Evolution - a very bad joke...

[Gauss]

Just out of curiosity. How many world leaders do you know who are either atheists or scientists?

Saying you are religious does not at all mean you are religious... Lipworks won´t do the trick, only actions will.

I would say the vast majority of our leaders act as if they have no belief at all in Gods.

 

[Gauss]

Except, of course, for the fact that the masons believe in a supreme being..

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

In a good or bad supreme being?

I would say that in the higher echelons of freemasonry there are some very secret rituals and I do not believe they are white magic...

 

[Gauss]

So what you're saying is that when they explicitly say: "he will never be a stupid Atheist." What they actually mean is the exact opposite. Got it! Now it all makes perfect sense.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

Why do they say "stupid atheist"?


Because they are into magic and in otyher dimensions there are dark beings nad bright beings and both have some power to affect this dimension. This is not the type of worshipping where you pray to God and tell him how you are going to become a better person.

Don´t they want to run society and control the mass of low level people in their direction? So if all people are atheists that would really suit them because atheists are the easiest to control...

If you have control of the media and science you would control everyone.. And the bright beings above will abandon the humans so the dark ones can take over.

Just some random thoughts of mine, I guess you will not accept this as truth because it is no absolute truth by any means. Just my wisdom at my level of understanding.

 

[McBell]

Just my wisdom at my level of understanding.

From what, Jack Chick tracts?

 

[Nepenthe]

See this is the problem with evolution. An evolutionist will tell you the German Shepard is not naturally evolved but selectivly breed. Why because it causes problems for evolution if the German Shepard was naturally evolved.

How is this be a problem for evolution? First, there is no genetic difference between artificial and natural selection- evolution is a change in alleles over time and both forms of selection do this. Artificial selection simply emphasizes human involvement in selecting traits we value over others.

And the German Shepherd, or more specifically the traits we associate with the breed, was first introduced in 1899. No problems with evolution whatsoever.

 

[Gauss]

Lies and hoaxes. And irrelevant to evolution.

If you had studied science you would know that in nature there is not a single system that evolves linearly in one direction.... All systems of the universe oscillate. You know we have night and day and then night again, just to make a simple example.

Hence evolution has no scientific basis at all. It is a law of nature to oscillate back and forth and never go in one direction only as these biologists pretend...

So when mankind gets wicked he is eliminated and a new mankind is then created, back and forth we go.


A nuclear reactor two billion years old:

Prehistoric Nuclear Reactor In Gabon Republic | Pureinsight

A professor of mathematics tells us his view:

Granville Sewell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


By now, those who could enlighten will have enlightened.

I thank you for your time and wish you good luck in your quest for higher truth.

 

[McBell]

By now, those who could enlighten will have enlightened.

I thank you for your time and wish you good luck in your quest for higher truth.

That is rather rude, don't you think?
You have not answered my question.
I mean, I even ask it TWICE...

 

[Nepenthe]

Archaeologists have found in the world a kind of organism called "three-leaves insect", which came into being between 600 million and 260 million years ago, and became extinct thereafter. An American scientist found a fossil of "three-leaves insect", on which there was also a human footprint, left by a shoe he was wearing, and clearly printed on the fossil. Aren't they joking with the historians? How could there possibly have been human beings 260 million years ago according to Darwin's theory of evolution?

Are you posting this all over the place? When I Google this it pops up in a lot of forums verbatim. Just curious.

Footprints on Trilobite Fossil | Pureinsight

Resultat av Googles bildsökning efter http://photo.minghui.org/images/u_science_related/life_research/images/2002-4-25-20020418footprint01.jpg

I'll just respond to the footprints and the trilobite fossil (the Meister Print as it's usually called) since I posted about it in this thread. It's a spall pattern, not a footprint.

 

[Starsoul]

Just some initial brief web links to discuss as a background to the most coverred up and flawed theory in modern society.....


Giants in Those Days--Historical News Articles Featuring Ancient Giants ---Page 19

Zhengjian Book Series: <i>Removing the Veil from Prehistoric Civilizations</i>, Part 6 -- Enduring Myths: Relics in the Ocean | Pureinsight

There Were Giants in Those Days: Giant Humans, Dinosaurs and Ancient Civilizations of Spain........Page 28

Steve Quayle News Alerts: Ancient Civilizations and Technology

Morien Institute - the mysterious underwater pyramid structure at Yonaguni



How could people build underwater cities carved out of stone 10s of thousands of years ago... How could big newspapers report giant skeletons 100 years back?

How can there be big human footprints dating back millions of years in cliffs?

How can there be human figures with a telescopesin rocks that were engraved 30 000 years ago?


Etc etc..... The evidence of prehistoric civilizations are just massive and they were way more tech advanced than our civilization...

:clap

Exactly!

if Evolution was anything more than a joke, It still wouldn't be a 200 yrs or so old 'theory', but a Law with what science has achieved today. Too bad proof cannot be generated and the question of proofs of ancient civilizations is a strong one.

 

[Gauss]

ONCE AGAIN I ask:

What happened to them?
​

Sorry, did not see that one, too many atheists here..

Ie a natural disaster struck them, like Noah´s flood(Atlantis civilization was wiped out), it came during Yu the great´s time - Yu the Great - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

There could be huge earthquakes, a terrible disease hitting on evil people(they have massive karma so it is very easy to pinpoint such people from other dimensions) or comets, anything to wipe out the civilization when it became too bad.

