Simple inspirational words.

[Anime_Pickles]

The beginning... Was all inspirational.. XD this is just an extension.

a very big extension xD

 

[Aimee2323]

All advantageous.. I heard that the whale has been and always will be (Until death). It has never evolved in any type of way..

How do you know? Even if they're subtle, they would've changed in some way over 50 billion years.

 

[Catzore <3 Taco's]

Well how would people know exactly what dinosaurs looked like without seeing them with their own eyes?
Say I were to draw certain picture of a cartoon character. There is no possible way for me to know what that specific character looks like.
People way back during the dinosaurs' time must have seen a dinosaur with their own eyes in order to draw them. Sort of like a gossip you could say. It spreads around the school in no time. Same with the people who have seen dinosaurs. They share their evidence and knowledge of dinosaurs with anyone they can. Who would keep that a secret? And it eventually was reached out to our generations.



Dinosaurs are really just ginormous reptile. All reptiles continue to grow until death. Am I wrong?

Question. I'm not sure if this is a smart question or stupid, but here goes. So is it true that evolution claims that ALL animals of our generation are animals long ago that have evolved?

My dad told me this: Well i guess They kind of get the whole skeleton and attach skin to it to see what it turns out like.

 

[BAD-MON]

2 question.
#1
scientists say there are 15 million insect species, 2 million marine species, more millions of bird and animal species.
Yet, only one- humans - developed language. If evolution is true - that species evolve continually higher and better - why haven't other species developed language?

#2
If evolution - and its survival of the fittest is true - why didn't the fastest runner, highest flyer, fastest fish, or the specie that produces the most offspring, or the specie that is the largest and strongest, evolve to dominate and wipe out their competitors? I remember you saying that an animal specie with two legs would die out quicker than an animal specie with four legs. Why could't at least ONE of the two-legged specie evolve in order to survive? If this were to happen, I guarantee we would have more animals than we do today.

 

[BAD-MON]

And this just popped in my head. How is it that ‘living fossils’ remained unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years, if evolution has changed worms into humans in the same time frame? Professor Gould stated that “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem".

 

[Aimee2323]

why haven't other species developed language?

Woof woof woof woof oh sorry I forgot, humans don't speak dog, I mean, meow roar, woof.

Okay seriously- animals do have their way of communicating. They may not have a true language like us, but they communicate through sounds and actions.

Then with number 2, it wouldn't work, because the other species would evolve with them, so while they may have been able to dominate what they were 10 million years ago, they wouldn't be able to now. Because if one animal started to become stronger through lucky genetic mutations, the other would have to too.

 

[Aimee2323]

And this just popped in my head. How is it that ‘living fossils’ remained unchanged over supposed hundreds of millions of years, if evolution has changed worms into humans in the same time frame? Professor Gould stated that “the maintenance of stability within species must be considered as a major evolutionary problem".

1am, my brain doesn't know what "living fossils" are.

 

[BAD-MON]

1am, my brain doesn't know what "living fossils" are.

Living fossils. Fossils that have been "fresh" (If you will) for millions of years.

 

[BAD-MON]

(I was going to ask you to watch a video, but I probably should wait a couple hours. XD)

 

[Aimee2323]

(I was going to ask you to watch a video, but I probably should wait a couple hours. XD)

I would've passed out in a couple of hours.

 

[BAD-MON]

I would've passed out in a couple of hours.

No... XD I'm saying you must be tired now. I should wait until tomorrow (Today for you) and then ask you to watch it. :3

 

[Aimee2323]

No... XD I'm saying you must be tired now. I should wait until tomorrow (Today for you) and then ask you to watch it. :3

Not like I'm going to get around to sleeping any time soon anyway

 

[ItsYaBoyJavid]

I seriously shouldn't trust myself to build stuff like ever .-. @Aimee2323 oh yeeeeee inspiring. lmao

 

[BAD-MON]

Not like I'm going to get around to sleeping any time soon anyway

Okay then. Here is the video. The description of the vid is self explanatory.

