You know what's ridiculous? [Spirituality & Religion]
When someone tells you that evolution is just too unlikely and that a creator god is the more likely option.
Like, how do you figure?! lol
Like, how do you figure?! lol
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
ladycae · 100+, F
interestingly, i have been giving this some study. and i have come to the conclusion that evolution is not the be-all and end-all of how the universe and life began. there are scientific facts such as the water molecule is made up of two hydrogen and one oxygen molecule. these are undisputed facts. they have been proven to be true and can be replicated over and over. then there is theory. the possibility that maybe this is the way things might be. and i emphasize [b]MAYBE[/b] because some posters here act and would like you to assume that evolution is fact. it is not which is why it is called a theory, a possibility, not scientific fact.
in another thread in this section (2 threads up i believe), i posted a video that shows that there is a possibility that dinosaurs are not 168 million years old. in fact, according to some experts, they are at the least 512 years old. this throws the entire theory of evolution out of wack because for evolution to work it needs time. it needs millions and millions of years to complete it's so-called transition from one species into another. Times that is now being questioned due to the discovery of soft tissue containing blood vessels and cells that by science's own conclusions cannot survive for millions of years. and if dinosaurs are younger than science, the entire theory of evolution is thrown on its ear because it upsets that need for millions of years to have passed in order for evolution to have taken place.
in this thread i did post a portion of an interview with a well respected noted scientist who does not believe evolution has proved it'self
there are more things that disprove evolution or shake up its premise but i won't go into them now because i am just studying them. But one thing is 1005 true and that is that evolution is but one scientific theory on how life began it is far from scientific fact because it has not been scientifically proven as 100% accurate.
in another thread in this section (2 threads up i believe), i posted a video that shows that there is a possibility that dinosaurs are not 168 million years old. in fact, according to some experts, they are at the least 512 years old. this throws the entire theory of evolution out of wack because for evolution to work it needs time. it needs millions and millions of years to complete it's so-called transition from one species into another. Times that is now being questioned due to the discovery of soft tissue containing blood vessels and cells that by science's own conclusions cannot survive for millions of years. and if dinosaurs are younger than science, the entire theory of evolution is thrown on its ear because it upsets that need for millions of years to have passed in order for evolution to have taken place.
in this thread i did post a portion of an interview with a well respected noted scientist who does not believe evolution has proved it'self
there are more things that disprove evolution or shake up its premise but i won't go into them now because i am just studying them. But one thing is 1005 true and that is that evolution is but one scientific theory on how life began it is far from scientific fact because it has not been scientifically proven as 100% accurate.
VoloProVeritas62 · 61-69, M
@ladycae Thank you, sister, for your insight and your studies.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
ladycae · 100+, F
So Celine do you acknowledge there is scientific fact? and scientific theory?
i am sure you believe that evolution makes the most sense but there are a lot of scientists who disagree and that is why it is not scientific fact. there are too many unanswered questions.
jack horner has so far refused to do carbon 14 dating on the soft tissue in the dinosaur bones. that makes it very suspicious to me. it would negate a huge chunk of his work were those tests to come back saying that those "168 mil" yr old bones were not that old? so it makes sense he would be reticent to test them. yet should he not as a scientist want to know what the c24 results were?
ys birds are related to dinosaurs, no one disputes that, but that fact and his further work does not negate the finding of those soft tissues in the bones. it just means he's left a hot potato and changed curse because as he has stated he wants to recreate a dinosaur.
simply because you think the explanation over the soft tissue is unlikely does not make it so. i and many many scientists find it compelling.
and again that is why evolution is just a theory. i realize to you it is God like and you are welcome to that belief.
but that is in no way makes belief in a creator god unlikely as your question asks because there are glaring holes in the theory of evolution. to a nonbeliever, there are glaring holes in the theory of a creator God. but one is no more real than the other. they are both at the end of the day theories that require faith to explain.
so it's not as ridiculous as you make it sound.
i am sure you believe that evolution makes the most sense but there are a lot of scientists who disagree and that is why it is not scientific fact. there are too many unanswered questions.
jack horner has so far refused to do carbon 14 dating on the soft tissue in the dinosaur bones. that makes it very suspicious to me. it would negate a huge chunk of his work were those tests to come back saying that those "168 mil" yr old bones were not that old? so it makes sense he would be reticent to test them. yet should he not as a scientist want to know what the c24 results were?
ys birds are related to dinosaurs, no one disputes that, but that fact and his further work does not negate the finding of those soft tissues in the bones. it just means he's left a hot potato and changed curse because as he has stated he wants to recreate a dinosaur.
simply because you think the explanation over the soft tissue is unlikely does not make it so. i and many many scientists find it compelling.
and again that is why evolution is just a theory. i realize to you it is God like and you are welcome to that belief.
but that is in no way makes belief in a creator god unlikely as your question asks because there are glaring holes in the theory of evolution. to a nonbeliever, there are glaring holes in the theory of a creator God. but one is no more real than the other. they are both at the end of the day theories that require faith to explain.
so it's not as ridiculous as you make it sound.
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment
This comment is hidden.
Show Comment