• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Creation evidence

Luminous

non-existential luminary
i thout by creationism you meant creationism of humans only...
so what your trying to say is the creationism of the universe(earth,moons,stars etc)
however if you mean creationism of humans against the theory of evolution then what i have mentioned clearly proves the fact evolution is false.
it doesn't even matter. because the process of evolution also points to one indivial's mutation causing species differentiation. and since these womens mitocondrial DNA was not completely the same it just prove that the human species also evolves. i mean, humans share some DNA in common with bananas; which kindof points that we share a common anscestor.
Also, can anyone answer this for me? (probably paintedwolf) - do females of the Ape/hog spiecies share some common mito DNA with homosapiens?
 
Last edited:

Luminous

non-existential luminary
very well said... i agree
And evolution is true. so we are not 'god's special and better loved creatures' we are equal to any other of ITs creations. In fact, i've watched BattleStar Galactica (a t.v. show) and the Cylon's(robots) religion is just as plausible as any of our humanly ones.
 

Jonsul

Ehh....
@gnostic
Umm... did you read where I said I wasn't talking to painted wolf?

And where else am I supposed to post this?? This is the closest to a creationism forum at all.

@Autodidact
I'm getting confused, I told you I'm not even advocating all this, just saying I find it interesting.

@Heneni
Thanks :D
I'm glad there's people like you here who see I'm just posting some things interesting^^
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
The truly sad thing about this and similar threads is the number of people who readily characterize something like this ...

cambodia-stegasarus.jpg


as proof that the overwhelming consensus of science is wrong. It is stunning that so many are so enthusiastically gullible.​
 

painted wolf

Grey Muzzle
Everything with MtDNA shares a distinctive linage (that is all Eukaryotes). Think of it as a branching tree. The first big branch happens between Plants and Not Plants. Then Fungi and Animals and so on. MtDNA shows that we shared a common ancestor Neanderthals 750,000 years ago, with chimpanzees 5-7 million years ago. (and that chimps are far more genetically diverse than we are)

MtDNA has been used to create what are called supertrees. Phylogenies for living species.
here is the Mammal supertree.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol291/issue5509/images/data/1786/DC1/1056346s1rev1_large.jpeg
Creationists love the human Mt-Eve but they hate to talk about the other Mt-eve's out there.

The important thing to remember is that just because Mt-mrca (most recent common ancestor) is our MRCA doesn't mean that she was the only person living at the time. We have more than one or two human fossils from the time for a start.

One other thing Creationists don't like to mention is that you can do the same thing with the Y chromosome. "Y-chromosome Adam" as he's called is the last shared common ancestor for all males. He lived around 60,000-90,000 years ago. A minimum of 30,000 years (or about a thousand generations) after 'Eve'. Like Mt-Eve he wasn't the only human in existance though his mother was possibly a decendant of Mt-Eve.

The real genetic prize is LUCA (Last Univeral Common Ancestor) that one lucky organism that gave rise to all modern life on Earth. Somehow LUCA had an advantage that let it reproduce faster and survive better than the other early lifeforms. LUCA became the DNA template from wich all living things decended. Bacteria to Corn to Humans.

wa:do
 

challupa

Well-Known Member
Everything with MtDNA shares a distinctive linage (that is all Eukaryotes). Think of it as a branching tree. The first big branch happens between Plants and Not Plants. Then Fungi and Animals and so on. MtDNA shows that we shared a common ancestor Neanderthals 750,000 years ago, with chimpanzees 5-7 million years ago. (and that chimps are far more genetically diverse than we are)

MtDNA has been used to create what are called supertrees. Phylogenies for living species.
here is the Mammal supertree.
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/vol291/issue5509/images/data/1786/DC1/1056346s1rev1_large.jpeg
Creationists love the human Mt-Eve but they hate to talk about the other Mt-eve's out there.

The important thing to remember is that just because Mt-mrca (most recent common ancestor) is our MRCA doesn't mean that she was the only person living at the time. We have more than one or two human fossils from the time for a start.

One other thing Creationists don't like to mention is that you can do the same thing with the Y chromosome. "Y-chromosome Adam" as he's called is the last shared common ancestor for all males. He lived around 60,000-90,000 years ago. A minimum of 30,000 years (or about a thousand generations) after 'Eve'. Like Mt-Eve he wasn't the only human in existance though his mother was possibly a decendant of Mt-Eve.

The real genetic prize is LUCA (Last Univeral Common Ancestor) that one lucky organism that gave rise to all modern life on Earth. Somehow LUCA had an advantage that let it reproduce faster and survive better than the other early lifeforms. LUCA became the DNA template from wich all living things decended. Bacteria to Corn to Humans.

wa:do
I'm really enjoying this thread. Learning so much. Thanks so much Painted wolf and others that have contributed to my learning curve!!:D:yes:
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Hello Jonsul.

