PSX5Central
Non Gaming Discussions => Off-Topic => Topic started by: Bossieman on June 23, 2002, 12:50:43 PM
-
ok I continiue.
Originally posted by Clowd
Im talking about lightning in the primitive atmosphere, from what I heard it was constant
This is interesting because lightning in the early atmosphere should be pretty hard but constant for me means that there is a constant lightning hitting the groun everywhere al lthe time, that is absurd. I know from school that we had a lot of lightning and stuff but not enough to kill off all aminoacid.
But let me tell you all something that I cant deny when it comes to aminoacid.
Lets take a normal proteinmolecyl, 400 aminoacid long. This 400 are combinations of 20 different combinations.
This protein must have been combined togehter a very first time.
What is the odds of this happening?
To make it simplier lets assume there is only one protein. very unrealistic but nevermind its easier to calculate. We now have 400 molecyles that are identical that is going to be put togheter in one long chain. But they all have to be lefthanded.
The odds of this happening is: 1/2^399.
Or in words: Flip a coin and get the same side up 400 times in a row.
Interesting.
Source (Swe) (http://www.ec.se/personal/hansf/amino2.htm)
-
Samwise, why cant we disscuss religion and science without facts?
You know you cant find one singel url that proves that God Exist.
So you are saying we cant disscuss.
-
I\'ll post this again for clowd to see. And Bossieman, what do you think about this?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Clowd
Remember everything I am posting is fact.
No incomplete skeletons have been found.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about living ones?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fstarw.jpg&hash=5bc8230ee902ee90c2975c41aad47d0eca975b13)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fface.jpg&hash=c1988040f22114d7963af3572e9f760935827572)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmuds.jpg&hash=89810cf1854426dbfd2cd3035638f9b231196460)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmud3.jpg&hash=760d1027f0be810b13d8203bbd6b983c3a90216a)
IMO this is a prime example of an animal that is in the middle of its evolution phase from a water animal into a land animal. IN the meantime it\'s habbit still involves both water and land. It once had fins like a fish but those fins are evovling into legs used for walking.
Also, It is beleived that birds evolved from reptiles. A while back a reptile was found that once had feathers: A creature that could also have been in the middle of its evolution process.
-
The coelacanth appears to be a cousin of Eusthenopteron, the fish credited with growing legs and coming ashore-360 million years ago- as the ancestor of all tetrapods (amphibians,reptiles,and mammals)including ourselves.
But this view is controversial. Debate still rages as to whether the coelacanths, presumed to be close relatives of the Rhipidistia fishes from which tetrapod amphibians supposedly arose, are our closest tetrapod ancestors, or if lung fishes, another very ancient line, are more closely related to tetrapods than the Rhipidistia and thus claim the oldest closest relative title. (There are three living genera of lung fishes.) Good genetic and morphological evidence points in both directions. Another line of thinking, based on physiological and anatomical analysis, identifies coelacanths with sharks and other cartilaginous fishes, but this view seems to have fallen from favor.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.digitalefolien.de%2Fbiologie%2Ftiere%2Ffische%2Fquasten2.JPG&hash=98f257dc39ffe7e3dbe21ce4d0f6a25e4b4170ab)
http://www.dinofish.com
-
Originally posted by Kimahri
I\'ll post this again for clowd to see. And Bossieman, what do you think about this?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Clowd
Remember everything I am posting is fact.
No incomplete skeletons have been found.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about living ones?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fstarw.jpg&hash=5bc8230ee902ee90c2975c41aad47d0eca975b13)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fface.jpg&hash=c1988040f22114d7963af3572e9f760935827572)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmuds.jpg&hash=89810cf1854426dbfd2cd3035638f9b231196460)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmud3.jpg&hash=760d1027f0be810b13d8203bbd6b983c3a90216a)
IMO this is a prime example of an animal that is in the middle of its evolution phase from a water animal into a land animal. IN the meantime it\'s habbit still involves both water and land. It once had fins like a fish but those fins are evovling into legs used for walking.
Also, It is beleived that birds evolved from reptiles. A while back a reptile was found that once had feathers: A creature that could also have been in the middle of its evolution process.
Well I must say that it DOES look like living proof of evolution, but I am no biologiest so I cant say for sure, but my opinions says that we have obviously proof here.
-
Some of these fish (notably Eusthenopteron) have bones in their paired fins that are very similar to the bones of tetrapod limbs. Specifically, they have a single bone (similar to the humerus or femur) followed by paired bones (similar to the radius and ulna or fibula and tibia of tetrapods). Did you know that there were fish with limb bones? I didn\'t until I learned about Eusthenopteron. Scientists think these fish used their limbs to walk on the sea (or lake or river) bed. What Eusthenopteron lacks are digits - having fin rays instead (although Sauripterus (a very recent discovery) is a closely related fish that does have 8 digits just like the earliest amphibians- see the illustration). However, the fossil record supplies us with examples of tetrapods that are quite similar to Eusthenopteron
Comparison of paired anterior fins of lobe finned fishes (A-D) and limbs of early tetrapods (E, F) A. Sterropterygion, B. Sauripterus, C. Panderichthys, D. Eusthenopteron, E. Ichthyostega, F. Acanthostega
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.gate.net%2F%7Erwms%2Ffig41.gif&hash=74c69416c84109b37412cbe3a440a806cf7a3972)
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoLimb.html
-
that fish is another type of mud puppy (http://ndwild.psych.und.nodak.edu/ndwild/owls/clipart/reptile/mudpup.gif)
-
Originally posted by Bossieman
ok I continiue.
This is interesting because lightning in the early atmosphere should be pretty hard but constant for me means that there is a constant lightning hitting the groun everywhere al lthe time, that is absurd. I know from school that we had a lot of lightning and stuff but not enough to kill off all aminoacid.
But let me tell you all something that I cant deny when it comes to aminoacid.
Lets take a normal proteinmolecyl, 400 aminoacid long. This 400 are combinations of 20 different combinations.
This protein must have been combined togehter a very first time.
What is the odds of this happening?
To make it simplier lets assume there is only one protein. very unrealistic but nevermind its easier to calculate. We now have 400 molecyles that are identical that is going to be put togheter in one long chain. But they all have to be lefthanded.
The odds of this happening is: 1/2^399.
Or in words: Flip a coin and get the same side up 400 times in a row.
Interesting.
Source (Swe) (http://www.ec.se/personal/hansf/amino2.htm)
Im talking about constant lightning in the atmosphere, in the clouds.
Those odds are interesting.
-
Originally posted by Kimahri
I\'ll post this again for clowd to see. And Bossieman, what do you think about this?
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Clowd
Remember everything I am posting is fact.
No incomplete skeletons have been found.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
How about living ones?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fstarw.jpg&hash=5bc8230ee902ee90c2975c41aad47d0eca975b13)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fface.jpg&hash=c1988040f22114d7963af3572e9f760935827572)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmuds.jpg&hash=89810cf1854426dbfd2cd3035638f9b231196460)
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fjordanlitvenenko.homestead.com%2Ffiles%2Fmud3.jpg&hash=760d1027f0be810b13d8203bbd6b983c3a90216a)
IMO this is a prime example of an animal that is in the middle of its evolution phase from a water animal into a land animal. IN the meantime it\'s habbit still involves both water and land. It once had fins like a fish but those fins are evovling into legs used for walking.
Also, It is beleived that birds evolved from reptiles. A while back a reptile was found that once had feathers: A creature that could also have been in the middle of its evolution process.
What is the name of this fish? Mud puppy? I need more info on it. Habitat, its food etc
-
Clowd, can I ask you a question?
Could you tell me why men (and women :D) have to shave their face every 3 days?
Could you tell me why grains appear in puberty?
Please, try to reply. Don\'t ignore these questions.
-
Originally posted by Adan
Clowd, can I ask you a question?
Could you tell me why men (and women :D) have to shave their face every 3 days?
Could you tell me why grains appear in puberty?
Please, try to reply. Don\'t ignore these questions.
Whats wrong with a beard?
Grains in purberty? What do you mean.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
What is the name of this fish? Mud puppy? I need more info on it. Habitat, its food etc
Mudskipper.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is an extract from David Attenborough\'s "Life on Earth" :
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
" One of the most crucial episodes in the history of life took place some 350 million years ago in a freshwater swamp. Fish began to haul themselves out of the water to become the first back-boned creatures to colonise the land. To cross this frontier, they - like the first terrestrial invertebrates - had to solve two problems: first, how to move around out of water, and second, how to obtain oxygen from the air.
