7 days or 7 billion years?

mobius42 · 16-06-2009 4:21pm

Jakkass wrote: »

You say that the majority of Christians will believe in God even if they are shown proof to the contrary. How do you know this given that there is currently no proof?

You cannot prove a negative. For argument's sake, say that I tell you that all the atoms in the Universe are held together by unicorns. How would you prove me wrong? You might say that you've examined atoms and can find no unicorns. I can just say that you're not looking hard enough. If you say that you have searched every atom in the Universe, I can say that they are invisible and so on ad infinitum. There's no evidence disproving elves, unicorns or Santa Claus, but you don't believe in any of them because of that, do you? For another explanation of this argument, see here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russel%27s_teapot

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't agree that it is our only life, but what I will say is that we should strive to make it as best for everyone as possible. I don't agree with you on consciousness, or afterlife because you have no means of assessment apart from a hunch. However, why don't you think that people who have faith are making the best of their lives?

This is one aspect of Christianity that has always puzzled me. If you believe that after you die that you are going to go to an eternal paradise, then why bother with this life? Shouldn't you pray for death as quickly as possible so that you can get to paradise as quickly as possible?

Twin-go wrote: »

The most stable countries to live in with the least amount of social disorder are countries where Atheists are in the Majority.

I don't think there is any country where atheists are in the majority. Also, atheism may be a product of stable societies not the other way around. In less stable societies, education is poorer and people are generally living with a lot more fear. Both of these factors encourage religious belief.

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:22pm

Evolution has'nt been proven and is not fact, its theory, theory is an idea, if it were fact then WHY have they built the large hydron collider under the ground in switzerland, their still trying to find "THE GOD PARTICLE" the most important and mystifying part of the whole evolution THEORY, its the bit that actually is the source of life, an energy particle that isnt understood by anybody.
I 100% believe in God, that he put us here for a purpose, like a test, I remember in school when the teacher left the room, some of us would start throwing things at each other, searching his draw, stealing from it, as we'd hear him come back down the corridor we'd all sit back down as innocent as pie.
My point being, if God was ever present we wouldnt have free will, we wouldnt be killing each other and all the other sh1t we get up to, one day the teacher suddenly said "I'll be only 5 mins and left the room, he walked up the corridor as heavy footed as ever, then snook back through the gym and tiptoed to the door, peeping through the crack he saw what we were up to, and who was up to it and who wasnt, he then tiptoed away, through the gym and came back heavy footed down the corridor, all the innocent's jumped back into their seats, he came in as normal, sat down and asked what had gone on while he was away, we said "nothing Sir", he then called 6 of us up and told us what he'd done, we tried to deny it, but we were caught, he wanted to find out who was naughty and nice, just like God.
I'm not a religious person, i dispise the catholic faith and most religions, it has been used by the powers that be to divide and conquer.
When i began to keep tropical fish I thought you fill the tank with water , get it to the right temperature and throw in the fish, not so, i had to build an eco system in the tank and sacrifice the first fish to get the whole system going, so the first fish i bought were hardy types, they basically died from their own sh1t till the system settled down, reminded me of the dinosour, it was needed to establish our ecosystem, then eliminated to make way for the prize fish, humans.
Evolution hasnt established the missing link, and is a never ending list of probabilities and coincidence, that cant be proven, to say that all life and the complexity of it and all its wonders came from gas is absolute rubbish, that i repeat hasnt and cant be proven, people simply believe it because they are told so without looking deeper into it. Seek and you will find, or just stay an ignorant idiot that believes what they are told.
I have my own reasons to believe in God that I wont be going into here.

bleg · 16-06-2009 4:24pm

the higgs boson i.e. god particle, has got nothing to do with evolution

Spear · 16-06-2009 4:30pm

uprising wrote: »

Evolution has'nt been proven and is not fact, its theory, theory is an idea

No matter how many times that lie is repeated it won't be any less of a lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

Sam Vimes · 16-06-2009 4:31pm

Pherekydes wrote: »

And they do it in the name of atheism, whether they admit it or not.