Was it not said by Swedenborg that the old Egyptians were extremely advanced technologically(see the saucers on their engravements) but also very wicked so they were wiped out.


Wish everyone good luck in their quest for higher truth.

 

[David M]

If you had studied science you would know that in nature there is not a single system that evolves linearly in one direction.... All systems of the universe oscillate. You know we have night and day and then night again, just to make a simple example.

Thats not oscillation, and how do you explain tidally locked bodies like Mercury.

Hence evolution has no scientific basis at all. It is a law of nature to oscillate back and forth and never go in one direction only as these biologists pretend...

Thus showing that you are truly ignorant of what ToE says, there is no direction in evolution.

A nuclear reactor two billion years old:

Prehistoric Nuclear Reactor In Gabon Republic | Pureinsight

No, concentrated natural deposits of uranium. There was no nuclear reactor built there. There author of this piece of garbage is a lying fantasist.

A professor of mathematics tells us his view:

Granville Sewell - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

By now, those who could enlighten will have enlightened.

I thank you for your time and wish you good luck in your quest for higher truth.

Someone who claims that evolution violates the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics? That makes him either a moron or a liar.

:clap

Exactly!

if Evolution was anything more than a joke, It still wouldn't be a 200 yrs or so old 'theory', but a Law with what science has achieved today. Too bad proof cannot be generated and the question of proofs of ancient civilizations is a strong one.

Someone else who doesn't understand science. A scientific theory is at a higher level than a scientiic law. Theories never become Laws they explain why Laws work.

 

[McBell]

Sorry, did not see that one, too many atheists here..

Ie a natural disaster struck them, like Noah´s flood(Atlantis civilization was wiped out), it came during Yu the great´s time - Yu the Great - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

There could be huge earthquakes, a terrible disease hitting on evil people(they have massive karma so it is very easy to pinpoint such people from other dimensions) or comets, anything to wipe out the civilization when it became too bad.

Was it not said by Swedenborg that the old Egyptians were extremely advanced technologically(see the saucers on their engravements) but also very wicked so they were wiped out.


Wish everyone good luck in their quest for higher truth.

What was "natural" about Noah's flood?

So in other words you really don't know?
I mean you just tossed out a super generic "natural disasters" then started talking about un-natural disasters and what could have happened.

Seems to me that you have done nothing but ratification from the time this 'idea' struck you.

Furthermore, you have not provided anything but conspiracy theories and pseudoscience to support any of it.

I have to agree with you though.
Better get out of the thread now before you lose your last ounce of credibility.

 

[McBell]

:clap

Exactly!

if Evolution was anything more than a joke, It still wouldn't be a 200 yrs or so old 'theory', but a Law with what science has achieved today. Too bad proof cannot be generated and the question of proofs of ancient civilizations is a strong one.

and yet Evolution has tons more evidence going for it than creation...

 

[tumbleweed41]

The joke is rejecting the empirical evidence supporting biological evolution, and instead resorting to pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, poor research and a complete ignorance of the scientific method.

 

[Revoltingest]

A scientific theory is at a higher level than a scientiic law. Theories never become Laws they explain why Laws work.

Another view is that a law is a theory, but one which has been verified to a great extent & has enormous usefulness, eg, the law of gravity (for weak fields). Yet even in the scientific community, many theories which behave as laws are still called "theory", eg, theory of evolution, theory of relativity,

 

[paolops181]

Evolution is false! How can you believe about the big bang theory? We should rather fear God.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Evolution is false! How can you believe about the big bang theory? We should rather fear God.

1. Biological Evolution is backed by overwhelming empirical evidence.
2. The Big Bang has nothing to do with the facts supporting Biological Evolution.
3. Biological Evolution has nothing to do with whether or not God exists.

And, IMHO, a God who demands fear is unworthy of worship.

 

[Enoughie]

If you had studied science you would know... All systems of the universe oscillate.

Really?! ALL systems oscillate?! Wow. That's a new law of physics! You must be a super genius. If this is remotely true, the Swedish Academy should contact you at any moment now to award you your Nobel Prize.

I think what you meant to say is: "if you are utterly ignorant about science" you'd make up idiotic concepts like "all systems of the universe oscillate."

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Enoughie]

So if all people are atheists that would really suit them because atheists are the easiest to control...

Atheists are easiest to control? Is the sky yellow?

It's been said that organizing atheists is like herding cats.. you know, because of their independence of mind, and everything..

Controlling religious people, on the other hand, is much easier. They already think of themselves as a flock of sheep.

You're clearly not putting much thought into what you're writing.

_____________________
Geopolitics.us - Natural Philosophy of Life - a simple, elegant, and powerful alternative to religious dogma

 

[Magic Man]

:clap

Exactly!

if Evolution was anything more than a joke, It still wouldn't be a 200 yrs or so old 'theory', but a Law with what science has achieved today. Too bad proof cannot be generated and the question of proofs of ancient civilizations is a strong one.

I know this is probably useless, but I have to say it. You misunderstand a scientific law and scientific theory. When something is a scientific theory, it doesn't mean it doesn't have enough evidence to be a law. They are two completely different things.

A scientific theory is just an explanation of a bunch of facts based on evidence. It is as factual as a scientific law. You can go here for a better clarification.

I don't mind people being ignorant of things. I'm ignorant of a lot of things. But what gets me is being ignorant about something, but dismissing it as if you aren't ignorant on the subject. If you want to remain ignorant about it, great. Just don't form an opinion without the necessary information.