There is one fish alive today which manages to do both these things - the Mudskipper. It is not closely related to those fish who pioneered the land, so any comparisons with them have to be made with caution, but even so it can give us a hint about how that momentous move was accomplished.
Mudskippers are only a few centimetres long and you can find them in mangrove swamps and muddy estuaries in many parts of the tropics, lying on the glistening mud well beyond the lap of the waters. Some may even be clinging to arching aerial roots of the mangroves or clambering up the trunks. A sudden movement or an abrupt noise will send them skittering back to the safety of the water. They come out to feed on the insects and other invertebrates that swarm on the oozy surface of the mud. they move by suddenly flexing the hinder end of their body so that they give a little skipping jump. But they also have a steadier, more sober way of edging themselves forward with their front pair of fins. Each of these has a fleshy base supported internally by bones - the fin is, in effect, a rigid crutch. With it the fish can lever itself forward...
But what solution could the early fish find to the problem of breathing out of water? The Mudskipper manages to do so by holding water in its mouth which it swills over the lining of its mouth with a rolling action of its head to extract oxygen. It also absorbs some directly from the air through its moist skin. But these devices allow it to remain out of water for only a short time. Within a few minutes it has to return to wet its skin and take a fresh mouthful of water. "
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://members.ozemail.com.au/~thebobo/mud.htm
-
Well, grains and beard are the legacy of our predecessors. Apes have and had hair in the face. Am I right? We, as result of evolution, have lost a big part of that hair. Women have lost it almost completely because female animals don\'t stand out big characteristics.
Notice that grains go out in puberty, at same time that beard. The mission of those grains, like in other animals and apes, is grease the hair in order to have it soft and protected. Perhaps, today those grains haven\'t that function in our faces cause we have not enough hair to lubricate. They aren\'t there because GOD wanted this way. To sum up, hair and grains in our faces is a legacy of monkeys, that will dissapear, probably, with the years (not 1 or 2, thousands).
We evolve. We evolved. And we will evolve.
-
Fossils showing the evolution of things have been found. One of teh better examples is the fossils showing the evolution of the horse hoof found by Othniel Charles Marsh. He found fossils, which he used to support Darwin\'s theory. Diagrams of the fossils clearly illustrate the gradual change that took place:
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshockwaves.hypermart.net%2Fhorse1.gif&hash=cf626a813f3b227283953106b6ea2b04001479e9) (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshockwaves.hypermart.net%2Fhorse2.gif&hash=77da72ef195f01277001a5a893b816dd47acb950) (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshockwaves.hypermart.net%2Fhorse3.gif&hash=61b38b2428643e7cf393412c284487c70dfbbc4f) (https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fshockwaves.hypermart.net%2Fhorse4.gif&hash=275e5aea10202dcf547acab9b5c58d282cf6f39c)
These show a clear progression in the change of the horse hoof on animals that otherwise had extremely similar skeletal structures.
source (http://www.geocities.com/ResearchTriangle/Lab/3773/OC_Marsh.html)
-
red x\'s shock.
-
I realized that. When I went to edit my post though, the power randomly went out. Go figure. Anyway, they should work now.
-
I\'m not going to let the 10kb reply I wrote go to waste since the original thread was closed. :)
shadwhawk if you want to see all my scientific facts, just read the whole thread, which ive doubt youve done.
You expect me to read a 12 page thread of your \'facts\', when the first three pages consisted of typical creationist bleating from you? You\'ve got to be kidding me.
To other posters: See, I told you he\'d dismiss me.
and if you come back saying Ive posted nothing scientific, then you are unworthy to debate with.
Yup, I knew it. He re-iterates his points (by telling me to read his past posts), and then dismisses me by telling me if I disagree with his \'facts\', he won\'t debate me.
as for your point on evolution is how life evolves, it has nothing to do with how life got here, how life got here is the foundation. if you cant prove how it got here then the rest of your theory is invalid.
You are stupid, aren\'t you? Abiogenesis is how life began. Evolution is how life changes. You can\'t have the latter without the former. It\'s like saying Moore\'s Law (computers are twice as fast and half as expensive every 18 months) has something to do with the initial creation of the transistor.
i can prove a creator by the left hand right hand scientific fact.
This is a nonsensical statement.
quality vs quantity? shotgun method? the way you posted you seem to have not read the whole thread.
Do you even understand my arguments, Clowd?
also for the 4 corners of the earth, i remember the scripture, it said something (cant remember what, i think its bible news) would be spread to the 4 cornes of the earth. this only means the entire world. why take something that is sketchy and use it to mar something that outrightly says God is seated above the circle of the earth?
You want to get technical, the Earth isn\'t round. It\'s not a circle. It\'s nearly spherical. Nowhere in the Bible is that little fact mentioned. Shall I bring up God \'opening windows of heaven\' for a biblical explination of rain? Howabout rabbits chewing cud?
If my anti evolution facts are so bland and easily refuted, why are you yet to do it?
That\'s odd; I seem to have done it already.
Shadwhawk you also seem to know not much about evolution except what you read on a couple of EXTREMELY bias web pages. Go to an unbias web page, where reputable scientists are reasonable
Oh? Care to name the sources of your \'facts\'? Care to name the sources of your oh-so-obvious vast knowledge of evolution?
Shall I guess it consists of answersingenesis.com, bible.com, and drdino.com?
you say i make up silly excuses too, and i run from questions, im yet to hear a reply to the right hand left hand scientific fact. if you want it its in this topic
Because you haven\'t explained what the hell it means, you idiot!
Everyone says Im not will to listen, but get this, I\'ll listen to scientific fact
Like \'changes in allele frequency over time\'?
Like \'isolated breeding populations\'?
Like \'adaptive features\'?
Like \'radiometric dating\'?
something like what bossieman posted. If you dont want to listen to people trying to prove their point, just post a scientific fact that proves evolution.
And right here, you display your ignorance for all to see.
You cannot prove anything in science, Clowd. Anyone who knows the slightest thing about science knows this. Only math and some forms of logic deal with proof.
You ask for \'a scientific fact\' that \'proves\' evolution. There are reams of observations (ie, \'facts\') about evolution. It\'s impossible to boil down the theory\'s entire framework to one \'fact\' that you refuse to define.
I\'ll toss one in anyway: Archeopteryx.
You cant just say we evolved that way all the time.
Evolved all what way?
Evolution is yet to have a foundation,
Wrong. Its foundation is heritability.
go ahead and deny something darwin and thousands of scientists, including albert einstein have noted.
Oh? Care to post sources for your claim that thousands of scientists have noted that evolution has no foundation?
Shadwhawk your argument on how light came to be when there was no sun or stars is invalid.
Wrong. Light is created before the stars both accounts of Genesis.
Moses wrote Gensis fromt he stand point of a human on earth. Keep that in mind when reading Genesis. He didnt write it from the stand point of God. So therefore in the primitive world there was constant total cloud coverage over the world. So when the clouds moved, light came to be
Moses didn\'t write Genesis.
The OT is the Word Of God, not What Happened By A Human\'s Account.
God Created Light. Then God Created Earth. Care to explain that away by your pathetic fundamentalist weaseling?
Which scientists? It was in Discover magazine 2 months ago. Sorry bud, the asteroid theory is going down the toilet. mORE AND more people are losing faith in it. So as of yet youve prooved jack squat
Give me an in-context quote. Give me a specific source. Give me a URL.
evolution is a theory, get other it. darwin admitted and all scientists do today. case over
EVOLUTION IS A THEORY. ITS IN BLACK AND WHITE.
Do you not read what the hell anyone posts? In science, a theory is a heavily tested, continually affirmed hypothesis.
Well, everyone, see what I told you? My predictions on his reactions were spot-on.
Oh, and I thought I should also point out that you are wrong Shadwhawk. The theory of eveloution, as stated by Darwin, is utter nonsence.. and none but the most ameture of armchair scientists actually believe in it. I realize that you\'re probably trying to keep from getting too techinical with Clowd as he won\'t understand a word you\'re saying, but there are other theories which branch off of Darwin\'s original which explain eveloution far better. Lavan and I already had this discussion long ago, and although he won by simply being able to throw out more facts than I could, I think we did a good job of picking apart Darwins theory.