They are atheists but that doesn't mean it's done in the name of atheism. They do it in the name of nationalism. They replace love of god with love of state and violently force people to stay in line. That does not say anything about whether a state where most people are voluntarily atheists would be good or not. All it says is that violent oppression is a bad thing

Mena · 16-06-2009 4:32pm

uprising wrote: »

Evolution has'nt been proven and is not fact, its theory, theory is an idea,

You're mistaking colloquial use of "theory" for it's real meaning.

uprising wrote: »

if it were fact then WHY have they built the large hydron collider under the ground in switzerland, their still trying to find "THE GOD PARTICLE" the most important and mystifying part of the whole evolution THEORY,

May I suggest you actually go read up what evolution is about because based on this statement, you don't have the first clue.

philologos · 16-06-2009 4:32pm

mobius42 wrote: »

This is one aspect of Christianity that has always puzzled me. If you believe that after you die that you are going to go to an eternal paradise, then why bother with this life? Shouldn't you pray for death as quickly as possible so that you can get to paradise as quickly as possible?

I should pray to stay alive for as long as possible IMO. Although the prospect of heaven is a tempting one, I want to stay alive so I can sow the seeds for other people to engage in a meaningful relationship with God. I also don't believe that one should believe because of heaven, and I think that is a selfish reason to believe in God. Believing in God for me is nothing more than recognising what is real and being thankful for it.

Twin-go · 16-06-2009 4:33pm

Jakkass wrote: »

You say that the majority of Christians will believe in God even if they are shown proof to the contrary. How do you know this given that there is currently no proof?.

They claim to have Faith.

Faith: "belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof" Encarta Dictionary.

Jakkass wrote: »

I don't agree that it is our only life, but what I will say is that we should strive to make it as best for everyone as possible. I don't agree with you on consciousness, or afterlife because you have no means of assessment apart from a hunch. However, why don't you think that people who have faith are making the best of their lives?

Is faith not a hunch?

My believe is based on Fact. When one Dies there is no brain activity. But I am open to be proven wrong, if somebody can show me evidence of the afterlife.

I feel they are not making the most of their lives because they have limited themselves to their believe in the existence of a God. they devote their live to this God and make decisions through out their live base on their God. Religion removes a measure of free will to an extent.

Jakkass wrote: »

I think for myself, and in this independent thought process I decided to follow God. By the by, Christianity as we know it today is based on Judaism just as it was in the first century

But once you decided to follow God all future decisions you make will be influenced by your God.
Christianity as we know did stem from Judaism I agree but, the church as we know it today is not Christs church. It is far different.

Jakkass wrote: »

Nonsense. Anyone who says this is picking and choosing. Why does nobody consider China or North Korea in these assessments they make? Interesting bias no?.

China is not an Atheist country. Their society is controlled by Communionists who limit peoples involvement in religion and their free will to a certian extent in many other aspects of live. Many people in China would practice religions such as Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism if they had a different form of government. I don't know enough about North Korea to comment.

Sweeden for example has a high standard of living low crime rates and has an Atheist majority

Jakkass wrote: »

Curiosity.

It was my curiosity that has got me to move away from the church I was raised in. I started asking questions that religion could not answer. To be fare they where questions sience could not answer either but at least with sience I feel I am getting closer to the answers all the time.

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:33pm

Spear wrote: »

No matter how many times that lie is repeated it won't be any less of a lie.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory

Theories are intended to be an accurate, predictive description of the natural world. However, it is sometimes not clear whether the conclusions derived from the theory inform us about the nature of the world, or the nature of the theory.

Since when is predictive description a fact?, read what you just quoted, and show me the facts.

cherryghost · 16-06-2009 4:35pm

Smart Bug wrote: »

It's 200 years since Darwin's birth & 150 since the publication of 'On the Origin of Species'.

So, how far have we come? Have we evolved or are we still superstitious idiots, hmm?

