Are we ALONE?

What are your opinions

  • yes...there are to many stars with planets, and some planets can produce life...and intellegence.

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • not sure....Scully keeps Moulder in the dark!!! Lucky baste

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    67

We may earn a small commission from affiliate links and paid advertisements. Terms

one word E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N. those things arent miracles, a baby forms in the womb when the sperm and egg meet, forming a zygote, and later forming into an embryo.

everything has evolved to best fit its environment. look at animals. look at finches (as darwin did) and you can clearly see that their differences are best suited for their individual environments. or look at rabits in different reigons. one could be brown and leaner while another could be pure white and a fatass. they are all adapted to their environments. hell even humans are adapted. im not being racist here, black people in africa have dark skin becasue there is more melonin (sp?) in their skin and helps protect them from the intense sun, and their larger nostrils provide more air flow for intense activity such as hunting or whatever.

these are just a SMALL amount of examples. and are seen worldwide.
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96+Nov 20 2003, 06:48 PM-->
@Nov 20 2003, 06:37 PM
do you even know how evolution works? it all branches off into things that are different. then organisms started to form. in organisms, sometimes a mutation will occur, randomly. in some cases this mutation will put the certain individual at an advantage over the other organisms in survival. this one will mate and pass his traits on, while the others with less desireable traits slowly die off. all you are left with is the better adapted organism. this continues to happen indefinitely, and is a very slow process. if the mutation occurs so many times the organism slowly becomes a completely different organism and will branch off in many directions.

here ya go incase you missed it

""in all the reading I’ve done in the life-sciences literature, I’ve never found a mutation that added information...All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not to increase it."

thats inconclusive. one because its one guy stating his opinion. two because he did not test every single mutation that has ever taken place. and three becasue people think of a mutation as being bad. something as small as a genetic mutation that would change what color hair or fur you have could be a mutation. but no one would think it was a mutation becasue it wasnt obvious.
 
Originally posted by SolReaver+Nov 20 2003, 06:39 PM-->
Silverchild79
@Nov 20 2003, 06:36 PM
with the sheer size of the universe it would be arogant to think we were alone

this is a foolish statement

explain your reasoning

I don't remember the number because it was a long time ago (junior year) when my AP World History teacher, possibly one of the smartest people I've ever met, liad it out for us.

"In the universe we know of X ammount of Galexies
containing X ammount of solar systems
containing X ammount of planets
let's say there is an .0001% chance for each of these planets to be able to sustain life
and let's say for all planets containing life there is an .0001% chance that it will be intelegant

So do the math and you'll find that by the odds there should be at least X ammount of planets, that we know of, which can sustain intelligant life. To think we are the ONLY planet with life would simply be arrogant"

I don't remember then final number but it was huge, and the percentage he used would seem modest. Taking our current hard knowledge of life per solar system there should be an 8ish% chance that life exists in every planet
 
ahhh......my post got deleted.........ohh well....

it was....


look at how a baby is formed in the womb. how can you say that is an accident?

Thats an easy one.....she didn't have the pill, he didn't have the rubber......baby was made.........hopefully baby had a brain, and learned from the perents mistakes........thats a little bit of Urban Evolution....
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 11:01 PM
i am not related to a monkey.

God created us, he said he did, and God does not lie because God is truth.

They you are not a homo sapien (aka a HUMAN) and I have no clue wtf you are!!!

P.S. God never talked to you, if you think he did, you should see a therapist :D
 
one word E-V-O-L-U-T-I-O-N. those things arent miracles, a baby forms in the womb when the sperm and egg meet, forming a zygote, and later forming into an embryo.


so why is the order that these things happen in, exactly the same for human birth? and when the order is disturbed, why do the babies end up with deformities?

everything has evolved to best fit its environment. look at animals. look at finches (as darwin did) and you can clearly see that their differences are best suited for their individual environments. or look at rabits in different reigons. one could be brown and leaner while another could be pure white and a fatass. they are all adapted to their environments. hell even humans are adapted. im not being racist here, black people in africa have dark skin becasue there is more melonin (sp?) in their skin and helps protect them from the intense sun, and their larger nostrils provide more air flow for intense activity such as hunting or whatever.


so why are african people more prone to skin cancer? you think white people didn't have ot hunt for there food?
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96+Nov 20 2003, 05:45 PM-->
look at how a baby is formed in the womb. how can you say that is an accident?