By today\'s standards, yes, Darwin\'s theory was a bit underdeveloped (he didn\'t even know genes existed then, and effectively hoped that some biochemical method of heritability was discovered later on--then came Mendel). But so was Newton\'s. The core evolutionary theory, that over time, mutations and natural selection modify species, remains quite solid.
5 mass extinctions? fill me in on these 5 mass extinctions...
Cretaceous (~40%), Triassic (~60% marine), Permian (~95%), Devonian (~60%), Silurian (~50%)
This is the left hand right hand: amino acids come in two shapes, left handed and right handed, should they be formed at random, half be left handed and half would be right handed, there is no reason why either shape would be prefereed by living beings, but of the 20 amino acids used to make life, ALL are left handed
The odds of evolution are compare to the odds of a printing shop blowing up and resulting in an unabridged dictionary.
which pretty much equals 1 to 100000000000 or some big number like that
Oh, the random amino acid formation argument? Bah.
1) It\'s not a random process. Chemical interactions are hardly random. As for why left-handed became prominent, one theory is that the raw materials that came to Earth were already predominantly left-handed.
2) Your probability math needs work. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/abioprob.html
Sonyfan what do you mean by evolution? Yes different types of birds are getting made all the time, just like humans. But they stay a bird. You dont see any half bird, half fish do you?
And you provide yet more evidence you don\'t know what the hell evolution is. Evolution is not the sudden spawning of a half-bird/half-fish mutant. In fact, such a creation was effectively render much of evolutionary theory invalid.
And why would evolution suddenly stop? Wouldnt some animals be in the middle of transforming?
Evolution doens\'t stop.
I wont click on any of the links until you tell me none of them are biast, but are scientists with an open mind.
Im talking I dont want to click on 15 reasons why creation is false. That isnt credibility
Well, everyone, another of my predictions came true: He won\'t visit any URL we post because he\'ll automatically think them biased.
EDIT: btw I dont dig into anti evolutionist websites. I have never been to one
Either you get all of your arguments from anti-evolution books, or you\'re a liar. Everything you\'ve posted is swiped right out of books or websites.
(snipped because I hit word limit. Yipe)
-
And to continue...
Until someone posts something that makes me say, wow, that is interesting, that could prove evolution, theres no reason to believe in it.
Which will never happen, because you think nothing can ever possibly prove evolution.
Thickheadedness? You guys are yet to produce scientific FACT that proves evolution. The left hand/right hand fact is enough to make/break creation or evolution
You see, evolution doesnt have a foundation. Any foundation attempt has been put in the air by it being a theory, plus my facts.
Still more predictions proving true: He reiterates his earlier statements in a lame attempt to counter criticisms of those very statements.
How is the left hand right hand fact a theory? Its fact man
It\'s fact that in experiments to create amino acids in a lab with non-aligned raw materials, amino acid distribution was exactly what chance would allow.
Care to post any evidence that the early raw materials that came to Earth were so non-aligned?
Arent Jews Christians?
If this isn\'t a prime exmaple of Clowd\'s astonishing ignorance, I don\'t know what is.
Ok, if the mods want this discussion to end, I\'ll cease posting about it. I\'ve got my fix beating a creationists\' head against a brick wall, so I\'m set for a while.
-
By today\'s standards, yes, Darwin\'s theory was a bit underdeveloped (he didn\'t even know genes existed then, and effectively hoped that some biochemical method of heritability was discovered later on--then came Mendel). But so was Newton\'s. The core evolutionary theory, that over time, mutations and natural selection modify species, remains quite solid. - Shadwhawk
You\'re right, I didn\'t phrase my statment correctly. It\'s not evolution as stated by Darwin which most people (myself included) have a problem with.. it\'s his theory of Natural Selection and how it pertains to Evolution. Both are riddled with holes because at the time there wasn\'t enough knowlage in the field of microbiology to make a proper assement. The theory of Evolution is supported by new theories and discoverys such as Natural Sythesis.. however natural selection (while it still plays a major role in evolution) is not what actually causes the correct mutations to occur at the time they are needed. It\'s a catalyst, not a cause.
Also, on a side note: I\'d like to address Clowd\'s "Proof" of moses parting the Red Sea by evidence of chariot parts being found in the sediment. (I am taking this with a grain of salt, mind you, seeing as how Clowd has failed to post a link to the discovery of this proof)
An event similar to the parting of the Red Sea may have happened several thousand years ago, and the story told has since been blown out of proportion since then. If you are going to believe that scant archeological remains which coincide with a tale from the bible are true, then I suggest you take a look at another very ancient document which started out much the same as the bible. Read: Homer\'s Illiad and the Oddesey. Much like the bible, it started off as oration passed down from generation to generation until it was written down by the poet Homer. So it\'s true origins are still a complete mystery.
For millenia, the book of the Illiad which describes Oddyseus\'s battle with the Trojans at the City of Troy was considered pure fantasy as no proof could be provided that the city of Troy even existed. However, we now know that Troy does indeed exist and there are nourerous archeological digs uncovering it\'s secrets.
http://www.iit.edu/~agunsal/truva/exc.html
Yet, just because there ARE ruins, dosen\'t mean you can assume that the Illiad (and the ensuing oddesey) and all that come with them; Greek gods, Legend of Hector, Scylla and Corryptus, Circies, Scirenes, ect.. are true. Why is there a double standard here Clowd, since you\'re obviously going to continue believing the way you do and discount the Illiad and Oddesey as fiction. It\'s evidence is just as strong as these chariot remains. Tell me, has anyone even done radio carbon dating on these remains to see if they even correspond to the right time period which the Red Sea parting was supposed to have happened?
(Note: 1000 years ago, there was "Proof" that Cyclops really did exist. Giant skeletal frame with a single giant hole in the center of the head were turning up fairly frequently. However, with continued study we now know that those "Cyclops" skeletons were actually the bones of Mammoth and other large elephants breeds from the Ice Age.
Also, just to make things interesting Clowd, I think you should read the works of Immanuel Velikovsky. He has written several books such as: Earth in Upheaval, Worlds in Collision, Ages of Chaos, Oedipus and Akhnaton, Peoples of the Sea, Ramses II and his Times, Mankind in Amnesia, and Stargazers and Gravediggers, which tie archeological and astronomical findings to passages found a variety of different religeons including Anchient Greek/Roman, Judeism, Buddism, and Catholosism
(Just to add more fuel to the fire. :D )
-
I take religion like this...
Religion is just something we believe in, no one can prove it right, no one can prove it wrong, we just believe it. Religion gives us hope for the future, religion makes dying less painful(emotionally) believing there is an afterlife. Religion helps us overcome terrible atrocities(9-11 an example). We pray because it gives us hope. Without religion people simply die like the bugs we step on.
-
Originally posted by "The One" Billy Gunn
Without religion people simply die like the bugs we step on.
Just for the record thats how we die to.
imo
-
Originally posted by "The One" Billy Gunn
I take religion like this...
Religion is just something we believe in, no one can prove it right, no one can prove it wrong, we just believe it. Religion gives us hope for the future, religion makes dying less painful(emotionally) believing there is an afterlife. Religion helps us overcome terrible atrocities(9-11 an example). We pray because it gives us hope. Without religion people simply die like the bugs we step on.
That is very true, clowd just refuse\'s to just admit he can\'t prove it. :D
-
Clowd, let me get one thing straight. I don\'t know if you read this in my post or just decided that the post was crap so didn\'t read this part but I did state I was catholic. I just believe in theories more rather than religion. But believing in evolution is perfectly acceptable in the catholic church. I don\'t know if you know that.
You never answered my question. What religion are you?
-
Let\'s play stump Clowd. After all, he knows everything. Here\'s a question for you. God created all life. So, what created God? He just didn\'t spring out of nothing. He had to have been created by something. Life just doesn\'t magically appear on earth.
-
Originally posted by Titan
Clowd, let me get one thing straight. I don\'t know if you read this in my post or just decided that the post was crap so didn\'t read this part but I did state I was catholic. I just believe in theories more rather than religion. But believing in evolution is perfectly acceptable in the catholic church. I don\'t know if you know that.
