 15 miles radius of my residence, there are several places where the miraculous are readily observable and undeniable. It is lack of effort and ignorance is generally the real reasons behind people who do not believe in God. You can easily google these things, so many of them. Just google "Joshua Mills gold dust miracle" and that is one of many supernatural things that God does. I myself have been used by God in the creation of these miraculous gold particles in a number of occasions. Remote viewing is another thing that cannot be explained except with the supernatural. If you have not experienced these things, well you are missing out !
While using Google for "Joshua Mills gold dust miracle", be sure to look at the video that shows how he fools people with his simple parlor magic trick.
Why is it that when a pagan performs magick, he is condemed, but when a christian performs magick it's a miracle?
None of that has anything to do with god, though. It may just be phenomena that we don't fully understand yet. Instantly assuming it's god, is where the logic falls off a cliff, even if that sillyness is true.
I WAS HEALED OF HEART DISEASE BY MY FAITH IN JESUS / YESHUA
Nevertheless, this argument will be resolved very soon.
the atheist, the muslims, the buddhist, the mormons, the jehova witnesess, and everybody else will soon have their belief verified.
THE BIBLE SAYS CERTAIN EVENTS WILL HAPPEN AT THE END TIMES.
WE ARE NOW IN THE END TIMES. THE END OF EVIL MEN CONTROLLING THE EARTH IS NEAR.
THE LORD HIMSELF WILL SOON RULE THE EARTH IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.
So lets wait and see who is right, and who is wrong.
why is it that William Lane Craig consistently comes out of top of debates with atheists, time after time, after time? Why is that? If the argument against a creator was SO strong, why aren't atheists winning the debates. There have been numerous debates where the audience was asked who won, the atheist or the believer....Guess what? Yep, you guessed it...time after time the audience sided with the believer.....15% believe in atheistic evolution....Hmmm.....I guess that means they are the smartest in the bunch, and the rest of us don't have a clue......I feel bad for the atheist Silverman, it must be tough to have nothing to live for, or to be so hateful to God, you are blinded by that same hatred...I guess he didn't get enough cookies as a kid.......Merry Christmas Dave! Ha!
vinster76,
Christians constantly BRAG that they are the huge MAJORITY in this country.
Then you claim that there is ANY significance to audiences supporting the believer. lol.
Yo Observer, you're back......nice hearing from you......Where does it say in my post, my goodness you like to put words in my mouth, that Christians are the majority????? The article says 15% of people are in agreement with atheistic evolution, it did not say the rest were Christians.......please read carefully.......my point is the VAST majority of people WORLD WIDE believe in a creator God. I have not come within miles of claiming that God is the Christian God....So, please lighten up, open your mind, and please stop arguing for the sake of argument, but rather, present cogent arguments for your point of view. I stand by my statement that Craig consistently wins in debates with atheists....It is a fact. You may not like what I just wrote, but you cannot factually dispute it......Your argument here is not with me, but with the atheistic argument itself....By the way, are you having a turkey or a ham on Thursday, or both???
vinster76,
I never said that you said that the majority of people here are Christians. They do and statistics support them. Please try to read what I wrote and not what you wish I had said.
"I stand by my statement that Craig consistently wins in debates with atheists....It is a fact. You may not like what I just wrote, but you cannot factually dispute it......"
I have no idea who this Craig character is and couldn't possibly care less. I'd guess 99% of people never heard of him either. Do you REALLY think that atheists need a SPOKESMAN to tell people that they don't believe in a god or gods? Get real. That is ALL that all atheists have in common. Keep pretending they don't.
William Lane Craig is probably the leading Christian apologist around today. He's famous for his debates, and has a big fan base of devotees, who insist he wins every debate (in their perfectly objective opinion of course) given that winners are seldom declared by any judges or audiences (although once in a while an audience poll is taken).
His favorite arguments are the Kalam Cosmological Argument–basically the Argument from Existence, or "first cause" argument, and the Moral Argument ("...but, there would be no objective morality without God!") He sometimes uses others, but those are his two favorities. IronChariots. org does a good job taking those arguments down.
Craig (or WLC) is good on a tactical level, but he is hampered by a whiny voice and the poor selection of arguments available to try to argue for god's existence.