All mammals grow in the womb almost identically. In fact, in the first few weeks of development, ALL mammalian fetuses can NOT be told apart.

Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 05:45 PM
look at how trees convert CO2 into oxygen through photosynthesis. dude, its a miracle that had to have been designed.


Put a solar panel in front of a green light. It will produce a little more power than under any other color light.
Plants that randomly mutated to produce green leaves were more successful than other colors and were able to take hold over long periods of time.

saturn_boy96
@Nov 20 2003, 05:45 PM
look at a polar bears fur. its appears to be white, but when its analyzed it is actaully clear, and it can create energy for the bear. design is in everything.


Same thing here. A brown bear in a polar region is more likely to be spotted by other animals, just as a white rabbit in a wooded area. The ones that happen to mutate to fit in to their surroundings are the ones who survive. The one polar bear that mutated to grow clear, hollow fur was able to survive better in colder regions, and was able to pass its traits along. The rabbit with purple fur was spotted by predators and eaten.

I'm not saying I don't believe in God, but couldn't it have been set up this way, and not just have 'poofed' into existance?
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 06:45 PM

where? what errors? double standards? if you can prove one i will belive you becasue the bible is whole and must be taken as such.

Very well... you asked for it.

The Biblical picture of God can hardly be reconciled with the Christian teaching of 'God is love', e.g.,
All forms of life destroyed because of one imperfect species - Genesis 6:5,7, 7:23.
Human sacrifice commanded by God - Leviticus 27:28,29.
God agrees that Jephthah sacrifices his daughter as a thanksgiving - Judges 11:29-40.
God sends ten plagues on Egypt because Pharaoh will not release the Hebrews, but he deliberately hardens Pharaoh's heart so he refuses to release the Hebrews making the plagues necessary in the first place - God admits that this is so he can perform 'his wonders' (Exodus 11:9), i.e., wholesale mass slaughter of life in Egypt - Exodus 7:3-4,13-14, 10:1,20.
God sanctions slavery and a man selling his daughter - Exodus 21:2- 6,7.
Death demanded for heresy - Deuteronomy 13:1,2,5,14,15.
God says that if a man strikes 'his slave', male or female, and they do not die immediately, the man shall not be punished because 'the slave is his money (i.e., property)' - Exodus 21:20-21.
God orders people to slaughter their own relatives because they rejected Moses' religion; 3000 killed. Moses tells the killers that God would bless them for doing this by making them ordained for his service - Exodus 32:27-29.
A person to kill their own family for a difference of religion - Deuteronomy 13:6-10.
God demands death for anyone not circumcised - Genesis 17:9-14.
God demands the sick are to be driven out of the community - Numbers 5:1-4.
God burns people to death for complaining - Numbers 11:1.
God kills 24,000 people by a plague because one of them brought a Midianite woman to his tent - Numbers 25:6-9.
The curses of God upon the Hebrews (e.g. eating their own children) - Leviticus 26:14-39, Deuteronomy 28:15-68.
God arranges the Midianite slaughter - Judges 7:2,9,22. (Note: Numbers 31:1-18 states that God instructed the mass slaughter of Midianites, and the Lord 'slew every male', alongwith their rulers (31:7), and the Midianite women and children and animals were captured; Moses then demanded all the males, including babies and the women were to be slaughtered, but the young girls could be 'kept alive for yourselves' (31:18). This story records the extermination of the Midianites, but later on, God again instructs the slaugher of the Midianites (Judges 6:16), It is the same with the Amalekites - they are 'ALL destroyed' in 1 Samuel 15:8, but they are destroyed yet again in 1 Samuel 27:8-9 and everyone - men and women - are killed; however, they are killed (- for the 3rd time) in 1 Samuel 30:1,16-17 except for 400 young men. At long last, they are are finally killed off in 1 Chronicles 4:43 when the 'remnant' were destroyed.
The Spirit of God comes upon Samson and he murders over a thousand people - Judges 14:19, 15:14-15.
The Psalmist praises God for his 'steadfast love' but then details his slaughtering in the past - Psalm 136:10-21.
God deliberately deludes people so they will not be saved - 2 Thess 2:11-12.
A girl not found to be a virgin was to be killed - Deuteronomy 22:13- 21 (Note the same did not apply to men).
God kills a baby for its father's wrongdoing, ignoring the father's pleas - 2 Samuel 12:15-20.
God kills 70,000 men - 2 Samuel 24:15.
God meets his arch enemy Satan - whom he does not even recognise (Job 1:6-7), and they have a wager (Job 1:8-12) over how much suffering it would take before righteous Job will reject God. Job then has his whole family killed and livelihood ruined (1:13-19) and then is afflicted by a loathsome plague (2:7-8).