What's your view on life on earth & how it got here...

lol fail thread is fail

TheInquisitor · 16-06-2009 4:36pm

Earthhorse wrote: »

If we're descended from apes then how come we don't build our houses in trees? Can someone please just answer that question for me?

I don't know if he's being serious or not

. (I hope not)

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:36pm

bleg wrote: »

the higgs boson i.e. god particle, has got nothing to do with evolution

The higgs boson is the source of life, how can the source of life have nothing to do with evolution, after all evolution is a theory of how life got here.

TheInquisitor · 16-06-2009 4:38pm

Earthhorse wrote: »

And another thing; if man came out of the ocean billions of years ago...how come apes don't live in the water?

Lol you answer your own question here. And we did not leave the water as apes , man , we left it as lets say crocodile or turtle or beaver like creatures that could go on land and water and eventually evolved to live just on land.

piby · 16-06-2009 4:39pm

Science is my God and evolution is my religion!

Spear · 16-06-2009 4:39pm

uprising wrote: »

Theories are intended to be an accurate, predictive description of the natural world. However, it is sometimes not clear whether the conclusions derived from the theory inform us about the nature of the world, or the nature of the theory.

Since when is predictive description a fact?, read what you just quoted, and show me the facts.

The first line was a giveaway.

"In the sciences generally, a scientific theory (the same as an empirical theory) is constructed from elementary theorems that consist in empirical data about observable phenomena."

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 4:40pm

uprising wrote: »

The higgs boson is the source of life, how can the source of life have nothing to do with evolution, after all evolution is a theory of how life got here.

Evolution explains the diversity of life not how it started. Are you not contradicting your posts above?
Also, doesn't the latest form of creationism (ID) do away with Adam & Eve and original sin (such a disgusting idea to begin with).

pts · 16-06-2009 4:40pm

uprising, if you seriously want to understand evolution I highly recomend this video:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vss1VKN2rf8

When you make arguments like the ones you've just made you make yourself look silly as you are showing your ignorance in the subject matter.

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:41pm

Spear wrote: »

The first line was a giveaway.

"In the sciences generally, a scientific theory (the same as an empirical theory) is constructed from elementary theorems that consist in empirical data about observable phenomena."

Enough mumbo jumbo, where are the facts that evolution is fact.

Sam Vimes · 16-06-2009 4:43pm

uprising wrote: »

The higgs boson is the source of life, how can the source of life have nothing to do with evolution, after all evolution is a theory of how life got here.

The higgs boson is not the source of life

And evolution is the theory of how life developed from simple to complex. It doesn't cover how life came from non life

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 4:44pm

uprising wrote: »

Enough mumbo jumbo, where are the facts that evolution is fact.

Genetics, don't humans and chimps share over 90% DNA, so were humans designed from chimps?

Spear · 16-06-2009 4:45pm

uprising wrote: »

Enough mumbo jumbo, where are the facts that evolution is fact.

You mean other than the large, detailed, consistent body of evidence?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution

Sam Vimes · 16-06-2009 4:45pm

uprising wrote: »

Enough mumbo jumbo, where are the facts that evolution is fact.

We need a new flu vaccine every year because the virus evolves. There's your proof

mobius42 · 16-06-2009 4:46pm

Jakkass wrote: »

I never said that it did give credence. It's just absolutely absurd to suggest that something exists, not only just something, but a place where we as humanity invest so much of our time and effort in, to end up with it being "meaningless".

I don't consider it closed minded to use a bit of common sense and reason.

I find it absurd to suggest that something exists because it was created by something else that "just exists" i.e. God. I also find it the height of arrogance to suggest that we have some sort of special position in the Universe despite the fact that there is nothing to suggest that we do. The Universe doesn't owe you a meaning of life nor does it owe you a reward for your investment.

