Atheism!

[lifterdead]

GOD'S TOTAL QUALITY MANAGEMENT QUESTIONNAIRE

God would like to thank you for your belief and patronage. In order to better serve your needs, He asks that you take a few moments to answer the following questions. Please keep in mind that your responses will be kept completely confidential, and that you need not disclose your name or address unless you prefer a direct response to comments or suggestions.

1. How did you find out about God?
___ Newspaper
___ Bible
___ Torah
___ Book of Mormon
___ Koran
___ Other Book
___ Television
___ Divine Inspiration
___ Word of mouth
___ Dead Sea scrolls
___ My mama done tol' me
___ Near Death Experience
___ Near-life experience
___ National Public Radio
___ Tabloid
___ Burning Shrubbery
___ Who?
___ Other (specify): _____________

2. Which model God did you acquire?
___ Yahweh
___ Jehovah
___ Allah
___ Just plain God
___ Krishna
___ Father, Son & Holy Ghost (Trinity Pak)
___ Zeus and entourage (Olympus Pak)
___ Odin and entourage (Valhalla Pak)
___ Gaia/Mother Earth/Mother Nature
___ None of the above; I was taken in by a false god

3. Did your God come to you undamaged, with all parts in good working order and with no obvious breakage or missing attributes?
__ Yes __ No
If not, please describe the problems you initially encountered here.
Please indicate all that apply:
___ Not eternal
___ Not omniscient
___ Not omnipotent
___ Finite in space/Does not occupy or inhabit the entire universe
___ Permits sex outside of marriage
___ Prohibits sex outside of marriage
___ Makes mistakes (Geraldo Rivera, Jesse Helms)
___ When beseeched, doesn't stay beseeched
___ Requires burnt offerings
___ Requires virgin sacrifices
___ Plays dice with the universe

4. What factors were relevant in your decision to acquire a God? Please check all that apply.
___ Indoctrinated by parents
___ Needed a reason to live
___ Indoctrinated by society
___ Needed target for rage
___ Imaginary friend grew up
___ Hate to think for self
___ Wanted to meet girls/boys
___ Fear of death
___ To piss off parents
___ Needed a day away from work
___ Enjoy organ music
___ Needed focus on whom to despise
___ Needed to feel morally superior
___ Graduated from the tooth fairy
___ My shrubbery caught fire and told me to do it

5. Are you currently using any other source of inspiration in addition to God? Please check all that apply.
__ Self-help books
__ Tarot, Astrology
__ Star Trek re-runs
__ Fortune cookies
__ Ann Landers
__ Psychic Friends Network
__ Dianetics
__ Playboy and/or Playgirl
__ Sex, Drugs, and Rock & Roll
__ Biorhythms
__ EST
__ Television
__ Mantras
__ Jimmy Swaggart
__ Crystals (not including Crystal Gayle)
__ Human Sacrifice
__ Wandering around in desert
__ Burning shrubbery
__ Other:_____________________

6. Have you ever worshiped a false God before? Is so, which false God were you fooled by? Please check all that apply.
___ Odin
___ Cthulhu
___ Lottery
___ Baal
___ Beelzebub
___ The Almighty Dollar
___ The Conservative Right
___ Mick Jagger
___ Bill Gates
___ The Great Pumpkin
___ Ronald Reagan
___ A burning cabbage
___ mushrooms
___ Other: ________________

7. God employs a limited degree of Divine Intervention to preserve the balanced level of felt presence and blind faith. Which would you prefer (circle one)?
a. More Divine Intervention
b. Less Divine Intervention
c. Current level of Divine Intervention is just right
d. Don't know - what's Divine Intervention?