You never answered my question. What religion are you?
Woo, Go Catholicism, we rule :)
Anyway, Clowd seems to be spewing opinions, so there is no real point in arguing with this idiot. Ignorance seems to be his main objective in his rants, so it\'s not worth paying attention to anymore.
See Yuz.
-
He needs to calm down. His opinions not the right one. His opinions are not facts. They are only his beliefs. Beliefs, not facts.
Clowd, by any chance, do you even know what a theory is?
-
Calm it down. This is exactly what wasn\'t supposed to be in this topic, and why the other ones got closed. Make posts only with sources and proof in them, not these types of comments attacking him.
-
I too am Catholic, which I\'m sure Clowd refuses to believe, but I\'m from the sort of the same mythos as Titan. You cannot believe the bible verbatium because of it\'s tendancy to be very open to interpretation. There is no solid evidence to back it up aside from a number of history figures who appear in it as well as a few proven events. The great flood for example, I recall, was proven.. but it wasn\'t a mass extiction causing event and only covered a reletively small area of the earth\'s total landmass. Now weither Noah and his ark have been proven, I\'m not sure as I haven\'t looked it up.
You also have to consider what I\'ve been debating over and over again.. that the bible has been changed by man. Even in it\'s first print original text it, in all likelyhood, is not true to actual events. For example, look at the movie "Thirteen Days" which recounts the events of the Cuban Missle crisis. All of the major points of actual history have been recreated into the film, however just because it\'s a true story dosen\'t mean that what happened in the film is exactly how it happened in real life. There simply isn\'t enough documentation to recall every conversation that was recreated in the film. If there was, you wouldn\'t need script writers. What the producers did, was take true documentation they could and built from that to a story which is close to the original events. Even some of the actual dialoge which was recorded has been changed in the film to make it more "dramatic" and entertaining. Now, this was a record of the events that happened some 40 years ago, and while it\'s not a documentary, it does illustrate my point as to how actual events get changed over time.
I\'m not debating against god, I\'m debating against Clowd\'s logic and lack of proof. Yes, Einstein did believe in god. Yes, Stephen Hawking does admit that the universe is organized in a way which elludes to a higher intellect as it\'s archetect. You will be EXTREEMLY hard pressed to find any text from these two scientist which support Clowd\'s claim of creationsim. They are simply admiting that there may be a god, not that "_____ Insert Religeon\'s name here" is correct. They seem to believe something that I also believe in.. that both Science AND God exist.. and neither of those two institutions are completely correct in their assertations. To me, Science is merely Man tinkering with God\'s tools. We can use those tools to uncover many truths about our world.. and to prove established religeon wrong.. but they cannot disprove existance of god.
Established Religeon IS wrong. Period, and anyone with an ounce of common sence should be able to see that. It\'s main flaw, is that it was created or given to a very scientifically primitive man. Now for example, place yourself in gods shoes. How would you explain to a nomadic people who only know their goats, famililes, and the geography of the local desert, about the scientific principals that you set up in order to create the world they live in? How would you explain quantum mechanics, cellular biology, evolution, advanced astrophysics? Simple.. you don\'t, since there is no possible way they could understand. Any messanger you send would likely be severely riddiculed (at best) or stoned to death (or worse) for hearsay. We are oftend likened to as God\'s children.. and I believe he speaks to us as such. You are right on one point Clowd.. we as humans cannot possibly begin to fathom god\'s true plan. Science, Religeon, Litterature, Philosophy - was all created by man.. and is perpetuated by man.. and thus cannot hope to expand beyond human comprehension. Perhaps when we evolve futher to something beyond mere men, we will have a better understanding.
-
Never have I seen so much emotion to a given subject such as religion, and yet people try to prove its not there. This 18 page argument is proof enough.
-
Originally posted by "The One" Billy Gunn
Never have I seen so much emotion to a given subject such as religion, and yet people try to prove its not there. This 18 page argument is proof enough.
Proof of what? Religion? There is no argument religion isn\'t amoung us :)
-
however natural selection (while it still plays a major role in evolution) is not what actually causes the correct mutations to occur at the time they are needed. It\'s a catalyst, not a cause.
Oh, I know that natural selection doesn\'t cause mutations--that\'s caused by mating, imperfect replication, and genetic damage.
Natural selection is the drive behind evolution. The ultimate fuel, I guess, is entropy. :)
Without religion people simply die like the bugs we step on.
We die regardless. I\'ll die without the cushy promise of an afterlife or the threat of eternal damnation. I\'ll just...stop. I\'m not particularly pleased with the idea that I\'ll be dead within 90 years, there\'s not a whole lot I can do about it. I\'ll hope that people smarter than me figure out ways to extend the human lifespan, but I\'m realistic. I\'ll likely be dead before Halley\'s Comet comes back.
Religions fade away, nations fall, people die. If you feel like being without religion would make your life as worthless as an insect\'s, more power to you.
-
Ok, let me clarify what I meant about "backing it up". What I meant was to find a source if you were going to make a claim of evidence/proof/fact. Like "chariots were found in the red sea" - well, BACK IT UP. Otherwise it\'s just one man\'s BS. Just an example mind you.
The bible quotations are fine, as they state where to find that info yourself.
You are allowed to state your opinion, but don\'t make it out as fact unless you have a source.
Hope that clears it up.
-
Originally posted by Titan
God created all life. So, what created God? He just didn\'t spring out of nothing. He had to have been created by something. Life just doesn\'t magically appear on earth.
On that note, what caused the Big Bang? Were the materials necessary to create the universe/all life as we know it resting in one spot for eons and then decided to just seperate one day? Anyone with an inkling of knowledge about physics can tell you that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. What was the "action" to the big bang\'s "reaction"?
On a somewhat related note, Just like some of you can pose questions that can not be answered by even the most well read religious scholar, I can pose questions about Human history and development that continue to stump some of the most learned evolutionary scientists. I can elaborate if you want.
-
Originally posted by Gohan
On that note, what caused the Big Bang? Were the materials necessary to create the universe/all life as we know it resting in one spot for eons and then decided to just seperate one day? Anyone with an inkling of knowledge about physics can tell you that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. What was the "action" to the big bang\'s "reaction"?
On a somewhat related note, Just like some of you can pose questions that can not be answered by even the most well read religious scholar, I can pose questions about Human history and development that continue to stump some of the most learned evolutionary scientists. I can elaborate if you want.
Interesting how its so hard to believe in God, but it is so easy to believe in the big bang.
Please elaborate
It is impossible to prove evolution or creation by facts. When i mean by prove is that there is no doubt in your mind. What people should do is take the facts that are present, and put 2 and 2 together and it will lead to something.
Shadwhawk, are you trying to prove evolution or that other word?
Titan you ask where did God come from. You cant look at it from a human standpoint. You had a beginning. You understand the concept of a beginning. You realize that everything on earth had a beginning. But God isnt human.
-
Clowd: This is the one thread that is supposed to be completely factual, and yet you are telling us to put two and two together without having posted any facts yet. Post something then maybe you will have some credibility.
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
Clowd: This is the one thread that is supposed to be completely factual, and yet you are telling us to put two and two together without having posted any facts yet. Post something then maybe you will have some credibility.
It doesnt have to be facts. That mud skipper is hardly hard evidence that evolution exists. And you say my left hand right fact isnt either.
I said 2 and 2 will lead to \'something\'
-
I have start reading the bible and I can´t belive some things that is writen in it.
I will post stuff from the bible here later but damn it does not look good.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
That mud skipper is hardly hard evidence that evolution exists.
What is it then ? You asked : Show me a fish with arms, so we did.
-
Why does it have arms? Because it needs them for the mud.
And thats just one example. One animal evolving in the entire world. If it was such a great example evolution would be stated as fact now.
-
Which is the case.
-
Evolution is considered to be as close to fact as you can get. It is what virtually all scientist accept.
And Clowd, the purpose of this thread was to have a discussion on this topic with out the bickering over opinions and such. Simwise said that the posts should all have facts, not opinions, and sources to back them up. We all did that, you should do the same.
-
Originally posted by SonyFan
The great flood for example, I recall, was proven.. but it wasn\'t a mass extiction causing event and only covered a reletively small area of the earth\'s total landmass.