The Bible presents an interesting picture of God, i.e., a god who never changes (Malachi 3:6) but actually does frequently change his mind and even regrets what he's done ('repents') - Genesis 6:6,7, Exodus 32:14, 1 Samuel 15:35, 2 Samuel 24:16, 1 Chronicles 21:l5, Jeremiah l8:8,10, 26:3,l3,l9, 42:l0, Ezekiel 24:14, Joel 2:13, Amos 7:3. Although it is to be noted that Numbers 23:19 and 1 Samuel 15:2 say that God never repents.
It states that God is 'spirit', i.e., non-physical (John 4:24) and yet he is always called 'him' or 'he' as if he had a male body, and then it states that although spirit, he has feet (Psalm 18:9), arms (Jeremiah 27:5), wings (Psalm 36:7), hands (Job 27:11), eyes (Deuteronomy 8:3), a mouth (Isaiah 1:20), ears (2 Chronicles 6:40), nostrils (Exodus 15:8) and legs (Genesis 3:8). He also uses a razor - Isaiah 7:20. He also occasionally roars (Joel 3:16) and sometimes he even whistles (Isaiah 5:26). Although he has never been seen (John 1:18), he has actually been seen (Isa 6:1), and he even revealed his rear to Moses (Exodus 33:21-22).......

Want more? I'm armed to the teeth, baby... I could post this shit for tens and tens of pages...
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96+Nov 20 2003, 06:45 PM-->
SolReaver
@Nov 20 2003, 06:35 PM
...And once again, using the bible as a reference is foolish as the bible's own validity is questioned. Why believe in a book that is chock full of double standards, contradicitons, cruelty, errors. etc...


where? what errors? double standards? if you can prove one i will belive you becasue the bible is whole and must be taken as such.

how could we all have come from the same organic molecules


how could we have all been created by an unseen supernatural being with no proof of his existence? how is he omniscient omnipotent and omnipresent when there is much evil in this world? how do animals speak human language? i can go on, but i think you see my point ;)


how can you say he is unseen? look at how a baby is formed in the womb. how can you say that is an accident?

look at how trees convert CO2 into oxygen through photosynthesis. dude, its a miracle that had to have been designed.

look at a polar bears fur. its appears to be white, but when its analyzed it is actaully clear, and it can create energy for the bear. design is in everything.

well,


Genesis 1 vs. Genesis 2. One says that God created man last, on the sixth day, after he had already created the earth and populated it with plants and animals. Two says God created man before the animals, and the earth was barren when He made the garden of Eden for man to tend. Which account of Creation is the correct one? Or if they're just metaphorical, at which point does the Bible cease to be metaphor and become factual

2 chron 36:9 Jehoiachin was eight years old when he began to reign; he reigned three months and ten days in Jerusalem. He did what was evil in the sight of the LORD.

2 Kings 24:8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign; he reigned three months in Jerusalem. His mother's name was Nehushta daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem.

go here for a ton more

http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/cont...ra/by_book.html

even if you can somehow disprove all these contradictions, there are still many terrible things in the bible...like sanctioned murder, genocide, rape, torture, etc.

------------------------------------------------------


look at how a baby is formed in the womb. how can you say that is an accident?


I hate to shit on your parade, but the process in which a baby is born has been explained by science. Do a quick google search and im sure that you will learn about cell division and reproduction.

The rest of your arguments are called "arguments by design"

im gonna use the refutation from the atheism web cause it explains it the best

The origin of the Argument by Design is a feeling that the existence of something as incredibly intricate as, say, a human is so improbable that surely it can't have come about by chance; that surely there must be some external intelligence directing things so that humans come from the chaos deliberately.