8. God also attempts to maintain a balanced level of disasters and miracles.
Please rate on a scale of 1 to 5 God's handling of the following: (1 unsatisfactory, 5 excellent):
Disaster:
1 2 3 4 5 flood
1 2 3 4 5 famine
1 2 3 4 5 earthquake
1 2 3 4 5 war
1 2 3 4 5 pestilence
1 2 3 4 5 plague
1 2 3 4 5 AOL
1 2 3 4 5 Republican Congress
1 2 3 4 5 Jerry Lewis
1 2 3 4 5 Dubya
1 2 3 4 5 my last relationship

Miracles:
1 2 3 4 5 rescues
1 2 3 4 5 spontaneous remissions
1 2 3 4 5 crying statues
1 2 3 4 5 water changing to wine
1 2 3 4 5 walking on water
1 2 3 4 5 stars hovering over towns
1 2 3 4 5 VCRs that set their own clocks
1 2 3 4 5 clear and competent statements by the President
1 2 3 4 5 my present relationship

9. Please rate the following on a scale of 1 to 5 (1 unsatisfactory, 5 excellent):
1 2 3 4 5 God's Courtesy
1 2 3 4 5 answers to your prayers
1 2 3 4 5 Are your spiritual needs being met?
1 2 3 4 5 How are your shrubs doing?

10. Do you have any additional comments or suggestions for improving the quality of God's services? (Attach an additional sheet(s) if necessary.)

 

[BigBen]

we got 4 years left to let out our inside feelings/emotions
c'mon now....

Hypo the world is not ending in 2012 stop saying that. Man kind decides the fate of mankind by how they control their emotions, and actions/interactions. For the record if the world was ending in 2012 like you think the bible says then why did the pope John Paul begin preparing for the year 3000?

If i were you i would take everything positive from religion and leave the condemning negative stuff alone, all that is doing is attracting more negative thoughts in your mind. STOP CONDEMNING YOURSELF WITH YOUR BELIEFS IT IS SELF DESTRUCTION! I believe in God, but I also believe that God is ALWAYS good. Bad things happen because people do bad things. Stop using the one God given gift mankind has that no other thing on this planet has for negative self destructive means.

We can control our thoughts in our mind and knowing this direct ourselves towards whatever desires we have. Stop thinking negatively and not controlling your emotions and thoughts. I am saying keep your faith in God but do not allow anything make you think negatively. If God is all good then He certainly would not want you do be thinking negatively.

 

[Zigurd]

I wish theists would do this test !!

 

[BigBen]

You cant make someone be something they do not want to be. I cant make u believe in God and you cant make me not believe in Him.

If you cant have faith in something you cant see, (i still say you see Gods design in all of creation nature, ect ect) then explain to me how you would have faith in creating something new out of an idea. It would take just as much faith to actualize the idea as it would to have faith in God.

 

[Skeptic]

You cant make someone be something they do not want to be. I cant make u believe in God and you cant make me not believe in Him.

If you cant have faith in something you cant see, (i still say you see Gods design in all of creation nature, ect ect) then explain to me how you would have faith in creating something new out of an idea. It would take just as much faith to actualize the idea as it would to have faith in God.

It does take faith in an idea to make it a truth. But these ideas are extensively tested (for the most part), before claimed as truth. Which is the difference between science and Religion.

 

[BigBen]

It does take faith in an idea to make it a truth. But these ideas are extensively tested (for the most part), before claimed as truth. Which is the difference between science and Religion.

you think science is flawless. NOTHING in science is universal. Im not saying science is not good, and has proved somethings on earth, and some things in space, but science CAN ALWAYS be taken somewhere where it does not follow its own rules. IE space. Physics DO NOT WORK if you apply them to areas in deep space. This then brings up the credibility of science in the whole picture. Science does not know all it is just a theory, a damn good theory of how things here work, but who says that theory can work anywhere else.

Im not saying science dos not work here bc it does, sometimes. If science is flawless and some all knowing thing then why do people die of diseases the have "cures" for. If man has discovered so much then why have we not discovered a way to feed the starving people in this world? Why cant a majority of men act beyond emotions and just do what is right? If we have a cure then we can fix someone 100% of the time every time for that disease. We both know thats hog wash it does not happen.

Religion has a great deal to do with thought, just as philosophy does. You must understand the workings of a thing before you can test the theory. We understand double blind placebo tests, so we test things by it. How can you test a philosophy by a means of scientific theory that is not meant to gauge what is being tested. Thats like me trying to tell you what my favorite color is by looking at a number line.

Learn the morals and lessons that Jesus teaches, not the ones that someone told you Jesus taught or the ones you think Jesus taught or any other ones that you can come up with. Learn Christs message. <--- with out learning Christs message you cant live by Christ, its like adding with out knowing how to count.