Ill do more research on this, but in a recent discovery magazine article, it stated there was a flood wich caused mass extinction large enough to kill the dinosaurs.
I guess no one will take this as fact until I post a link
-
Clowd, do you believe that Joshua stopped the sun? I have a great arguement for that if you want to get into it.
-
Originally posted by Titan
Clowd, do you believe that Joshua stopped the sun? I have a great arguement for that if you want to get into it.
No, he didnt, God did.
-
Whatever. That\'s not the point. It\'s phisically impossible for the sun to stop. Do you know what would happen if you stopped the sun? The bible was written at the time when we were "special" and were the center of the universe. They had the impression that the sun rotated around the earth as well as the whole universe. But physically, the earth rotates on it\'s axis. Do you know what would happen if the earth did stop rotating on it\'s axis? The mountains would collapse, the seas would probably flood (gravity :) ) , the sky\'s probably would fall. It\'s simple physics. Not to mention the constant sun beaming on the earth. The temperatures would rise because there is no night or darkness. Basically to put it so you would understand, we would be screwed up the bum. Not sure if that\'s 100% true. I read it in a book one time (Inherit the Wind. Its a very good book. Read it sometime Clowd). Might have been a bit exagerated.
-
Originally posted by Titan
Whatever. That\'s not the point. It\'s phisically impossible for the sun to stop. Do you know what would happen if you stopped the sun? The bible was written at the time when we were "special" and were the center of the universe. They had the impression that the sun rotated around the earth as well as the whole universe. But physically, the earth rotates on it\'s axis. Do you know what would happen if the earth did stop rotating on it\'s axis? The mountains would collapse, the seas would probably flood (gravity :) ) , the sky\'s probably would fall. It\'s simple physics. Not to mention the constant sun beaming on the earth. The temperatures would rise because there is no night or darkness. Basically to put it so you would understand, we would be screwed up the bum.
The bible didnt say the sun stopped rotating, it said the sun stood still. If the sun stoppped in the sky today wouldnt you say the same thing? Look, the sun is staying still! I dont see you saying the earth stopped rotating.
You think its out of the power of God to control his planet? Well you must not believe in the flood or parting the red sea.
-
If the sun stopped in the sky, doesn\'t that mean it stopped rotating? But the sun doesn\'t rotate. If the sun stopped in the sky, i\'d be scared because the earth did stop rotating on it\'s axis and physics would kick in.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
The bible didnt say the sun stopped rotating, it said the sun stood still. If the sun stoppped in the sky today wouldnt you say the same thing? Look, the sun is staying still! I dont see you saying the earth stopped rotating.
You think its out of the power of God to control his planet? Well you must not believe in the flood or parting the red sea.
It said the sun stood still I still dont see you saying oh my, the earth stopped rotating, rather, the sun has stood still, or stopped moving or somthing of that order.
-
IF THE SUN STOOD STILL IN THE SKY, THEY EARTH HAD TO HAVE STOPPED ROTATING ON IT\'S AXIS. What you said is a synonym to what I said. The sun stopped=the earth stopped rotating. The sun doesn\'t revolve around the earth, otherwise, then it would be a different story.
-
Originally posted by Titan
What you said is a synonym to what I said.
Exactly. The synonym that I said is what Joshua said.
-
Then why are you saying that I was saying something entirely different?
-
Originally posted by Titan
Then why are you saying that I was saying something entirely different?
You tryed to say he said the sun stood still because he believed the sun revolved around the earth. Im saying you cant prove that.
-
I think I read it that they thought it revolved around the earth because the Bible was written before it was proved that the earth revolved around the sun. Pretty much everyone thought that the sun and stars, ect. revolved around the earth because we were "special". Like I said in the post, I\'m not 100% sure that it\'s true, just what I read.
-
Originally posted by Titan
I think I read it that they thought it revolved around the earth because the Bible was written before it was proved that the earth revolved around the sun. Pretty much everyone thought that the sun and stars, ect. revolved around the earth because we were "special". Like I said in the post, I\'m not 100% sure that it\'s true, just what I read.
The inspired writers of the bible knew that the earth was a circle, (God is seated above the circle of the earth) and that God hangs it upon nothing which means the earth just floats in space.
They knew quite a bit more then man did of that time through God.
-
But the earth isn\'t a circle, it\'s a sphere.
-
Originally posted by Titan
But the earth isn\'t a circle, it\'s a sphere.
This is from the standpoint of a human. If you were in space looking at the earth, you would say its the shape of a circle. Sphere, circle its basically the same thing. What shape is a basketball? I would say its a circle
Do you think Job would say the circle that is slightly flatened at the poles?
EDIT: Job wasnt in space, in case you took it that way
-
um...duders...didnt ryu just close the other thread...i think we should stop with this debating. Just get along damnmit.....:)
-
Nice to see all your great evidence Clowd. Ehem.
-
ok. This is getting outta hand.
Everyone start backing up your facts with something other then your word. Otherwise this thread will end up closed.
Give us some kinda DOC or URL...
-
Originally posted by Samwise
PS. I\'ll delete any post in the new thread that states something without anything to back it up. Have a nice day.
I\'m still waiting for this to happen. The thread has become bogged down by opinionated crap. :o
-
So far clowd, you have 3 posts in this thread that could have been compacted into one post and yet you posted them individually, and I\'m not referring entirely to your discussion with Titan either. I warned you before about doing as we ask and if you don\'t, there will be consequences. I\'m sick of you not listening to other people when it comes to these threads. You completely ignored what shadwhawk said even though what he said is probably the closest thing to fact that I have ever seen.
Either you have a problem with reading comprehension or you are just having a lot of trouble understanding what any of us are stating. In any case, I\'ll spell it out for you in the most simplistic of terms:
Creationism - The idea that all was created by a supreme being - IE no science involved. It was suddenly just there, and so were we.
Evolution - Change over time. Evolution has NOTHING to do with how life was created just with how it CHANGED OVER TIME.
Abiogenesis - The supposed development of living organisms from nonliving matter. Also called autogenesis, spontaneous generation.
Evolution does exist. You admitted it yourself that it does exist --
And thats just one example. One animal evolving in the entire world.
and you can\'t write it off as if it doesn\'t. What you are arguing is creationism VS Abiogenesis. For you not to know that at all already shows just how unintelligent you are. There it is, in bold right there for you to see.
-
Ryu, I dont know what to say. You say creation says life was *poof* and it appeared so it isnt scientific.
Funny how evolution states the universe began the same way.
I didnt admit it existed, I was being sarcastic. Im sure there would be more then one animal changing in the hole world. I believe that animals change, but they stay to their kind. Humans change, look at the different sizes, shapes, colors. But they dont change into a diffrent species.
As for shadwhawk, it is extremely hard to reply to his posts because they are so long. It would be better if he gave me a numbered list. so I dont have to quote everything he said.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
Funny how evolution states the universe began the same way.
You really don\'t listen, do you? EVOLUTION SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE WAY THINGS STARTED! Man...:rolleyes:
It\'s things like this that destroy your credibility.
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
You really don\'t listen, do you? EVOLUTION SAYS NOTHING ABOUT THE WAY THINGS STARTED! Man...:rolleyes:
So you believe in a creator? For evolution to exist, the big bang theory must exist.
-
That isn\'t true at all. Many people believe in creation, followed by evolution. Evolution only states what happens when animals are already there. It says nothing about how they got there, and isn\'t related to that at all. Evolution can exist with any other theory on how things began, including creation.
-
So your giving up your debate on there not being a intellegent creator?
-
No, I\'m just telling you to get things straight, and stop making such ignorant posts. By continually saying evolution deals with how things began, you are only showing that you don\'t listen to our posts, and really don\'t know what you\'re talking about.
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
No, I\'m just telling you to get things straight, and stop making such ignorant posts. By continually saying evolution deals with how things began, you are only showing that you don\'t listen to our posts, and really don\'t know what you\'re talking about.
Well you have no way to dissaprove there isnt a creator.
-
I never said I did have a way. But seriously, let\'s stop making these useless, pointless, bickering, antagonizing bull**** posts, and do what this topic was made for. This topic was made to post facts only, backed up by sources. You have yet to do that Clowd.