Jakkass wrote: »

I consider divine revelation to be a record of communication between God and prophets. It's not "evidence" that is the concern however. The debate surrounds indication. What indicates to you that God exists, or what indicates to you that God does not. As for someone who cannot see how God can be indicated for, or what suggests that God exists, I would reccommend that you read some apologetics.

Perhaps you and I have a different understanding of what I mean when I say evidence? By evidence, I mean precisely that which indicates that God exists! And as for apologetics, it's just mental gymnastics for the purpose of furthering a delusion. It answers nothing, in an incredible fancy way.

Jakkass wrote: »

Atheism has nothing to do with reality, it's a mere denial. Whether or not such a denial is accurate in reality is a totally different question.

Not true. Anti-theism is a denial of God's existence. Atheism is just lack of belief. I don't believe in your God for the same reason you don't believe in Thor or Zeus.

Jakkass wrote: »

No, I'm not. I'm merely saying that there is only so far atheism can go in satisfying someones intellectual curiosity.

I competely agree. Atheism is not a philosophy.

Jakkass wrote: »

Faith and reason go hand in hand in terms of a Christian outlook. Likewise, reason is absolutely useless on its own, it must go hand in hand with empiricism or what one can gain through experience.

Firstly, the attitudes of your fellow Christians strongly undermine your first sentence! Also, you are right about empiricism. Reason and empiricism are pillars of the scientific method. However, how does it relate to Christianity? If you were empirical would you not question the very basis of the Bible? Would you not discover that most of the gospels were written 100 years after Jesus' death? Would you not question the various gospels that were not included in the Bible and how the ones that got in were translated? You talk of empiricism yet I see no evidence of you actually using it.

Jakkass wrote: »

Christians reason the Biblical scriptures because it is considered to be a chronology of peoples experiences. However, it is important also to have indication external to the Biblical text.

I think you'll find that most Christians haven't even read the Bible not to mention "reason" it. You are quite in the minority considering that you have even questioned and taken the time to understand what it is you are supposed to believe in.

Jakkass wrote: »

Which God? - The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob seems to be the most reasonable to me.

Why?

Jakkass wrote: »

Why? - Why believe in God? Investigate what Christians actually argue. I've listed quite a few authors so far on this thread that give pretty clear reasons why one should believe in God.

I didn't mean why believe in God (a whole other argument), I meant why is life about developing a relationship with God?

Jakkass wrote: »

What is God? - This is where divine revelation kicks in. God revealed Himself to prophets and reveals Himself to us on a daily basis in our daily lives as Christians.

That doesn't tell me what God is.

Jakkass wrote: »

How does believing in God further understanding? - Well belief in God requires people to assess issues beyond a face value approach. Isolating what we can know to what we can only see at face value is a rather limiting worldview.

It depends on what you mean by "face value". Yes, we should investigate deeply the many mysteries of our Universe, but you don't investigate by making crazy stuff up and thinking the meaning of life was solved 2000 years ago by Middle-Eastern shepherds.

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 4:46pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

We need a new flu vaccine every year because the virus evolves. There's your proof

I thought Satan creates them.

Max Power1 · 16-06-2009 4:47pm

Twilightning wrote: »

You can't 'believe' in evolution since it's not based on faith. It's actual fact. If you don't adhere to it, there's something wrong.

Pretty much sums it up IMO.

Thats an important point that most theists dont get.

ScumLord · 16-06-2009 4:47pm

Would domestic animals be an example of a type of forced evolution. I seen some program where they showed the domestication process from a wild animal to a domesticated one.

mobius42 · 16-06-2009 4:48pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

We need a new flu vaccine every year because the virus evolves. There's your proof

Smart Bug · 16-06-2009 4:50pm

ScumLord wrote: »

Would domestic animals be an example of a type of forced evolution. I seen some program where they showed the domestication process from a wild animal to a domesticated one.

Yes.

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:50pm

pts wrote: »

uprising, if you seriously want to understand evolution I highly recomend this video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vss1VKN2rf8

When you make arguments like the ones you've just made you make yourself look silly as you are showing your ignorance in the subject matter.