The more you learn about how the mind works in terms of thought, the more brilliant Jesus message really is. Some one would say that it is outrageous to say it is a sin to think about doing something bad, in our example we will use selling crystal meth.

So say i dont care about what i think, i welcome all thoughts on how to make more money easy and fast. i need money and i think hey if i sell dope then i can make some extra money. But i dont act on it, but i do allow the thought to stay in my mind. Eventually i will become numb to the thought it will have no effect as far as good or bad goes on me this may take some time but eventually it will happen. Say i need to make rent, and i decide to sell a little meth. Its ok its just a little. Well eventually i start selling more bc i like having more things, and more things, and more things, and bc i have no spiritual life and nothing beyond this world exists after life i guess i still want more, bc hell if im here im gonna enjoy it. Mean while our same person has taken and destroyed peoples lives at the expense of the trap of trying to satisfy himself with physical things.

Now you have to accept this story as a possibility even though it may not be the reality bc basically that is all the stories or ideas everyone else seems to be posting about Christianity. They take the most extreme situation flip it some more then talk about all the evil it can do. If you think Jesus was here to preach an evil message then your insane. Christs message was of peace, but just like all good things they can be taken and used for evil.
Their is no tool that can be used for good that can do just as an equal amount of evil.

 

[Tonka]

religion... Pathetic.

 

[tim290280]

Where to start with this

you think science is flawless. NOTHING in science is universal. Im not saying science is not good, and has proved somethings on earth, and some things in space, but science CAN ALWAYS be taken somewhere where it does not follow its own rules. IE space. Physics DO NOT WORK if you apply them to areas in deep space. This then brings up the credibility of science in the whole picture. Science does not know all it is just a theory, a damn good theory of how things here work, but who says that theory can work anywhere else.

You misunderstand what science is. Science is literally knowledge and/or understanding. It especially pertains to knowledge obtained and tested through scientific method. Thus it isn't flawed, rather the knowledge and understanding of a subject is. You refer to science not working in space, because physics are some how different, by which I assume you mean the concept of gravity. This is just not the case. It is merely your understanding of how forces are conserved in terms of energy in the universe that is limited. The science still applies.

Im not saying science dos not work here bc it does, sometimes. If science is flawless and some all knowing thing then why do people die of diseases the have "cures" for.

This is a really stupid thing to say. Diseases are a living evolving entity. They are an example of evolution in progress right now for all you anti evolution theory people!! Thus disease will adapt and overcome cures given enough time. The body would also adapt (as would the disease so as not to wipe itself out) to be immune over time.

If man has discovered so much then why have we not discovered a way to feed the starving people in this world? Why cant a majority of men act beyond emotions and just do what is right? If we have a cure then we can fix someone 100% of the time every time for that disease. We both know thats hog wash it does not happen.

This is a spurious argument. I could ask the same of "Why do people have to die?" "Why did that man kill my mommy?" "Why didn't god do something about it?"

Religion has a great deal to do with thought, just as philosophy does. You must understand the workings of a thing before you can test the theory. We understand double blind placebo tests, so we test things by it. How can you test a philosophy by a means of scientific theory that is not meant to gauge what is being tested. Thats like me trying to tell you what my favorite color is by looking at a number line.

I would have said religion is more about suppressing thought. Look at the ignorance of the fundamentalists of any religion. How many Christians deny evolution when there is much evidence and sound knowledge that shows it has and is occurring? As for testing a philosophy; easy measure it. We can prove that agriculture has been in existence for ~10,000yrs through a number of means. That predates the supposed fundamentalist age of the earth by a few thousand years. The only argument against this (which I have never heard uttered) is that the universe came into existence already several billion years old......

Learn the morals and lessons that Jesus teaches, not the ones that someone told you Jesus taught or the ones you think Jesus taught or any other ones that you can come up with. Learn Christs message. <--- with out learning Christs message you cant live by Christ, its like adding with out knowing how to count.

This is a flawed statement. Christ's message was never written down until a couple of hundred years after his death. Therefore you are relying on what someone has accredited to Christ. I don't have anything against the message, but don't try and take high ground with this argument.