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
I never said I did have a way. But seriously, let\'s stop making these useless, pointless, bickering, antagonizing bull**** posts, and do what this topic was made for. This topic was made to post facts only, backed up by sources. You have yet to do that Clowd.
This may be called off the subject, but in order to debate I must know this.
Shockwaves, which do you believe.
1.) Life came to earth on an asteroid. (big bang theory)
2.) Life formed from lightning sparks and polymerized in the primitive ocean. (big bang theory)
3.) A creator
-
Neither one or two has anything to do with the big bang. Why can\'t you see that?
-
Originally posted by Clowd
This may be called off the subject, but in order to debate I must know this.
Shockwaves, which do you believe.
1.) Life came to earth on an asteroid.(big bang theory)
2.) Life formed from lightning sparks and polymerized in the primitive ocean. (big bang theory)
3.) A creator
isnt the big bang theory related to the formation of the universe?
-
Yes, it is. It has nothing to do with the origin of life.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
Originally posted by Gohan
On that note, what caused the Big Bang? Were the materials necessary to create the universe/all life as we know it resting in one spot for eons and then decided to just seperate one day? Anyone with an inkling of knowledge about physics can tell you that every action has an equal and opposite reaction. What was the "action" to the big bang\'s "reaction"?
On a somewhat related note, Just like some of you can pose questions that can not be answered by even the most well read religious scholar, I can pose questions about Human history and development that continue to stump some of the most learned evolutionary scientists. I can elaborate if you want.
Interesting how its so hard to believe in God, but it is so easy to believe in the big bang.
Please elaborate[/B]
Not once in my entire post did I say that I didn\'t believe in God nor did I say I believed in the Big Bang.
My elaboration is coming very soon.
-
Originally posted by Clowd
For evolution to exist, the big bang theory must exist.
The big bang theory is nothing more than a theory. It is not part of evolution. Evolution is a species evolving over time, now starting from scratch.
-
That\'s it clowd. I warned you.
-
Intermission
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.mistermischief.net%2Fdebeehalo%2Fhalo01.jpg&hash=6b1600dc705b2b459a0f62c621dd2b9399a8c194)
:thepimp: OK, I return you all to your discussion.:thepimp:
-
Hehe, intermissions are funny. :) We need something similar to that every 2 pages. Videoholic, I now dub you Intermission regulator. Please see to it that we get plenty of them in these religion threads.
-
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.pip.com.au%2F%7Epaceman%2FGraphics%2FSHOEPRINT.jpg&hash=aa17e50845070d661982175b7a965197b25d7ff7)
500 MILLION YEAR OLD FOOTPRINTS DISCOVERED
What may be the oldest fossil footprint yet found was discovered in June of 1968 by William J. Meister, an amateur fossil collector.
This print is estimated to be around 300 to 600 MILLION years old
A sandaled shoe crushing a trilobite; is this proof that there were previous civilisations on earth, or visitors from another world?
Meister made this remarkable find during a rock and fossil hunting expedition to Antelope Spring, 43 miles west of Delta, Utah. He was accompanied by his wife and two daughters. The party had already discovered several small fossils of trilobites when Meister split open a two inch thick slab of rock with his hammer and discovered this outstanding print. The rock fell open "like a book", revealing
on one side the footprint of a human with trilobites right in the footprint itself. The other half of the rock slab showed an almost perfect mold of the footprint and fossils. Amazingly the human was wearing a sandal!
Trilobites were small marine invertebrates, the relatives of crabs and shrimps, that flourished for some 320 million years before becoming extinct 280 million years ago. Humans are currently thought to have emerged between 1 and 2 million years ago and to have started wearing well-shaped footwear for no more than a few thousand years.
The sandal that crushed a living trilobite was 10 1/2 inches long and 3 1/2 inches wide; the heel is indented slightly more than the sole, as a human shoe print would be. Meister took the rock to Melvin Cook, a professor of metallurgy at the University of Utah, who advised him to show the specimen to the university geologists. When Meister was unable to find a geologist willking to examine the print, he went to a local newspaper, The Deseret News. Before long, the find recieved national publicity.
On July 20, 1968, the Antelope Spring site was examined by Dr. Clifford Bur****, a consulting geologist from Tuscon, Arizona, who soon found the impression of a child\'s foot in a bed of shale. ``The impression", he said, ``was about six inches in length, with the toes spreading, as if the child had never yet worn shoes, which compress the toes. There does not appear to be much of an arch, and the big toe is not prominent." Dr. Bur**** stated:
The rock chanced to fracture along the front of the toes before the fossil print was found. On a cross section the fabric of the rock stands out in fine laminations, or bedding planes. Where the toes pressed into the soft material, the laminations were bowed downward from the horizontal, indicating a weight that had been pressed into the mud.
In August of 1968 Mr. Dean Bitter, an educator in the Salt Lake City public schools system, claimed to have discovered two more prints of shoes or sandals in the Antelope Spring area. According to professor Cook, no trilobites were injured by these footfalls, but a small trilobite was found near the prints in the same rock, indicating the small sea creature and the sandaled wanderer might have been contemporaries.
What does this prove? Nothing. It is just one of the many discoveries that have led to questions about science\'s take on Human history. Like if there were "human" footprints over 300 million years ago don\'t a lot of evolution\'s theories not hold up?
More examples coming...
-
FFS Clowd! Shockwaves keeps telling you that EVOLUTION DOESN\'T HAVE TO DO WITH HOW LIFE ORIGINATED!!! He kept on trying to knock it into your thick head and each time you replied with something worthless, "ME NO UNDERSTAND!!!"
I\'m really loosing my patience with you.
That isn\'t true at all. Many people believe in creation, followed by evolution. Evolution only states what happens when animals are already there. It says nothing about how they got there, and isn\'t related to that at all. Evolution can exist with any other theory on how things began, including creation.
[/b]
Your answer:
So your giving up your debate on there not being a intellegent creator?
[/b]
Can you seriously not see your own ignorance and failure in understanding even the simplest of paragraphs?? :mad: :evil:
-
The Bible tells us that God created Adam and Eve just a few thousand years ago, by some fundamentalist interpretations. Science informs us that this is mere fiction and that man is a few million years old, and that civilization just tens of thousands of years old. Could it be, however, that conventional science is just as mistaken as the Bible stories? There is a great deal of archeological evidence that the history of life on earth might be far different than what current geological and anthropological texts tell us. Consider these astonishing finds:
The Grooved Spheres
Over the last few decades, miners in South Africa have been digging up mysterious metal spheres. Origin unknown, these spheres measure approximately an inch or so in diameter, and some are etched with three parallel grooves running around the equator. Two types of spheres have been found: one is composed of a solid bluish metal with flecks of white; the other is hollowed out and filled with a spongy white substance. The kicker is that the rock in which they where found is Precambrian - and dated to 2.8 billion years old! Who made them and for what purpose is unknown.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fgrooved_sphere.jpg&hash=0938b27cf9159705468c3d40f79d895259236507)
The Dropa Stones
In 1938, an archeological expedition led by Dr. Chi Pu Tei into the Baian-Kara-Ula mountains of China made an astonishing discovery in some caves that had apparently been occupied by some ancient culture. Buried in the dust of ages on the cave floor were hundreds of stone disks. Measuring about nine inches in diameter, each had a circle cut into the center and was etched with a spiral groove, making it look for all the world like some ancient phonograph record some 10,000 to 12,000 years old. The spiral groove, it turns out, is actually composed of tiny hieroglyphics that tell the incredible story of spaceships from some distant world that crash-landed in the mountains. The ships were piloted by people who called themselves the Dropa, and the remains of whose descendents, possibly, were found in the cave.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fdropa_stone.jpg&hash=bf32b2585488d351b56fbe35250113f6e38996ad)
The Ica Stones
Beginning in the 1930s, the father of Dr. Javier Cabrera, Cultural Anthropologist for Ica, Peru, discovered many hundreds of ceremonial burial stones in the tombs of the ancient Incas. Dr. Cabrera, carrying on his father\'s work, has collected more than 1,100 of these andesite stones, which are estimated to be between 500 and 1,500 years old and have become known collectively as the Ica Stones. The stones bear etchings, many of which are sexually graphic (which was common to the culture), some picture idols and others depict such practices as open- heart surgery and brain transplants. The most astonishing etchings, however, clearly represent dinosaurs - brontosaurs, triceratops (see photo), stegosaurus and pterosaurs. While skeptics consider the Ica Stones a hoax, their authenticity has neither been proved or disproved.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fica_stone_lg.jpg&hash=cce94d0b9446750faf625b1162f1dc2bb3caeb77)
The Antikythera Mechanism
A perplexing artifact was recovered by sponge-divers from a shipwreck in 1900 off the coast of Antikythera, a small island that lies northwest of Crete. The divers brought up from the wreck a great many marble and and bronze statues that had apparently been the ship\'s cargo. Among the findings was a hunk of corroded bronze that contained some kind of mechanism composed of many gears and wheels. Writing on the case indicated that it was made in 80 B.C., and many experts at first thought it was an astrolabe, an astronomer\'s tool. An x-ray of the mechanism, however, revealed it to be far more complex, containing a sophisticated system of differential gears. Gearing of this complexity was not known to exist until 1575! It is still unknown who constructed this amazing instrument 2,000 years ago or how the technology was lost.