I think you look the silly one, listening to a man explain some theory as fact, when did evolution end or will we become something else?

philologos · 16-06-2009 4:50pm

Twin-go wrote: »

They claim to have Faith.

Faith: "belief in, devotion to, or trust in somebody or something, especially without logical proof" Encarta Dictionary.

I do believe in Christianity, and I don't believe there is absolute proof for God. I do however believe that there are indications for it. I believe both go together.

Twin-go wrote: »

Is faith not a hunch?

Depends on what kind of faith you are discussing. If you are discussing blind faith perhaps it is just a hunch. However if you are dealing with what is or what is not more probable and give reasons for believing then that isn't blind faith is it?

Twin-go wrote: »

My believe is based on Fact. When one Dies there is no brain activity. But I am open to be proven wrong, if somebody can show me evidence of the afterlife.

Beliefs aren't based on fact. If they were they wouldn't be beliefs they would be well, facts and they wouldn't be so contentious.

Twin-go wrote: »

I feel they are not making the most of their lives because they have limited themselves to their believe in the existence of a God. they devote their live to this God and make decisions through out their live base on their God. Religion removes a measure of free will to an extent.

Ah right. So because you feel I amn't making the most of my life I amn't. What kind of reasoning is that?

I think Christians are more free than atheists or agnostics. My views aren't based on popularity, I have the freedom not to be bound to the will of man, I don't have to be bound to social norms. I reject those who are tempting me into things that turn out to be a detriment.

I'd far prefer to have a devotion to God than a devotion to the evils of this world.

Twin-go wrote: »

But once you decided to follow God all future decisions you make will be influenced by your God.

So? I would rather my decisions be influenced by God than by humanity to be honest with you.

Twin-go wrote: »

Christianity as we know did stem from Judaism I agree but, the church as we know it today is not Christs church. It is far different.

Which church are you referring to? I've seen many Christians who truly want to live out their faith in honesty and integrity. Most of them in the younger age demographic.

By the way what do you have for assessing what is Christ's church? Why is Christs church better than a church of man. Didn't you just say a minute ago that morals contrived by people should be more important than morals revealed to mankind by God?

Twin-go wrote: »

China is not an Atheist country. Their society is controlled by Communionists who limit peoples involvement in religion and their free will to a certian extent in many other aspects of live. Many people in China would practice religions such as Confucianism, Buddhism, and Taoism if they had a different form of government. I don't know enough about North Korea to comment.

Yes, China is an atheist country. The majority of people are atheists, therefore it should be considered with the rest of the countries you are considering. Let's be intellectually honest. By the way, communism and atheism are not mutually exclusive. It is possible to be a communist and an atheist, this is the way most communist states operated in the 20th century.

Twin-go wrote: »

Sweeden for example has a high standard of living low crime rates and has an Atheist majority

We can all pick the best of the batch and ignore the worst.

Twin-go wrote: »

It was my curiosity that has got me to move away from the church I was raised in. I started asking questions that religion could not answer. To be fare they where questions sience could not answer either but at least with sience I feel I am getting closer to the answers all the time.

Fair enough. I feel I am getting closer to the truth through my religion, and through other learning I would do. I don't believe religion and science are mutually exclusive either.

Boosh · 16-06-2009 4:52pm

uprising wrote: »

Evolution has'nt been proven and is not fact, its theory, theory is an idea

Yeah just like that damn stupid "theory" of Gravity. Pffffffftttttt i don't believe in that gravity stuff either.

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 4:53pm

ScumLord wrote: »

Would domestic animals be an example of a type of forced evolution. I seen some program where they showed the domestication process from a wild animal to a domesticated one.