Never mind the vultures . They decended on you for simply posting something you found interesting. It happens all the time. I once posted stuff about giants and i had my head chopped off. Some here claim to be experts at something they arent. Its easy to bully the newbie. ;)

Anyway...i dont know why people are so insecure in their beliefs that they feel the need to jump on others for trying to explore their own. One would think that on a religous forum, there would be more..'lets talk about this like adults' and less ' your a liar', 'this stuff is rubbish'.

Seems like many hold on to the evolution idea for dear life. Its essential to them that the theory holds up else there might be a god they are answerable to.

Keep your head about you. And welcome to the forum. I know you expected freedom. Instead you got a rude awakening. Anyway...i for one enjoy reading alternative ideas, and i am secure enough to not get my knickers in a twist when somebody presents their thoughts to me. This is far less controversial and dark then those who claim god to be a monster. Evolution of monsters seems to be the order of the day. They are mostly called human'kind'.

Happy posting!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts.
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
i thout by creationism you meant creationism of humans only...
so what your trying to say is the creationism of the universe(earth,moons,stars etc)
however if you mean creationism of humans against the theory of evolution then what i have mentioned clearly proves the fact evolution is false.

Actually you have no idea what the Theory of Evolution (ToE) is, do you? What you cited was made possible by, is consistent with, and supports, ToE.
 

Heneni

Miss Independent
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. Everyone is not entitled to their own facts.

Surely you dont expect me to believe that. God exists...fact...for me..but thats an opinion for you.

Your facts are opinions to me.

Shall we give others some room to breathe then?

Heneni
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Surely you dont expect me to believe that. God exists...fact...for me..but thats an opinion for you.

Your facts are opinions to me.

Shall we give others some room to breathe then?

Heneni

Maybe you're confused about the difference between fact and opinion. To say that God's existence is a fact is the height of arrogance, denying others their right to a different opinion. And facts don't belong to anyone, I don't have my own private set of facts. Either the sun rose this morning or it didn't, and whether or not it did is a fact that belongs to no one, and is true for everyone.
 

Heneni

Miss Independent
Maybe you're confused about the difference between fact and opinion. To say that God's existence is a fact is the height of arrogance, denying others their right to a different opinion. And facts don't belong to anyone, I don't have my own private set of facts. Either the sun rose this morning or it didn't, and whether or not it did is a fact that belongs to no one, and is true for everyone.

Then you wont mind if i call the 'facts' of evolution arrogance as well.

And while we are on the subject of science. Even scientists are willing to believe that although they cant see most of the universe which consists of what they like to call dark matter - because they are ignorant of what else to call it, and this dark matter has five times the weight of that which we can see...i would say that science has made the leap into the unknown by acknowledging that not everything you cant see isnt real.

It might just be then...that my facts of gods existance is less likely to be an opinion in the near future.

Dark Matter - Introduction
 

Autodidact

Intentionally Blank
Then you wont mind if i call the 'facts' of evolution arrogance as well.
Facts are facts. Evolution is a fact--not an opinion. There's nothing arrogant about that, any more than it's arrogant to assert that the sun rose this morning.

The existence of God is an opinion--you believe it; millions do not, and you are not inherently any more intelligent, informed or authoritative than they are.

To say that your opinion is a fact is the height of arrogance.

And while we are on the subject of science. Even scientists are willing to believe that although they cant see most of the universe which consists of what they like to call dark matter - because they are ignorant of what else to call it, and this dark matter has five times the weight of that which we can see...i would say that science has made the leap into the unknown by acknowledging that not everything you cant see isnt real.
Science has always acknowledged this. It has nothing to do with what you're talking about.

It might just be then...that my facts of gods existance is less likely to be an opinion in the near future.
It might, and it might not. It might be more so, who knows. Let's talk about what we do know.
 

gnostic

The Lost One
heneni said:
Surely you dont expect me to believe that. God exists...fact...for me..but thats an opinion for you.

Your facts are opinions to me.

You don't have fact, heneni. You only have faith.

In order for you to have fact about your god, you would need to be able to prove that God exist. And in order for you to prove this, it need "evidences", which are testable, observable, quantified it, and some one else independent from you can also find the same "evidences", which are testable, observable, quantified it; you and the other person do all this in order to verify your "evidences" are verifiable, reliable and accurate. Only then can you prove or disprove the evidences are fact.

Without evidences, you don't have proofs or facts.

You only have faith in what you believe in, which is that God exists. That's not fact. Faith is more like opinion than fact.

Can you prove that God exist?

Unless you understand the difference between fact and faith, then you don't know what evidences are.
 
Top