| 16 May 2006 06:36 am |
myst7426 Guest | Red Spartan 226 wrote:
humans were always the same though.
homo neanderthal, homo erectus, homo habilis, australopithecus afarensis, a. africanus, etc are show gradual change over time. The above mentioned are ancestors of homo sapiens are cousins who shared a common ancestor, such as neaderthals and possible a. africanus.
| |
 | | 16 May 2006 11:34 am |
The Diabolical One... Rep: 2  Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 5,320 OFFLINE | Duriel wrote:
Yet we walk behind the dogs while we hold little baggy’s, and we pick up their poop!
hahaha... yes it seems as though sometimes our pets control our lives...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
| | | 16 May 2006 12:47 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 1Joined: 27 Apr 2005 Posts: 2,116 OFFLINE | Actually, as part of our background, they do somewhat control our lives. Every distinct feature that your perceptions pick up is something that changes your mind set.
---
The farther you question, the more they will hate you. | | | 16 May 2006 03:24 pm |
Anomynous_person Guest | "Oh so animals are just our little slaves."
Stop putting more effort on how you say something. Put it into what you say, so it can become worthwhile.
No, animals are not neccessarily our slaves. But we do have dominion over them. We control them, to suit our selves. Then we see what problems this causes on the ecological system. And then we put them into isoloation as to keep them from getting extinct! Man has power over the animals, but he must use it in measure.
| | | 16 May 2006 03:55 pm |
The Diabolical One... Rep: 2Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 5,320 OFFLINE | the only reason man has power over animals is because we have technology... as a creature we are rather weak and frail... we have had to create our own dominance... nobody gave it to us...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
| | | 16 May 2006 04:39 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 6 Joined: 01 Oct 2005 Posts: 3,602 OFFLINE | Red Spartan 226 wrote:
He can create the first generation of animals and made them evolve into another.
Same with humans, that’s why some human races (like mexicans and filipinos) are dark because it’s hot which makes them dark.
possible, it could also be that aliens seeded the earth, the origin is not my concern, the future is.
---
Dogbert said the deepest thing ever.
“It is all a part of the big illusion we perpetuate upon ourselves and which is in turn perpetuated upon us. When we believe we engage the illusion, when we stop believing we shatter the illusion and ourselves in the process because we are part of it." | | | 16 May 2006 07:57 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0  Joined: 30 Jan 2006 Posts: 1,686 OFFLINE | dark99 wrote:
the only reason man has power over animals is because we have technology... as a creature we are rather weak and frail... we have had to create our own dominance... nobody gave it to us...
Well, kind of, we have a brain, animals have wings, fangs, claws, sharb teeth, venom, lots of strength... People created society and weapons.
| | | 17 May 2006 12:27 am |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 1Joined: 27 Apr 2005 Posts: 2,116 OFFLINE | Anomynous_person wrote:
“Oh so animals are just our little slaves."
Stop putting more effort on how you say something. Put it into what you say, so it can become worthwhile.
No, animals are not neccessarily our slaves. But we do have dominion over them. We control them, to suit our selves. Then we see what problems this causes on the ecological system. And then we put them into isoloation as to keep them from getting extinct! Man has power over the animals, but he must use it in measure.
Oh. So we have dominion over them, we control them to suit OURSELVES, and we have power over them. But they are definately not our slaves. We don’t destroy their territory, hunt them. make them do tricks for our own entertainment, entrap them in pounds, abuse them, fish, or slaughter them. They are definately not our slaves.
---
The farther you question, the more they will hate you. | | | 17 May 2006 06:16 am |
myst7426 Guest | Black Hydra Xc wrote:
Anomynous_person wrote:
“Oh so animals are just our little slaves."
Stop putting more effort on how you say something. Put it into what you say, so it can become worthwhile.
No, animals are not neccessarily our slaves. But we do have dominion over them. We control them, to suit our selves. Then we see what problems this causes on the ecological system. And then we put them into isoloation as to keep them from getting extinct! Man has power over the animals, but he must use it in measure.
Oh. So we have dominion over them, we control them to suit OURSELVES, and we have power over them. But they are definately not our slaves. We don’t destroy their territory, hunt them. make them do tricks for our own entertainment, entrap them in pounds, abuse them, fish, or slaughter them. They are definately not our slaves.