But if human intelligence is so improbable, surely the existence of a mind capable of fashioning an entire universe complete with conscious beings must be immeasurably more unlikely? The approach used to argue in favor of the existence of a creator can be turned around and applied to the Creationist position.

This leads us to the familiar theme of "If a creator created the universe, what created the creator?", but with the addition of spiralling improbability. The only way out is to declare that the creator was not created and just "is" (or "was").

From here we might as well ask what is wrong with saying that the universe just "is" without introducing a creator? Indeed Stephen Hawking, in his book "A Brief History of Time", explains his theory that the universe is closed and finite in extent, with no beginning or end.

The Argument From Design is often stated by analogy, in the so-called Watchmaker Argument. One is asked to imagine that one has found a watch on the beach. Does one assume that it was created by a watchmaker, or that it evolved naturally? Of course one assumes a watchmaker. Yet like the watch, the universe is intricate and complex; so, the argument goes, the universe too must have a creator.

The Watchmaker analogy suffers from three particular flaws, over and above those common to all Arguments By Design. Firstly, a watchmaker creates watches from pre-existing materials, whereas God is claimed to have created the universe from nothing. These two sorts of creation are clearly fundamentally different, and the analogy is therefore rather weak.

Secondly, a watchmaker makes watches, but there are many other things in the world. If we walked further along the beach and found a nuclear reactor, we wouldn't assume it was created by the watchmaker. The argument would therefore suggest a multitude of creators, each responsible for a different part of creation (or a different universe, if you allow the possibility that there might be more than one).

Finally, in the first part of the watchmaker argument we conclude that the watch is not part of nature because it is ordered, and therefore stands out from the randomness of nature. Yet in the second part of the argument, we start from the position that the universe is obviously not random, but shows elements of order. The Watchmaker argument is thus internally inconsistent.

Apart from logical inconsistencies in the watchmaker argument, it's worth pointing out that biological systems and mechanical systems behave very differently. What's unlikely for a pile of gears is not necessarily unlikely for a mixture of biological molecules.
 
Originally posted by Silverchild79+Nov 20 2003, 06:58 PM-->
Originally posted by SolReaver@Nov 20 2003, 06:39 PM
Silverchild79
@Nov 20 2003, 06:36 PM
with the sheer size of the universe it would be arogant to think we were alone

this is a foolish statement

explain your reasoning

I don't remember the number because it was a long time ago (junior year) when my AP World History teacher, possibly one of the smartest people I've ever met, liad it out for us.

"In the universe we know of X ammount of Galexies
containing X ammount of solar systems
containing X ammount of planets
let's say there is an .0001% chance for each of these planets to be able to sustain life
and let's say for all planets containing life there is an .0001% chance that it will be intelegant

So do the math and you'll find that by the odds there should be at least X ammount of planets, that we know of, which can sustain intelligant life. To think we are the ONLY planet with life would simply be arrogant"

I don't remember then final number but it was huge, and the percentage he used would seem modest. Taking our current hard knowledge of life per solar system there should be an 8ish% chance that life exists in every planet

see my previous post regarding argument by design ^^^
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96+Nov 20 2003, 11:15 PM-->
Originally posted by GSRCRXsi@Nov 20 2003, 06:14 PM
saturn_boy96
@Nov 20 2003, 06:11 PM
ok, we will leave religion out of it, but only to a point, because you can see God in more than just "religion".

one word, Entropy.

entropy says that everything goes from a state of order to a state of chaos.  its been proven.  nothing can go from a state of chaos to a state of order without an outside force acting on it.

and thats why the entire universe is in chaos. nothing is in order. hence nothing outside the universe is acting on it.

which is why evolution is impossible.

No, it proves evolution. Evolution is a RANDOM process and thats why it works. Evolution is based on the random (chaotic) changes in our and everthing else's dna over time.
 
Back on topic....this time religion out of the question.....

Is you neighbor an alien...and not the illegal type...but the extraterestial type....???