Yes, the term would be artificial selection. Carl Sagan goes over it very well in Cosmos. Basically all traits are inherited form the parents through genes (thousands of years ago they didn't know the full mechanics like we do now). Take dogs as an example, all dogs share ancestry with wolves or dogs and wolves share ancestry with a wolf like creature. People started breeding wild creatures which displayed tame traits, the offspring would be tame and each genereation would be tamer. Subsequently dogs would be bred based on traits, swimming herding etc Over maybe a dozen generations a new breed may arise and if all the dogs of the same breed interbreed then the breed is maintaned. Soemtimes pure bred dogs fall sick easier than mutts, this is due to the founder effect because of a shallow gene pool.
Basically through artificial selection (every domesticated animal and crops) new breeds can arise in a small number of generations through artificial selection, so imagine what can happen over tens of thousands of generations through natural selection.
Someone else cab expalian it better.

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 4:55pm

uprising wrote: »

I think you look the silly one, listening to a man explain some theory as fact, when did evolution end or will we become something else?

What makes you think we're so special that evolution ends with us, we're just passing through.

mobius42 · 16-06-2009 4:58pm

Jakkass wrote: »

Ah right. So because you feel I amn't making the most of my life I amn't. What kind of reasoning is that?

I think Christians are more free than atheists or agnostics. My views aren't based on popularity, I have the freedom not to be bound to the will of man, I don't have to be bound to social norms. I reject those who are tempting me into things that turn out to be a detriment.

I'd far prefer to have a devotion to God than a devotion to the evils of this world.

Atheists views aren't based on popularity either. Nor are they bound to the will of man. Nor are they bound by social norms. Also, we can reject those who tempt us just as easily as you. What do you have extra besides the belief in Jewish zombies?

Talking about social norms, your Christian beliefs are heavily influenced by the social norms of Middle-Eastern society 2000 years ago. The Bible suggests stoning children and slaves!

Also, equating all the evils of the world with atheism is outrageous! Look at all the evil carried out in the name of God.

uprising · 16-06-2009 4:58pm

Sam Vimes wrote: »

We need a new flu vaccine every year because the virus evolves. There's your proof

Yes in the labs of porton down, and why are the worlds best microbiologists all dying http://mikephilbin.blogspot.com/2009/04/swine-flu-pandemic-microbiologist.html

http://valis.gnn.tv/B16098

and the virus mutates because of the over use of antibiotics, unfinished courses of antibiotics leave superbugs behind.

pts · 16-06-2009 5:00pm

uprising wrote: »

I think you look the silly one, listening to a man explain some theory as fact, when did evolution end or will we become something else?

I'm afraid that to the majority of people on this thread (even some Christians) you are the one coming across as silly. I hope you watched it, if you did I'm sure you realised that some of the things you said earlier were not evolution or a misunderstanding of it.

It is a theory, in a scientific sense. Which is not the same as the common usage of the term theory. It has been rigorously tested since it was proposed and has been found to hold using tests from many different sciences. However more importantly it allows predictions to be made. Show me one prediction that can be made and can be tested if it is true or not, based on the "theory" that god created all the animals and humans in less than a week.

uprising · 16-06-2009 5:02pm

pts wrote: »

I'm afraid that to the majority of people on this thread (even some Christians) you are the one coming across as silly. I hope you watched it, if you did I'm sure you realised that some of the things you said earlier were not evolution or a misunderstanding of it.

It is a theory, in a scientific sense. Which is not the same as the common usage of the term theory. It has been rigorously tested since it was proposed and has been found to hold using tests from many different sciences. However more importantly it allows predictions to be made. Show me one prediction that can be made and can be tested if it is true or not, based on the "theory" that god created all the animals and humans in less than a week.

The majority? of sheep?, where did i say less than a week

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 5:02pm

If you don't believe in evolution the only alternative is that every living thing (including extinct animals/plants etc) was placed on earth in its original form.

ScumLord · 16-06-2009 5:04pm

DTrotter wrote: »

Soemtimes pure bred dogs fall sick easier than mutts, this is due to the founder effect because of a shallow gene pool.

This is one of my new pet hates (:pac:), I now think purebred dogs are one of the human races biggest acts of cruelty against animals. Working dogs are ok but show dogs are just deformed at this stage.

