Evolution Is A Hoax!

[TruthSeeker777]

[quote name='Fixxxer' post='1206167' date='Mar 1 2007, 08:48 AM']I don't think evolution is a hoax, it's pretty obvious we have evolved. Couldn't have God started all creation that later evolved? Also, I think believing the earth is only about 6000 years old is pretty stupid, we can prove such things like dinosaur fossils are much older than 6000 years old.[/quote]
You mean believing what God said is stupid

Making a statement like that is errr ????

Do explain how obvious evolution is dear Fixxxer,i'm missing some serious links my man

And bring the prove about Dino fossils too

Do you know how easy it is to brainwash a kid?
You are told at 3 that the earth is billions of years old by the religious cult
called the evolutionists ,you believe that lie untill you die.
Unless you make some choices who to believe!

God or Men.

The word of God is for NO private interpretation

Who do you put your trust in Fixxxer?

Here's an example:

A man leaves his home and start jogging,
he turns left and left again,
he turns left again and
before he gets home he see two hooded men.

Where's he running and who is the two hooded men?

Right now you probably are brainwashed.

Do you know?

[Urib2007]

[quote name='Fixxxer' post='1206167' date='Feb 28 2007, 10:48 PM']I don't think evolution is a hoax, it's pretty obvious we have evolved. Couldn't have God started all creation that later evolved? Also, I think believing the earth is only about 6000 years old is pretty stupid, we can prove such things like dinosaur fossils are much older than 6000 years old.[/quote]

Well then Fixer get your proof together and claim that $250,000 from Dr. Horvind! Imagine what you could do with that amount of money.

I think anyone who believes that evolution is accurate and true needs to get the ball rolling in claiming that money.

[Fixxxer]

I'm not brainwashed, i know about both sides, my school teaches about both evolution and creation. Even if you dont believe in evolution of humans you can see it clearly in animals

[TruthSeeker777]

What [b]kind[/b] of animal have evolved into another [b]specie[/b]?
Love to see the scientific proof of such a miracle.

[FullTruth]

Every Religion has an evil spirit guiding it, and Religion of Evolution is no different.

I don't really care if anybody wants to believe in Evolution, but the Spirit of Evolution teaches Racism, Sexism, and many other things. I have it on good authority, the elites of the world consider themselves more evolved than us, and should rule over us. That is what spirits teach. Absolute hatred of one group against another.

You can believe in Theistic Evolution if you want. I reject the spirit of Evolution, because it teaches that the strong should get every resource, and the weak should serve the strong.

God himself moulded me. Shaped in the womb to be Fearfully and Wonderfully made.

Edited March 2, 2007 by FullTruth

[Fixxxer]

I'm wondering since the earth is only around 6 thousand years old, how did we get fossils and mainly oil? those take well over the age of the earth to form.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Fixxxer' post='1206698' date='Mar 2 2007, 12:03 AM']I'm wondering since the earth is only around 6 thousand years old, how did we get fossils and mainly oil? those take well over the age of the earth to form.[/quote]
Remember the 6000 year-old theory was invented by a protestant minister in the last century. There is absolutely no basis for it other then his own opinions.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1206197' date='Mar 1 2007, 12:26 PM']No, what ther person is suggesting is that it's a little of both.

I believe that it's important to address the issue of Micro Evolution and Macro Evolution. Defining those key terms is important because if you're suggesting that nothing evolves, that's ridiculous, but also to suggest that everything evolves with no scientific proof is also ridiculous. Most of Darwin's perceptions of evolution was based upon his experience [and time spent] at the Galapagos Islands. It was there that Darwin found animals [such as Panguins] that were normally artic animals, living in a tropical climate. This was the breaking point in Darwin's theories, which sadly Darwin went to the most extreme with later in life, but the theories of things naturally [thou I'd argue is with the power of God] evolving isn't contradictory at all.

If you'd really like to get specific in regards to Genesis, it says say that the earth was created in a specific standard of time, but that can be defined differently.