CLICK HERE FOR THE PIC (http://paranormal.about.com/library/graphics/antikythera_lg.jpg)
The Baghdad Battery
Today batteries can be found in any grocery, drug, convenience and department store you come across. Well, here\'s a battery that\'s 2,000 years old! Known as the Baghdad Battery, this curiosity was found in the ruins of a Parthian village believed to date back to between 248 B.C. and 226 A.D. The device consists of a 5-1/2-inch high clay vessel inside of which was a copper cylinder held in place by asphalt, and inside of that was an oxidized iron rod. Experts who examined it concluded that the device needed only to be filled with an acid or alkaline liquid to produce an electric charge. It is believed that this ancient battery might have been used for electroplating objects with gold. If so, how was this technology lost... and the battery not rediscovered for another 1,800 years?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fbaghdad_battery_lg.jpg&hash=e928190906c6c9c97ba6e0f96649ad495cd01c89)
-
The Coso Artifact
While mineral hunting in the mountains of California near Olancha during the winter of 1961, Wallace Lane, Virginia Maxey and Mike Mikesell found a rock, among many others, that they thought was a geode - a good addition for their gem shop. Upon cutting it open, however, Mikesell found an object inside that seemed to be made of white porcelain. In the center was a shaft of shiny metal. Experts estimated that it should have taken about 500,000 years for this fossil- encrusted nodule to form, yet the object inside was obviously of sophisticated human manufacture. Further investigation revealed that the porcelain was surround by a hexagonal casing, and an x-ray revealed a tiny spring at one end. Some who have examined the evidence say it looks very much like a modern-day spark plug. How did it get inside a 500,000-year-old rock?
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fcoso_lg.jpg&hash=090f4562b792ec0336e071adde1cdda67620f2e6)
Ancient Model Aircraft
There are artifacts belonging to ancient Egyptian and Central American cultures that look amazingly like modern-day aircraft. The Egyptian artifact, found in a tomb at Saqquara, Egypt in 1898, is a six-inch wooden object that strongly resembles a model airplane, with fuselage, wings and tail. Experts believe the object is so aerodynamic that it is actually able to glide. The small object discovered in Central America (shown at right), and estimated to be 1,000 years old, is made of gold and could easily be mistaken for a model of a delta-wing aircraft - or even the Space Shuttle. It even features what looks like a pilot\'s seat.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fsa_plane2.jpg&hash=8eebb8360f33f57590b42b9d259712e932b67ab2)
Giant Stone Balls of Costa Rica
Workmen hacking and burning their way through the dense jungle of Costa Rica to clear an area for banana plantations in the 1930s stumbled upon some incredible objects: dozens of stone balls, many of which were perfectly spherical. They varied in size from as small as a tennis ball to an astonishing 8 feet in diameter and weighing 16 tons! Although the great stone balls are clearly man-made, it is unknown who made them, for what purpose and, most puzzling, how they achieved such spherical precision.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fstone_ball_lg.jpg&hash=954874be7bd91627ec8ad5fa6b4519222cf1affe)
Impossible Fossils
Fossils, as we learned in grade school, appear in rocks that were formed many thousands of years ago. Yet there are a number of fossils that just don\'t make geological or historical sense. A fossil of a human handprint, for example, was found in limestone estimated to be 110 million years old. What appears to be a fossilized human finger found in the Canadian Arctic also dates back 100 to 110 million years ago. And what appears to be the fossil of a human footprint, possibly wearing a sandal, was found near Delta, Utah in a shale deposit estimated to be 300 million to 600 million years old.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fhandprint.jpg&hash=1a778a7959c545c7ec38c82ecf174c39b23196f1)
Out-of-Place Metal Objects
Humans were not even around 65 million years ago, never mind people who could work metal. So then how does science explain semi-ovoid metallic tubes dug out of 65-million-year-old Cretaceous chalk in France? In 1885, a block of coal was broken open to find a metal cube obviously worked by intelligent hands. In 1912, employees at an electric plant broke apart a large chunk of coal out of which fell an iron pot! A nail was found embedded in a sandstone block from the Mesozoic Era. And there are many, many more such anomalies.
(https://psx5central.com/community/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fparanormal.about.com%2Flibrary%2Fgraphics%2Fmetal_tube.jpg&hash=0328b1fd6fc0bd069700b71d8d44c9f8ff140e6a)
What are we to make of these finds? There are several possibilities:
- Intelligent humans date back much, much further than we realize.
- Other intelligent beings and civilizations existed on earth far beyond our recorded history.
- Our dating methods are completely inaccurate, and that stone, coal and fossils form much more rapidly than we now estimate.
In any case, these examples - and there are many more - should prompt any curious and open- minded scientist to reexamine and rethink the true history of life on earth.
BTW, This was taken from About.com
-
Well looks like Clowd has been "troll a lized" and his post stripped down to 2 or so. Well looks like he\'ll have to start his game over and start levling up again on this forum. :D
But then again , admins and mods here are sensible people. If you would just listen to what they ask you to do then all would be well. If you put up a public apology to all and esp. to the admins and mods, maybe they\'ll be kind enough to remove the troll tag and reinstate you with your avatarr and original post count. :) Good Luck.
P.S. LOL Vid. Great pic. We need more of those in ...you know...what...shhhhh
Lenny : Hey shuuuut upppppp
LOL
-
Not likely. We expect results, not apologies. Actions speak louder then words. Besides, he annoys us and it\'s fun giving the morons what for. :)
-
Originally posted by Gohan
What are we to make of these finds? There are several possibilities:
- Intelligent humans date back much, much further than we realize.
- Other intelligent beings and civilizations existed on earth far beyond our recorded history.
- Our dating methods are completely inaccurate, and that stone, coal and fossils form much more rapidly than we now estimate.
Here\'s another possibility: This world was created from the remains of other worlds. That would explain why there are so many old fossils of Dinosaurs and humans even if you believe that the world is only 6002 years old.
Those are some really interesting discoveries Gohan. If those objects really were built on this world, it\'s too bad the technology died out or we would be much more technologically advanced today than we are now.
Ryu, did you ban Clowd, or did you just reduce his post count? If he\'s not banned...
Clowd:
This may be called off the subject, but in order to debate I must know this.
Shockwaves, which do you believe.
I think it\'s funny how you are asking Shockwaves what he believes, when you have ignored our request multiple times to tell us what religion you belong to. If you really do feel that your religion is true (obviously you do), you shouldn\'t be afraid of telling us what it is, right?