BTW, you are absolutely correct that the only thing atheists have in common is that we don't believe in gods, but theists consistently try to build atheism up to be more than that. Sam Harris is right–atheism isn't even an ism.
Dandintac,
Thanks for the info. I figured I wasn't missing anything worthwhile.
It's good to know the arguments, because theists pull them out all the time on message boards like these, but they are generally easy to handle by just about any intelligent skeptic, even those who are unfamiliar with them. It's also worth looking for the debate between WLC and Sam Harris on YouTube. I love watching WLC squirm as Harris takes down Catholicism.
There's a reason why people who argue to support what the Bible says are called "apologists". Perfect definition.
Bro, you realise that William Lane Craig fully accepts the Scientific theory of biological evolution by natural selection, the big bang theory, the generally accepted ages of the earth and the universe. This just goes to show that the only unreasonable people in this argument are the Young Earth Creationists like the folks at Answers in Genesis. I reckon we can have intelligent arguments one way or the other about the existence of God without denying the work of science of the past 500 years! It's not unreasonable to conclude No God or to conlude God, but to deny demonstrated scientific facts is truly, truly, truly moronic and anti-intellectual!
No offense dude, but Christians ALWAYS lose those debates. They have no argument at all. The only people that actually think they won are Christians, so they intentionally have their "debates" in front of a Christian audience. They have NO arguments at all that are based on fact or logic. They quote scriptures and try to act like science is wrong, but have never once picked up an actual science book.
This should work:
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DGgXpsfcnw0&w=420&h=315]
Meyer speaks of information as evidence for ID; however, his colleague William Dembski has conceded that his "Design Filter" cannot distinguish between "actual" design as opposed to "apparent" design. This is because there are natural mechanisms which can generate novel "information" content and select from among the variants containing this novel "information" to yield functional systems, i.e. evolution is itself a designer of "complex-specified information." Again, the difference returns to proposed mechanisms generating this "information" where evolution has clearly observable, testable, applicable and falsifiable mechanisms as opposed to the untestable, unverifiable and unfalsifiable "mechanism" of ID/creationism.
I must concede I could be wrong about God and evolution. God could be real and evolution could be false. To falsify evolution in my mind (and the minds of virtually all evolution supporters), one need only show a rabbit fossil in the pre-Cambrian, human fossils alongside dinosaur fossils, a true chimera, or the special creation of an organism ex nihilo. Not sure what evidence I would require to believe in a god, but if a god exists, I'm sure it knows and could make this evidence available. Still, I'm willing to admit I could be completely wrong and I am ever open to new evidence.
Paul, I'll ask you again: Is there any evidence that would cause you to accept evolution? Is it possible that the God of Bible does not exist?
Meyer is a fraud. He presents NO evidence at all. He just says, "well cells have nano technology so how could they possibly have evolved?" He's a paid liar. His books are an absolute joke. Surrounding lies with facts does not make the lies correct. ID is creationism in disguise. I can't believe people are gullible enough to fall for his nonsense.
Hmm..looks like the embedded video didn't show up. Let me try again:
If that didn't work, here's the link to the debate between Stephen Meyer and Michael Shermer:
http://www.discovery.org/v/1111
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kD4grsoI4lo&feature=player_detailpage
Oh, it showed up alright. It's just so ridiculously stupid that nobody cares.
(deep thoughts by Paul)
Notice how ALL of the money spent by Answers in Genesis is for advertising, but not a single dollar for scientific research.
Also, it should be noted that Young Earth Creationists like Ham and the recently imprisoned Kent Hovind– claim that T-rex had those huge teeth for cracking open coconut husks (their primary diet according to these quacks), since there was no death or killing "before the fall".
Generally– IMHO, if you believe that you are in telepathic communications with an invisible man in the sky, you may be CRAZY.
"... claim that T-rex had those huge teeth for cracking open coconut husks."
Do you have a source for that claim? I read that they claimed the T-Rex was vegetarian, but I've never read that they specifically ate coconuts. I think this is another example of an atheist's imagination run amuck. They interpret things the way they want to interpret them instead of paying attention to what was acutally said.