1.) Who says that God's "week" is equivilent to our "week" in regards to duration of time, etc. God is much more powerful, so we can't possibly suggest that our standards, dictate his standards.
2.) After Adam and Eve were created [thou Eve wasn't named eve yet but woman], it doesn't specify the duration of time that they'd spent in the Garden of Eden, until they were removed from the garden of eden. It could have been that Adam and Eve lived in the Garden of Eden thousands upon thousands upon thousands [possibly over 100,000?] of years before they'd sinned and were thrown from the Garden of Eden. Therefore to suggest that the earth is merely 4,000 years is to presume that you know God in his entirety.

In regards to the "Big Bang" and other theories... I'd say that without proof, we should just leave them as just that... "theories" but if an individual was curious and would like to speculate, it wouldn't be wrong to assume that God made the Big Big theory [among the others] happen to begin with and that was the method that was used to create. I mean, think about it... when human beings create, we use our hands, but when God creates, I'd imagine that he'd just made it happen by his power, strength and might.

Dont forget that our very breathe and everything that goes with that alone is just allowed to happen because of God. If it weren't for God and his power, we wouldn't even be able to take a simple breathe... its not a mistake that we're able to continue in life.

Reza[/quote]

The big-bang theory was actually developed by two people independently of each other, one of who was a Catholic priest.

And I think the distinction between macro & micro evolution is fairly important, as well.

I really love your last sentence, there, too.

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1206647' date='Mar 1 2007, 08:15 PM']What [b]kind[/b] of animal have evolved into another [b]specie[/b]?
Love to see the scientific proof of such a miracle. [/quote]

you seem to be the kind that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You put every individual that believes in some sort of "evolutioin" as "THE EVOLUTIONIST" and put them right in there with darwin, but the problem is that that way of thinking is no different then saying all black people are of the same race and charectoristics. It's apples and oranges again. Please take the time to go back and read my previous response thou because you're dodging it.

In regard to dating fosils and rocks, carbon 14 dating has some issues, like everything else. People interpreting and translating the bible have issues too, since a "word for word" translation between two languages is impossible. Does it mean that translations are 100% false? No, they have issues but still can be accurate to some degree, despite havinig problems. Also carbon 14 dating isn't the only form of dating things. The problem is that you dont know the process, the process isn't about just starting off with 14 million years and proclaiming it. It's a mathmatical process, it's about dating something that's 5 years old, checking the reaction to the chemicals, then being able to calculate that to a specific amount of years [this is just a nutshell]. It's not perfect but no system is perfect. Carbon 14 dating doesn't work on the Mediteranian Sea either, that's a flaw of it, but it doesn't mean that it's completely inaccurate because it's also been used on biblical facts, and it's come on point several times.

Reza

[TruthSeeker777]

[quote name='Fixxxer' post='1206698' date='Mar 2 2007, 07:03 AM']I'm wondering since the earth is only around 6 thousand years old, how did we get fossils and mainly oil? those take well over the age of the earth to form.[/quote]

[b]Fossils from the flood[/b],remember the earth were covered with thousands of layers of mud.
Just like the Mount of the Mississipi river building up huge layers.Many fossils that were found were standing upright.
Thats a good basis for flood evidence.
The Flood came incredibly quick,water from above and below.

[b]Oil[/b], its been proven by scientists that they can create oil from plants within a couple of hours in a Lab.
If you take in account the 300ft. fossilised tree they found while drilling for oil in Alaska.You can imagine
that the earth looked quite different from now ,it was mainly land and amazing forests and trees.
The eart will be restored just like that when Jesus returns to rule for a thousand years.

Which by the way i believe will be the 7th millenuim.
Just like God created the earth in six days,the earth will stand for 6 centuries.
God will rest on the 7th
And thats why i believe Jesus will reign for that Millenuim.
Just my thoughts from what i've learned and it make a lot of sense
when you look at what the number 7 means for God.

[Anomaly]

Actually, the type of oil produced from plants in the lab isn't really close to the type of oil pumped from underground.

Although, there currently are scientists that are exploring new theories that oil is not neccesarily created from dinosaurs and plants, there are other chemical and physic causes that create oil.