The more you learn about how the mind works in terms of thought, the more brilliant Jesus message really is. Some one would say that it is outrageous to say it is a sin to think about doing something bad, in our example we will use selling crystal meth.

It would have to have been a brilliant message, it took scholars years to write. Look up the history of the bible.

So say i dont care about what i think, i welcome all thoughts on how to make more money easy and fast. i need money and i think hey if i sell dope then i can make some extra money. But i dont act on it, but i do allow the thought to stay in my mind. Eventually i will become numb to the thought it will have no effect as far as good or bad goes on me this may take some time but eventually it will happen. Say i need to make rent, and i decide to sell a little meth. Its ok its just a little. Well eventually i start selling more bc i like having more things, and more things, and more things, and bc i have no spiritual life and nothing beyond this world exists after life i guess i still want more, bc hell if im here im gonna enjoy it. Mean while our same person has taken and destroyed peoples lives at the expense of the trap of trying to satisfy himself with physical things.

So moral repugnancy is the domain of faith alone? I don't think there are too many scientists or atheists that would condone wilful social destruction.

Now you have to accept this story as a possibility even though it may not be the reality bc basically that is all the stories or ideas everyone else seems to be posting about Christianity. They take the most extreme situation flip it some more then talk about all the evil it can do. If you think Jesus was here to preach an evil message then your insane. Christs message was of peace, but just like all good things they can be taken and used for evil.
Their is no tool that can be used for good that can do just as an equal amount of evil.

I agree that many have distorted faith and religion to their own ends and will continue to do so. But your argument and many of those posting against science in these threads distort science and knowledge. I find it annoying that people with a primary or high school knowledge level proclaim science doesn't know (insert here) when anyone who has read more widely would find that ignorance laughable.

Ignorance is the enemy of science. It is ignorance that science is against not religion. It is not science's fault that religion perpetuates ignorance.

 

[Tonka]

Where to start with this

You misunderstand what science is. Science is literally knowledge and/or understanding. It especially pertains to knowledge obtained and tested through scientific method. Thus it isn't flawed, rather the knowledge and understanding of a subject is. You refer to science not working in space, because physics are some how different, by which I assume you mean the concept of gravity. This is just not the case. It is merely your understanding of how forces are conserved in terms of energy in the universe that is limited. The science still applies.

This is a really stupid thing to say. Diseases are a living evolving entity. They are an example of evolution in progress right now for all you anti evolution theory people!! Thus disease will adapt and overcome cures given enough time. The body would also adapt (as would the disease so as not to wipe itself out) to be immune over time.

This is a spurious argument. I could ask the same of "Why do people have to die?" "Why did that man kill my mommy?" "Why didn't god do something about it?"

I would have said religion is more about suppressing thought. Look at the ignorance of the fundamentalists of any religion. How many Christians deny evolution when there is much evidence and sound knowledge that shows it has and is occurring? As for testing a philosophy; easy measure it. We can prove that agriculture has been in existence for ~10,000yrs through a number of means. That predates the supposed fundamentalist age of the earth by a few thousand years. The only argument against this (which I have never heard uttered) is that the universe came into existence already several billion years old......

This is a flawed statement. Christ's message was never written down until a couple of hundred years after his death. Therefore you are relying on what someone has accredited to Christ. I don't have anything against the message, but don't try and take high ground with this argument.

It would have to have been a brilliant message, it took scholars years to write. Look up the history of the bible.

So moral repugnancy is the domain of faith alone? I don't think there are too many scientists or atheists that would condone wilful social destruction.

I agree that many have distorted faith and religion to their own ends and will continue to do so. But your argument and many of those posting against science in these threads distort science and knowledge. I find it annoying that people with a primary or high school knowledge level proclaim science doesn't know (insert here) when anyone who has read more widely would find that ignorance laughable.

Ignorance is the enemy of science. It is ignorance that science is against not religion. It is not science's fault that religion perpetuates ignorance.

Well said.

 

[Skeptic]

you think science is flawless. NOTHING in science is universal. Im not saying science is not good, and has proved somethings on earth, and some things in space, but science CAN ALWAYS be taken somewhere where it does not follow its own rules. IE space. Physics DO NOT WORK if you apply them to areas in deep space. This then brings up the credibility of science in the whole picture. Science does not know all it is just a theory, a damn good theory of how things here work, but who says that theory can work anywhere else.