I've heard the story multiple times from multiple sources. I don't know if it's printed anywhere on a plaque or brochure, but this report says that the "guides" explain that was the reason for the T-rex's long teeth.
http://www.science20.com/fish_feet/t_rex_ate_coconuts
Are you seriously telling me you have never seen Kent Hovind's videos? I don't buy it for a second! Yes, Kent did claim that dinosaurs and humans walked the earth together and there was no killing before original sin. Yes, Kent did claim that a giant ice canopy surround the earth for thousands of years until god melted it creating the great flood. Yes, Kent is a moron and is in jail for fraud and tax evasion. Sorry Paul. You don't need to sell your religion by lying. Spread it to folks by explaining the benefits and good things involved. Jesus would not want you to lie to spread his religion like an advertising company.
One more piece of Evidence among millions of why atheism is Total stupidity all over, here, there, anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, every single time and forevermore. 😀
So CNN is sayin' the Christians are using tauntology??
😀 😀 😀 ROFLOL!!
Oh my gosh! These atheists were so right!!!
After all the experiments- evolution is proven...here is a lab experiment for anyone that is interested.
Take some organic matter put it in a hole and give it enough time it will come alive.
Your experiment proves nothing because:
a) the Theory of Evolution is NOT about how life started, rather, what it does once it exists (abiogenesis deals with origins).
b) your experiment does not accurately simulate ANY of the conditions that are normally present when evolution occurs.
Like a typical religious nut– you are clueless.
From the gooey stew through the zoo that ended up with you, eh 😉
The theory of evolution as it stands, the Darwinian evolution has a lot of loopholes and even scientist have trouble admitting they understand Macro evolution.
Scientists have questions regarding specific rates and underlying mechanisms of macroevolution, but there is no real debate regarding whether or not macroevolution occurred.
That statement is true. In the absence of evidence for, and also given that all that the current scientific evidence could establish is the common descent of living organisms. What macroevolution requires is more than a common ancestry for living organisms: there must be a natural mechanism by which the diversity of life-forms we see on Earth can be formed, without the need for any direction for any mechanism to foster such. That mechanism is precisely what we don’t have evidence for and in the absence of such it fails to explain human origins.
If I'm interpreting you correctly, that mechanism is more or less mutation and selection, i.e. the same mechanism that produces observable speciation events and novel functional morphology at gross anatomical scales (e.g. the Pod Mrcaru lizards). I would further add that the human ancestral lineage of temporally and morphologically overlapping forms is sufficient evidence of common descent to all but those who, for a priori religious purposes, reject the evidence based upon their faith-driven unreasonable doubts. I would further add, that those who make this rejection, never seem to offer any evidence for any alternative mechanisms . . .
The mechanism is genetic mutations, sorted by natural selection. What mechanism do you suggest prevents small changes from adding up over time? You people keep referencing some imaginary mechanism that allows evolution to occur on the long term. There is NO DIFFERENCE between micro & macro evolution. They are both evolution, genetic mutations sorted by natural selection and are 100% proven, without a doubt in the scientific community. If you disagree, you are welcome to run experiments to show the data is wrong. But wait, you wont because you aren't a scientist and probably have never read a science book in your life... but yet you know that evolution is wrong on the longterm. LOL
Why lie? Scientists do not say that at all. Macro evolution is not any different than micro. Macro is just the result of millions of years of micro evolution. Oh yeah evolution has a lot of loopholes!!! Those damn attorneys really need to get their theory together!
You really have no clue, do you?
I know others are explaining this, but it might help for someone else to chip in and phrase it a little differently. It's also worthwhile, because the same fallacious thinking at work in your mind is extremely common.
First, evolution is not a theory about the BEGINNING of life. That's abiogenesis. We don't know how life started, but we have made a lot of headway. Evolution by Natural Selection is a theory regarding change and diversification of life over time.
Furthermore, the fact that we still do not know how life started is no excuse to invoke the God of the Gaps (we don't know–therefore God). Be aware that history is full of things that were once thought to be controlled by gods and their magic. The sun was once thought to be a god. What other explanation was there? Right? Using arguments from ignorance reduces your god to (Tyson's words) an "ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance".
It may be possible that in our lifetime, we may actually stumble on exactly how life started, and replicate it in the lab. We may be close, or still far away. We may also, figure out the cause of the Big Bang, and demonstrate that it was a natural event. When this happens, God will be unemployed as the light of science and reason is cast on the last dark pocket where he may be hiding.