 

[Aimee2323]

Never said there couldn't be evidence in the future, science is evolving to get new evidence on stuff (excuse the pun) but the Bible and religion will stay the same. Best my tired mind can do? 2am, night..

 

[ModernRevolution]

ok, i will aknowledge there is evidence for it, but it is poorly conducted and constantly contradicts itself. Babylonians, Mesopotamians, Hindus, Greeks, African tribes, and ect. an example is the epic of gilgamesh, which interestingly enough also has its own version of the fall of man into sin. And no, nobody finds your post offensive.
(lol, i think this is the most fun thread i have ever commented on)

im not talking about floods in general, i am talking about worldwide floods. the Catastrophism kind of flood. oh and im not as dumb as you think, i know how rivers work xD

no, please no, this is just way too fun xD

I think what you need is to re examine the evidence for the big bang. It does not contradict itself, it is perfectly clear and is the most widely accepted theory there is today. And what is gilgamesh? And I really don't think, unless the land had really, really sunk, that a mass flood over the whole Earth may be possible. And I think we need more proof than "The bible says it's true" If water did cover the whole Earth, I think it would be 2m deep everywhere, but not that, just how would the water be transfered from all the lakes, rivers, seas ect onto every single peice of land there is?

And I think Aimio is trying to say is that Science adapts to newfound facts that are gathered through observation and experimentation.

 

[Aimee2323]

Aimio is trying to say is that Science adapts to newfound facts that are gathered through observation and experimentation

What Claudio said ^

 

[PlasticManPeppo]

Maybe science is based on assumptions, but the assumptions were made with knowledge on the subject. But religion is based on a book, which was written by some people long after the events happened, stories change. You play a game where you whisper a message to one person, then another, it will change even if you're only playing with 5 people, imagine how many people the stories went to by word before being written down. The Bible involves equally as many assumptions as science, so that can not be used as a point against science. Because the Bible had to have been changed before being written down, nobody was there writing down it all whilst it all happened, it had some time and passing on before it was actually written. So assumptions are made up as you go along, especially with long stories, based on the other parts of the stories. At least science has evidence to back up those assumptions.

no, aimee. it is not based on a book. it is based on about 100 books, most of them written separately by different people at completely different time periods who never knew each other.

I think what you need is to re examine the evidence for the big bang. It does not contradict itself, it is perfectly clear and is the most widely accepted theory there is today. And what is gilgamesh? And I really don't think, unless the land had really, really sunk, that a mass flood over the whole Earth may be possible. And I think we need more proof than "The bible says it's true" If water did cover the whole Earth, I think it would be 2m deep everywhere, but not that, just how would the water be transfered from all the lakes, rivers, seas ect onto every single peice of land there is?

And I think Aimio is trying to say is that Science adapts to newfound facts that are gathered through observation and experimentation.

Gilgamesh is one of the oldest written stories in the world, found on 12 different tablets found about 100 years ago. Oh and i gave you more proof than "the bible says its true", i also gave the proof of different cultures having flood stories. It didn't just come from the ground, it came from the sky also, in the form of rain.

 

[Aimee2323]

no, aimee. it is not based on a book. it is based on about 100 books, most of them written separately by different people at completely different time periods who never knew each other.

Gilgamesh is one of the oldest written stories in the world, found on 12 different tablets found about 100 years ago. Oh and i gave you more proof than "the bible says its true", i also gave the proof of different cultures having flood stories. It didn't just come from the ground, it came from the sky also, in the form of rain.

Still a book. Just multiple.
Also, the Bible goes against itself a lot.. So taking every word literally would be impossible.

 

[PlasticManPeppo]

Still a book. Just multiple.
Also, the Bible goes against itself a lot.. So taking every word literally would be impossible.

the Bible never fully contradicts itself, find one instance in the bible where it contradicts itself and give it to me. I can not take every word you say literally, same vise versa. We are not supposed to take every word literally, we are supposed to draw out the meaning, message, and commands and meditate on them (different kind of meditate). So please give me a time where the bible "goes against itself" and i will try my best to explain it.