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 5:06pm

ScumLord wrote: »

This is one of my new pet hates (:pac:), I now think purebred dogs are one of the human races biggest acts of cruelty against animals. Working dogs are ok but show dogs are just deformed at this stage.

Want to buy a pure bred labradoodle?

uprising · 16-06-2009 5:08pm

DTrotter wrote: »

If you don't believe in evolution the only alternative is that every living thing (including extinct animals/plants etc) was placed on earth in its original form.

where is the human missing link, humans (homosapians) have always been humans, will we keep evolving, are we evolving right now?

pts · 16-06-2009 5:09pm

uprising wrote: »

The majority? of sheep?

We could all be wrong I guess. It would be arrogant to think otherwise. However why not investigate why all the "sheep" here actually do believe what they do before you dismiss it. I don't understand why you're so confident that a theory which has been tested by some of the brightest people around is wrong. I hope it's not just because you have a hunch that it's wrong.

uprising wrote: »

where did i say less than a week

I assumed (maybe incorrectly) that you found the "theory" of diversity of life (note that I didn't say beginning of life) from the Bible more compelling than the theory of evolution.

bleg · 16-06-2009 5:10pm

uprising wrote: »

Yes in the labs of porton down, and why are the worlds best microbiologists all dying http://mikephilbin.blogspot.com/2009/04/swine-flu-pandemic-microbiologist.html

http://valis.gnn.tv/B16098

and the virus mutates because of the over use of antibiotics, unfinished courses of antibiotics leave superbugs behind.

antibiotics dont affect viruses. anti virals do.

pts · 16-06-2009 5:12pm

uprising wrote: »

where is the human missing link, humans (homosapians) have always been humans,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution for your reading pleasure.

uprising wrote: »

will we keep evolving, are we evolving right now?

Yes, you are different from your parents, and your children (if you have any) will share many similar traits with you, but will be different from you.

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 5:15pm

uprising wrote: »

where is the human missing link, humans (homosapians) have always been humans, will we keep evolving, are we evolving right now?

The term missing link is a meme that is thrown around, genetics proves common ancestry between primates.

uprising · 16-06-2009 5:17pm

pts wrote: »

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_evolution for your reading pleasure.

Yes, you are different from your parents, and your children (if you have any) will share many similar traits with you, but will be different from you.

The dominant view among scientists is the recent African origin of modern humans.

the dominant view isnt fact, its their view.........

I'm still human, like my parents, whats next?

My name is URL · 16-06-2009 5:17pm

bleg wrote: »

antibiotics dont affect viruses. anti virals do.

Don't affect or don't cure?

I'd be surprised if the amount of Antibiotics that's prescribed doesn't have some affect on our own immune systems and how virus adapt to take advantage of a weakened one.

uprising · 16-06-2009 5:22pm

DTrotter wrote: »

The term missing link is a meme that is thrown around, genetics proves common ancestry between primates.

No it doesnt, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0413_060413_evolution.html

from link above "The species lived between 3 million and 3.6 million years ago and is widely considered an ancestor of modern humans"

Widely considered, widely considered a fact????

uprising · 16-06-2009 5:25pm

My name is URL wrote: »

Don't affect or don't cure?

I'd be surprised if the amount of Antibiotics that's prescribed doesn't have some affect on our own immune systems and how virus adapt to take advantage of a weakened one.

What has been proven that over use of antibiotics has strenghtened viruses, has affected and altered our inbuilt immune system

DTrotter · 16-06-2009 5:29pm

uprising wrote: »

No it doesnt, http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2006/04/0413_060413_evolution.html

from link above "The species lived between 3 million and 3.6 million years ago and is widely considered an ancestor of modern humans"

Widely considered, widely considered a fact????

It shows different stages of progression in the fossil record, the term missing link is thrown around by creationsists as if they're expecting some kind of fossil of a chimpanzee driving a car or something. Genetics proves as much almost as fossils.

7 days or 7 billion years?

Comments