So prove it.
"They refuse to look at the real world.
They refuse to look at the evidence we have, and they offer none," Silverman said.
Here is what you are asking for, Mr. Silverman!
http://www.holy-19-harvest.com
"UNIVERSAL MAGNIFICENT MIRACLES"
See this.
Atheist Billboards Declare Prayer, Bibles Not Helping Disaster Victims
http://news.atheists.org/2013/11/25/disaster-relief/
To help the Disaster Victims is the Commandment of GOD;
So it is good to see that even atheists sometimes hearken to the Commandments of GOD and do good.
Otherwise, they would totally be captivated by their "selfish genes!"
http://www.holy-19-harvest.com
UNIVERSAL MAGNIFICENT MIRACLES
Not so GOOD by the Bishops if that is all they can do.
While at least $300 million has been pledged by nations around the world to help survivors of Super Typhoon Haiyan, the Catholic Bishop Conference of the Philippines, a billion-dollar non-government organization, has responded to the disaster by sending 1,000 bibles and 12,000 rosaries to survivors, according to CBS News. Additionally, the Pope tweeted for Catholics to pray for the typhoon victims. His message was retweeted 30,000 times.
Assumed miracles happen in EVERY FAITH in the world. Either they are all correct or none of them are. I lean towards the latter....
In over 2000 years of religion trying to masquerade as science– they have yet to produce one, single, testable, verifiable piece of scientific evidence of the supernatural, much less God's existence.
To help the Disaster Victims is the absolute Commadment of GOD;
whether some bishops fully obey or not to HIS Commandments is another thing.
We should Never blame GOD for the bad or wrong deeds of the scholars (of any Religion).
The Ultimate Evidence that unmistakably proves the Existence of GOD is the Language of Mathematics.
Nothing is random in the book of Universe, or in the book of Religion. Everything (=from the letters of our DNA, or the Letters of Scripture) is precisely Counted therein, from the very beginning!
http://www.holy-19-harvest.com
UNIVERSAL MAGNIFICENT MIRACLES
Craetionist – ICR and the Discovery Insti-tue are pushing the 46% maybe ?
Good news you are way off base.
How whales made the dramatic evolutionary shift from land to the sea
Minke whale genome and aquatic adaptation in cetaceans
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ng.2835.html
Plenty of money to be made teaching evolutionism. The educratists are joined at the hip to the Beast and that's an unholy marriage.
lol??
lol??
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Why teach s*ex or evolution in school?? Both carnal and the adherents think they invented it.
OK atheist is not me this time is the Word of God in the Bible, that more than 2,500 years ago said:
Psalm 14:1a The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God." ...
Psalm 53:1a The fool has said in his heart, "There is no God," ...
Don't blame me, blame it on yourselves because that was said thousands of years ago and is true to this day. 🙂
Are you often bothered by the negative sentiments expressed in the Koran against Christians? Me neither.
No at all! I had a couple of Muslim friends, they were sort of receptive to the message. One of them even told me once "merry Christmas".
😀 😀 😀 OMG I can see the atheists clubbing me with their toothpicks till I die. 😀 😀
😀 😀 😀 😀
Atheism is Total stupidity all over, here, there, anywhere, everywhere, anytime, all the time, every time and forevermore.
Yeah! 😀 😀 😀
That's right!! 😀 😀 😀
Poor atheists they are going to club us/me with their toothpicks till me/us die, die, die! 😀 😀 😛
You are all fired!!
Hey! Watch it dude that slogan is mine.
The A&A's practice psychological warfare. Jesus said,
"Jhn 15:23
He that hateth me hateth my Father also."
I beieve in God.... His name is "The God Particle"! No "Bearded Wonder". No "Old man with a halo". No throne. No Pearly Gates. ... Well, maybe, if the "Pearly Gates" is the white-wash aura we see as the brain shuts down and the "angels" are angelic memories of people as our defensive mechanisms accept death and cease vilifying percieved threats. I suspect one day scientists will discover the force that animates mass and consolidates particles to form "creatures".
Correct, the bearded wonder woman doesn't do much for most. When did you stop beating on her??