My dog is definately my slave. Eventhough she sleeps and eats all day and does me no good besides entertainment, she is still a slave. She is probably better off living the easy life in my house instead of living in the wild, but nonetheless, she is trapped and cannot escape my will.
| | | 17 May 2006 11:32 am |
The Diabolical One... Rep: 2Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 5,320 OFFLINE | of course that is probably the difference between humans and your dog... your dog is happy being your slave while most humans are not... of course that does have something to do with how your dog doesn’t have to do any work at all... it probably doesn’t even consider itself a slave... just one lucky dog who gets free food...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
| | | 17 May 2006 08:30 pm |
Regular Rep: 0 Joined: 01 Apr 2006 Posts: 379 OFFLINE | True, after all, IF EVERYTHING IS SUBJECTIVE, hydra, I’m looking at you  , how can your dog be a slave, when he feels you’re wrapped around his pinky claw?
Rev. Storring
---
KNOWLEDGE IS POWER. ARM YOURSELF | | | 17 May 2006 09:20 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0 Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "Just because Evolution exists, and it does, does not necesarilly mean that we are dscebded from apes."
Hey, I thought you were the one writing proofs for Creation on the Web, now you are here saying Evolution exists?!? No way! Evolution, one species turning into another one over time, does not exist, and that is where they say we came from monkeys. If you believe in evolution, you believe your great ancestor was an ape! And I’m talking about macroevolution, not micro.
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:26 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "Fossils show gradual decent over time in the same."
NO THEY DON’T!!!!!!!
IN FACT, THE FOSSIL FINDS SHOW THE EXACT OPPOSITE!!!! THAT IS ONE OF THE BEST PROOFS AGAINST EVOLUTION!!! EVERY CREATURE IN THE FOSSIL RECORD IS FOUND WHOLE AND FULLY DEVELOPED!! THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS!! THE FOSSILS DON’T SHOW GRADUAL CHANGE, THEY SHOW SUDDEN APPEARANCES OF ALL THE KINDS OF CREATURES!!!! IT PROVES THAT EVOLUTION IS A LIE! DARWIN WOULD BE EMBARRASSED IF HE WERE HERE TODAY! HE WAS EXPECTING THAT THEY WOULD FIND THE TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS SOMETIME LATER IN THE FUTURE, AND THEY HAVEN’T!!!!
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:29 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "Modern apes have 1 more pair of chromosomes than humans."
That is a significant amount! You know how big of a difference 2 chromosomes is? That’s another proof against evolution, that pair of chromosomes makes a big difference!
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:41 pm |
bonjour Rep: 2 Joined: 25 Aug 2005 Posts: 8,307 OFFLINE | Someone who cares.... wrote:
God can do anything. But see, there are problems with evolution in evolving one animal kind into another one, so I hold with my belief that evolution, macroevolution, is false all the way.
“Same with humans, that’s why some human races (like mexicans and filipinos) are dark because it’s hot which makes them dark."
But see, that doesn’t show evolution. It just shows the varieties within a kind, the human kind. But it doesn’t show monkeys evolving into humans over time.
maybe you should read a book or something once in a while, there has been a lot of proof showing the humans link to the primates whether you need to accept the trut no matter how much you don’t want to
---
 | | | 17 May 2006 09:46 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "homo neanderthal, homo erectus, homo habilis, australopithecus afarensis, a. africanus, etc are show gradual change over time. The above mentioned are ancestors of homo sapiens are cousins who shared a common ancestor, such as neaderthals and possible a. africanus."
Let me startle you with the truth about this:
*Homo neanderthal- regular human with arthritis or another form of bone disease, that’s why he was crippled. And some of the neanderthal skulls have been found to be BIGGER than modern humans skulls, so in the past, the hominids had bigger brain sizes? I don’t think so. It’s not a hominid.
*Homo erectus- thought to be hominid due to smaller brain size. Actually, that brain size is within the average brain sizes of people in Europe. Just a human.
*Homo habilis- is actually a mix between Australopithecus and Homo erectus, this makes it an invalid taxon. INVALID!
*Australopithecus afarenis (Lucy)- when they requested for a knee joint for her, they found one about 200 ft. lower and miles away. Tell me, how could that knee joint belong to Lucy? So, is her knee joint older than the rest of her body? And her inner ear structures, her skull and bones show she is a chimpanzee. She didn’t even walk like a human.
*Australopithecus africanus- regular skull of a baby ape that wasn’t fully developed. No human features at all, just like an ordinary ape.
Sorry, those are not hominid finds, they are either human, or ape, not mix. They do not show gradual change, they show that scientists are so desperate for proof for their evolution theory, that they will even use invalid taxons and a bunch of misleading information for “proof."
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:48 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "the origin is not my concern”
It should be. This could change your life and how you think forever. The origin should be your concern. Make it a concern. Learn the truth about your origin.