Videoholic, if you want an intermission, just go into the "Hot Babe\'s Thread 2" thread. There is no need for that in this thread (not to sound pushy or anything, I just think that this thread would be better off staying on topic. :))
-
well you know what Ryu...you can go...errr go eat some rotten Roma sammiches? YEAH GO EAT SOME YOU *in dubbed voice* stupid melon farmer!!! LOL :laughing:
-
He wasn\'t banned. I just messed with his account a little bit. The pic was Samewise\'s idea. ;)
-
The inspired writers of the bible knew that the earth was a circle, (God is seated above the circle of the earth) and that God hangs it upon nothing which means the earth just floats in space. - Clowd
So you\'re saying that god taught these simple chosen nomads and farmers about advanced astronomy? He is god, so it\'s not like he can\'t impart the understanding upon them.. however.. as it is written he did give the bible to his "chosen" so that they might spread his word. Now these chosen are not god, how could they have possibly been able to explain all this to their followers? That\'s like you going deep into the African congo to some hunter/gatherer tribe and try to explain advanced scientific principals to them. They simply couldn\'t understand, you would be laughed at and disregarded as a fool. (A feeling that shouldn\'t be wholly unfamiliar to you by now) After all, Jesus merely said he was the king of kings, and this father\'s kingdom was greater than all the nations of earth. He was talking about heaven, yet he was crucified by the Romans for hearacy and subversion of the Roman empire. Christ\'s message didn\'t even begin gaining popularity until 200 years AFTER Christ and all his disiples had been hunted down and killed.
Yeah, these people sound like a real open minded bunch.
Gohan - Some of those discoveries are probably hoaxes or mistakes.. and others.. well. Heh, noone ever said our views of societies true age were completely accurate. It was just, what, 10 years ago that the Sphinx of Egypt was found to be some 6,000-10,000 years older than we previously thought. There\'s still quite a bit we need to learn about our world before we can write anything off as "gods doing" or say that mankind is as old as the earth itself. There\'s an example found in Michael Crichton\'s book "Sphere" which I like. It states that what we belive to be Aliens now could just be humans from the future who are observing their past and studying us. Maybe their odd shape is due to *gasp* our future evolution... which is why they\'re often described as humanoid in appearance. If the idea of a multiverse is correct (not saying it is), that allows for a "type" of time travel without all the paradoxs that follow with it. I can jus see it now.. some scientist from the future standing on the shore of an ancient ocean sayin...
"Psst... Bob.. come here. Yeah, come over here. Check this out. *Crushes Trilobyte under his foot* Hah hahahaha That\'s gonna be causeing some people to start scratching their heads in about 500 million years."
Anyhow, if I had a way-back machine, I think I\'d be most interested in checking out the Library of Alexandria. That was, at the time, believed to be the largest and most comprehensive collection of human knowlage on the planet. Alexandria was a city of scholars, and by finding out what was lost there we\'d probably have a much greater understanding of who we are and how we came to be.
Info on the Legend of Alexandrian Library (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/GreekScience/Students/Ellen/Museum.html)
(Edit: This sort of contradicts my above statement, yet also proves to Clowd that you don\'t need "devine" wisdom to have a basic understanding of how the universe works. This is also evident in the Aztech calander (Mayan?) which was created around the same time if not before the Bible was as I recall.)
As for the Big-Bang, I\'m fairly sure that it\'s been proven with some of the latest pictures from the Hubble Space Telescope. There was an issue of TIME Magazine from I believe July or August of last year that explained how Scientists now think they know how the universe started and how it\'s going to end. The conclusion they came to was that our universe dosen\'t expand and contract like we thought it might have.. it\'s not a repeating loop.. it has a definate begining.. and it will end. Well maybe not end.. but eventually just breakdown into bits and pieces of protons and energy growing farther and farther apart.. dissapating forever. Well anyhow, the one thing we don\'t know about the Big Bang is "How" it started. As Stephen Hawkings explains, we can see back far enough to see it happening.. but not starting.. we don\'t know what came before because we can\'t figure out what happened much before a billionth of a second after it happened.
How the universe may end. (http://www.time.com/time/covers/1101010625/story.html)
Edit: I did provide the link to the Time Magazine artical because I think it\'s an increadibly interesting read. I\'ll provide others upon request. :D
Also, if you want to read some silly shyt, visit this page.
Aliens and the Bible? (http://www.think-aboutit.com/Spiritual/aliens_and_the_bible_2.htm)
Of course, since it mentions the word "Bible" in there a few times.. Clowd will probably take it as an absolute truth. :rolleyes:
Oh, and just for f*ck\'s sake, here\'s a link that explains the discoveries in Iraq which ellude to a "biblical" sized flood happening at around 5,200 BC.. around Noah\'s time.Biblical flood? (http://www.naplesnews.com/today/religion/d321241a.htm)
-
ohhh evolution this, abigenowhatever that. Can\'t you all just accept the fact that I created this world and you are all my children
:D
OK, ego trip off.
Anyhoo, to belive in a creator is to me atleast a sign of...hmmm how shall I put it...weakness (probly not the right word). The thought that some god is up there smiling on us and waiting for us when we die. Nothing but fairytales IMHO.
IF...and I say IF there was a creator there would have to be a purpose. I once had the rather grim idea that all this we and all other creatures on this rock were just a giant experiment. Somebody which the primitive us must have mistaken as a god is just studying us. When you think about it any advanced being will appear to be almost godlike to a lesser being.
But that was just an idea :)
On another note, for those into these type of thoughts I suggest you check out some episodes of Stargate SG1, they ask alot of these questions, there gods are nothing but aliens on an ego trip, so they ask questions like did we create religion or was it all brought upon us etc...
-
Originally posted by Clowd
This is from the standpoint of a human. If you were in space looking at the earth, you would say its the shape of a circle. Sphere, circle its basically the same thing. What shape is a basketball? I would say its a circle
Do you think Job would say the circle that is slightly flatened at the poles?
EDIT: Job wasnt in space, in case you took it that way
Nice avatar clowd. :laughing: To argue with you, you are an idiot. A sphere and a circle are two entirely different things. A circle is a 2D object. This is a circle ----> :evil: The smily is a circle. A sphere is a 3D object. Like our earth or your mouseball. I have never heard anyone refer to a basketball as a circle, or even the earth. I always hear globe (earth), or sphere or even heard ball which is a sphere. When you say circle referring to a sphere, you sound like you failed 2nd grade when doing shapes.
-
What a waste of time, 1000 post in less that three weeks, and 90% from retarded arguments he couldn\'t back up...
yep that\'s clowd for you. He ruined the values of this forum.
What happened to just talking?
-
Gohan:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/spheres.html
http://skepdic.com/icastones.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/coso.html
The \'Impossible Fossil\' doesn\'t look too much like a handprint. Its spread is wrong, the palm is too short and too wide, and the fingers are all too short.
Fossilized Finger:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mom/mom-review.html
-
Originally posted by Titan
Nice avatar clowd. :laughing: To argue with you, you are an idiot. A sphere and a circle are two entirely different things. A circle is a 2D object. This is a circle ----> :evil: The smily is a circle. A sphere is a 3D object. Like our earth or your mouseball. I have never heard anyone refer to a basketball as a circle, or even the earth. I always hear globe (earth), or sphere or even heard ball which is a sphere. When you say circle referring to a sphere, you sound like you failed 2nd grade when doing shapes.
The hebrew word used in the bible for circle can be translated sphere.
Tommorow I will post everything
-
Originally posted by Clowd
Tommorow I will post everything
Sure you will, like the "facts" you have posted b4?
-
Originally posted by shockwaves
Neither one or two has anything to do with the big bang. Why can\'t you see that?
You have to believe in one, pick.
-
Originally posted by luckee
Sure you will, like the "facts" you have posted b4?
Its around 5-10 pages long and has quotes from scientists, facts, etc
Me stubborn? Why cant people realize that evolution is a theory.
All scientists recongize that
-
Me stubborn? Why cant people realize that evolution is a theory.
We have been saying this for the past 3 pages, you just CAN\'T READ. I even BOLD the important parts oF a post and yoU STILL don\'t GET IT. What more do you need from our Consistant posts? Do you even Know what readIng compreheNsion is Guy?
Man, it\'s lame reading OveR yOur Nimrod posts.
-
looks like clowd used to peel paint from the wall and eat it when he was young :)
-
<----love subliminal messages :D
-
Well, it took me a minute, but I figured out the secret messege...
-
Grreeeat... 5 to 10 pages of "proof". HAH, I gotta see this. How much does anyone wanna bet he\'s gonna post a link to that other thread? :p
Bring it on junior, we\'re waiting. :evil:
-
Hey Gohon. I just read your posts on the old artifacts by supossedly humans. I saw a movie in school that had a few of those artifacts. A movie called The Search For Ancient Astronauts. They had showed things about how it\'s possible that aliens could have built those. It\'s possible. Although, there could also be an explanation for those. Can\'t give one but it could be ancient astronauts.