Sorry for the spelling but 6 beers is effecting my posting skills.....
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 07:01 PM
so why are african people more prone to skin cancer? you think white people didn't have ot hunt for there food?

your missing my point. these are all about the environment. maybe the air is thinner in africa, maybe the actual activity of hunting is more active then that of other races (precivilization of course). maybe the people in africa have to worry about more then just hunting, but rather steering clear of animals that are a harm to their lives (lions, tigers, etc) so they need to be able to get away, and so on and so on.

and all skin cancer isnt caused by the sun. and what about the people who live in africa now, the tribes and all that still exist. they have no problem being in the sun all day, and i dont think they are fearing skin cancer. its all about the environment.
 
Originally posted by ktanaka+Nov 20 2003, 07:05 PM-->
Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 11:15 PM
Originally posted by GSRCRXsi@Nov 20 2003, 06:14 PM
saturn_boy96
@Nov 20 2003, 06:11 PM
ok, we will leave religion out of it, but only to a point, because you can see God in more than just "religion".

one word, Entropy.

entropy says that everything goes from a state of order to a state of chaos.  its been proven.  nothing can go from a state of chaos to a state of order without an outside force acting on it.

and thats why the entire universe is in chaos. nothing is in order. hence nothing outside the universe is acting on it.

which is why evolution is impossible.

No, it proves evolution. Evolution is a RANDOM process and thats why it works. Evolution is based on the random (chaotic) changes in our and everthing else's dna over time.

i don't htink you understand,

evolution says chaos---->order
creation (and the 2nd law of thermo dynamics) says order---->chaos

they are opposites.
 
Originally posted by GSRCRXsi+Nov 20 2003, 07:12 PM-->
saturn_boy96
@Nov 20 2003, 07:01 PM
so why are african people more prone to skin cancer? you think white people didn't have ot hunt for there food?

your missing my point. these are all about the environment. maybe the air is thinner in africa, maybe the actual activity of hunting is more active then that of other races (precivilization of course). maybe the people in africa have to worry about more then just hunting, but rather steering clear of animals that are a harm to their lives (lions, tigers, etc) so they need to be able to get away, and so on and so on.

and all skin cancer isnt caused by the sun. and what about the people who live in africa now, the tribes and all that still exist. they have no problem being in the sun all day, and i dont think they are fearing skin cancer. its all about the environment.

yes i agree, and the life span in africa is much shorter than abywhere else so have all of these "evolutions" helped them to survive longer?

skin cancer, and all forms of cancer actually are caused by mutations in DNA (evolution?). these mutations kill, they do not help.
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96@Nov 20 2003, 06:16 PM
skin cancer, and all forms of cancer actually are caused by mutations in DNA (evolution?). these mutations kill, they do not help.

You're exactly right, and proving my point. :)

Evolution is just random changes. Millions upon millions of those changes will not work. They'll result in horrible illnesses, deformities, and more. The tiny, tiny fraction of those mutations that do happen to help are the ones that continue on. A good one might not be seen for millions of years. But when it does show up, it's carried on.
 
Originally posted by saturn_boy96+Nov 20 2003, 07:16 PM-->
Originally posted by GSRCRXsi@Nov 20 2003, 07:12 PM
saturn_boy96
@Nov 20 2003, 07:01 PM
so why are african people more prone to skin cancer?  you think white people didn't have ot hunt for there food?

your missing my point. these are all about the environment. maybe the air is thinner in africa, maybe the actual activity of hunting is more active then that of other races (precivilization of course). maybe the people in africa have to worry about more then just hunting, but rather steering clear of animals that are a harm to their lives (lions, tigers, etc) so they need to be able to get away, and so on and so on.

and all skin cancer isnt caused by the sun. and what about the people who live in africa now, the tribes and all that still exist. they have no problem being in the sun all day, and i dont think they are fearing skin cancer. its all about the environment.

yes i agree, and the life span in africa is much shorter than abywhere else so have all of these "evolutions" helped them to survive longer?

skin cancer, and all forms of cancer actually are caused by mutations in DNA (evolution?). these mutations kill, they do not help.

evolution is not perfect. There are errors when copying dna and splitting cells and whatnot. that is why there are many different species, and we are affected by our environments. I recommend that you take a 100 level human biology class to learn more

on a side note, the sega saturn was quite possibly the absolute worst video game console to have ever been created :)
 
Back
Top