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:48 pm |
The Diabolical One... Rep: 2Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 5,320 OFFLINE | Someone who cares.... wrote:
“Fossils show gradual decent over time in the same."
NO THEY DON’T!!!!!!!
IN FACT, THE FOSSIL FINDS SHOW THE EXACT OPPOSITE!!!! THAT IS ONE OF THE BEST PROOFS AGAINST EVOLUTION!!! EVERY CREATURE IN THE FOSSIL RECORD IS FOUND WHOLE AND FULLY DEVELOPED!! THERE ARE NO TRANSITIONAL FORMS!! THE FOSSILS DON’T SHOW GRADUAL CHANGE, THEY SHOW SUDDEN APPEARANCES OF ALL THE KINDS OF CREATURES!!!! IT PROVES THAT EVOLUTION IS A LIE! DARWIN WOULD BE EMBARRASSED IF HE WERE HERE TODAY! HE WAS EXPECTING THAT THEY WOULD FIND THE TRANSITIONAL FOSSILS SOMETIME LATER IN THE FUTURE, AND THEY HAVEN’T!!!!
www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1a.html#tran
here are some transitional fossils and forms now shut the hell up about that cause you are wrong... I can’t wait until you come back with nothing to say cause you finally realized that you had bullshit information... there are transitional fossils so DEAL WITH IT...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
| | | 17 May 2006 09:53 pm |
UBER 1337 Poster Rep: 0Joined: 03 Feb 2006 Posts: 1,149 OFFLINE | "maybe you should read a book or something once in a while, there has been a lot of proof showing the humans link to the primates whether you need to accept the trut no matter how much you don’t want to”
As a matter of fact, I’m reading a book right now, it’s called The Evolution Cruncher, nice name, huh? And I have read many other articles, and they all show that there are NO links between primates and humans. Bring up any example you want, I will tell you how it is not a hominid. Just like I did right there ^^ with Myst’s post. It’s a lie, there are no hominids. The truth is, humans and primates are different, and have no links. Speak monkey, speak, he’s not talking... Write a book monkey, come on, he’s not writing, he’s just chewing the paper... Read this book monkey, he’s not reading it, he just threw it away...
---
“Dying men have said, “I am sorry I have been an atheist, an infidel, an agnostic, a skeptic, or a sinner”; but no man ever said with his last breath, “I am sorry I have lived a Christian life." “The wages of sin is death- quit before payday.“ | | | 17 May 2006 09:58 pm |
The Diabolical One... Rep: 2Joined: 09 Jan 2006 Posts: 5,320 OFFLINE | Someone who cares.... wrote:
“homo neanderthal, homo erectus, homo habilis, australopithecus afarensis, a. africanus, etc are show gradual change over time. The above mentioned are ancestors of homo sapiens are cousins who shared a common ancestor, such as neaderthals and possible a. africanus."
Let me startle you with the truth about this:
*Homo neanderthal- regular human with arthritis or another form of bone disease, that’s why he was crippled. And some of the neanderthal skulls have been found to be BIGGER than modern humans skulls, so in the past, the hominids had bigger brain sizes? I don’t think so. It’s not a hominid.
*Homo erectus- thought to be hominid due to smaller brain size. Actually, that brain size is within the average brain sizes of people in Europe. Just a human.
*Homo habilis- is actually a mix between Australopithecus and Homo erectus, this makes it an invalid taxon. INVALID!
*Australopithecus afarenis (Lucy)- when they requested for a knee joint for her, they found one about 200 ft. lower and miles away. Tell me, how could that knee joint belong to Lucy? So, is her knee joint older than the rest of her body? And her inner ear structures, her skull and bones show she is a chimpanzee. She didn’t even walk like a human.
*Australopithecus africanus- regular skull of a baby ape that wasn’t fully developed. No human features at all, just like an ordinary ape.
Sorry, those are not hominid finds, they are either human, or ape, not mix. They do not show gradual change, they show that scientists are so desperate for proof for their evolution theory, that they will even use invalid taxons and a bunch of misleading information for “proof.“
umm let me guess that was from some creationist who walked up to some fossils and made up his own damn mind about what they were... then he probably called himself a scientist and claimed his findings as fact...
---
fuckyfuckerfuckingmcfuckfuck69 wrote:
Someone with a comment that has thought to it? Blasphemy!
| |
|
Previous Page - Post Reply - Next Page |
Moderated by: Admins, Superusers |
»
Off-Topic
» Can God might have created evolution?