Not that I believe Evolution is a hoax, but I do believe evolution caused soley by random genetic mutations then natural selection is scientifically unsound simply according to the math. The rate of genetic mutation observed during a period of time does not allow sufficient time for the number of mutations to occur to come up with the wide variety of life forms. This theory, buy the way, is one of the foundations of the "Guided Evolution" theories, or "Intelligent Design" theories. Origianl mitocondria DNA was originally created in such a manner that it's seemingly random evolution fulfills an organized and intended final design.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Truthseeker777' post='1206811' date='Mar 2 2007, 09:32 AM'][b]Fossils from the flood[/b],remember the earth were covered with thousands of layers of mud.
Just like the Mount of the Mississipi river building up huge layers.Many fossils that were found were standing upright.
Thats a good basis for flood evidence.
The Flood came incredibly quick,water from above and below.[/quote]

Really.So you are gonna explain all the fossils on earth to the flood? Explain to me when in the last 6000 years the earth bent and separated the Applachians fossils found here to specific points in Mexico and Scotland and Morocco and buried them deep, and nowhere in between. THey are buried 50-1000 feet below ground? How are you going to explain the multiple layers of sandstone, siltstone, and coal or was there more than one flood? All those different layers had to grow and die and grow and die. Or the 4000 ft thick Catskill Delta? Are you gonna tell me the Appalachian mountains which go up to 3000 feet high were flat and underwater and reached their current height in 6000 years? Then explain to me how the Himalyas did it, as they have sedimentary rocks as well. Mount Everest is 4 miles high.

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1206797' date='Mar 2 2007, 12:47 PM']you seem to be the kind that's throwing the baby out with the bathwater. You put every individual that believes in some sort of "evolutioin" as "THE EVOLUTIONIST" and put them right in there with darwin, but the problem is that that way of thinking is no different then saying all black people are of the same race and charectoristics. It's apples and oranges again. Please take the time to go back and read my previous response thou because you're dodging it.

In regard to dating fosils and rocks, carbon 14 dating has some issues, like everything else. People interpreting and translating the bible have issues too, since a "word for word" translation between two languages is impossible. Does it mean that translations are 100% false? No, they have issues but still can be accurate to some degree, despite havinig problems. Also carbon 14 dating isn't the only form of dating things. The problem is that you dont know the process, the process isn't about just starting off with 14 million years and proclaiming it. It's a mathmatical process, it's about dating something that's 5 years old, checking the reaction to the chemicals, then being able to calculate that to a specific amount of years [this is just a nutshell]. It's not perfect but no system is perfect. Carbon 14 dating doesn't work on the Mediteranian Sea either, that's a flaw of it, but it doesn't mean that it's completely inaccurate because it's also been used on biblical facts, and it's come on point several times.

Reza[/quote]

Yeah, that's why you have to calibrate carbon dating. And it's incredibly expensive, so many artefacts aren't dated like that. When they are they send samples to different labs to make sure one lab wasn't contaminated or something. And there are other methods of dating. C-14 is just the best known.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Archaeology cat' post='1206899' date='Mar 2 2007, 04:31 PM']Yeah, that's why you have to calibrate carbon dating. And it's incredibly expensive, so many artefacts aren't dated like that. When they are they send samples to different labs to make sure one lab wasn't contaminated or something. And there are other methods of dating. C-14 is just the best known. [/quote]
Have you dated any human artifacts older than 6000 years?

[Archaeology cat]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' post='1206913' date='Mar 2 2007, 09:44 PM']Have you dated any human artifacts older than 6000 years?[/quote]

Me personally, on one of my digs, no. I dug in the US at a Big Sandy period site that was around 3000 B.C., and my work now is around 2500 B.C. However, the leader of my dig in the US also dug earlier sites (He might have dug a Clovis site, but I'm not sure now). I do look some at predynastic Egypt, around the time of the unification of Egypt (c. 3100 BC), but again, I haven't been on a site that has dated an object. In my experience they date an object or two, but they also come up with stylistic relative chronologies and then fit them together. It also helps that the Egyptians actually kept records, biased though they may be. Anyway, I've gotten close in my studies, but I don't usually go back quite that far.