Im not saying science dos not work here bc it does, sometimes. If science is flawless and some all knowing thing then why do people die of diseases the have "cures" for. If man has discovered so much then why have we not discovered a way to feed the starving people in this world? Why cant a majority of men act beyond emotions and just do what is right? If we have a cure then we can fix someone 100% of the time every time for that disease. We both know thats hog wash it does not happen.

Religion has a great deal to do with thought, just as philosophy does. You must understand the workings of a thing before you can test the theory. We understand double blind placebo tests, so we test things by it. How can you test a philosophy by a means of scientific theory that is not meant to gauge what is being tested. Thats like me trying to tell you what my favorite color is by looking at a number line.

Learn the morals and lessons that Jesus teaches, not the ones that someone told you Jesus taught or the ones you think Jesus taught or any other ones that you can come up with. Learn Christs message. <--- with out learning Christs message you cant live by Christ, its like adding with out knowing how to count.

The more you learn about how the mind works in terms of thought, the more brilliant Jesus message really is. Some one would say that it is outrageous to say it is a sin to think about doing something bad, in our example we will use selling crystal meth.

So say i dont care about what i think, i welcome all thoughts on how to make more money easy and fast. i need money and i think hey if i sell dope then i can make some extra money. But i dont act on it, but i do allow the thought to stay in my mind. Eventually i will become numb to the thought it will have no effect as far as good or bad goes on me this may take some time but eventually it will happen. Say i need to make rent, and i decide to sell a little meth. Its ok its just a little. Well eventually i start selling more bc i like having more things, and more things, and more things, and bc i have no spiritual life and nothing beyond this world exists after life i guess i still want more, bc hell if im here im gonna enjoy it. Mean while our same person has taken and destroyed peoples lives at the expense of the trap of trying to satisfy himself with physical things.

Now you have to accept this story as a possibility even though it may not be the reality bc basically that is all the stories or ideas everyone else seems to be posting about Christianity. They take the most extreme situation flip it some more then talk about all the evil it can do. If you think Jesus was here to preach an evil message then your insane. Christs message was of peace, but just like all good things they can be taken and used for evil.
Their is no tool that can be used for good that can do just as an equal amount of evil.

i didnt say science is flawless... dont put words in my mouth.

 

[BigBen]

Where to start with this

You misunderstand what science is. Science is literally knowledge and/or understanding. It especially pertains to knowledge obtained and tested through scientific method. Thus it isn't flawed, rather the knowledge and understanding of a subject is. You refer to science not working in space, because physics are some how different, by which I assume you mean the concept of gravity. This is just not the case. It is merely your understanding of how forces are conserved in terms of energy in the universe that is limited. The science still applies.

Science is a theory. You understand how certain things work under certain conditions. Your arguement about physics just does not hold up with me, it was not my understading, it is anyones understanding of physics that has studied them and looked for flaws that people have found in them. A fellow from nasa was the one who discovered the problem with physics. Weather it be gravity or vacuum or something in space, he says that problems very much exsist.

This is a really stupid thing to say. Diseases are a living evolving entity. They are an example of evolution in progress right now for all you anti evolution theory people!! Thus disease will adapt and overcome cures given enough time. The body would also adapt (as would the disease so as not to wipe itself out) to be immune over time.

I am not anti evolutionary, evolution within species does happen and that is all their is proof of, everything else is just speculation or ideas bc their is zero proof of evolution form one species to another, that is what most people are against saying a fish turned into a crab.

This is a spurious argument. I could ask the same of "Why do people have to die?" "Why did that man kill my mommy?" "Why didn't god do something about it?"

That was the entire point, stuff like that is constantly brought up in religious threads and used against religion, it is only fair that the exact same concept be answered in an atheist thread.

I would have said religion is more about suppressing thought. Look at the ignorance of the fundamentalists of any religion. How many Christians deny evolution when there is much evidence and sound knowledge that shows it has and is occurring? As for testing a philosophy; easy measure it. We can prove that agriculture has been in existence for ~10,000yrs through a number of means. That predates the supposed fundamentalist age of the earth by a few thousand years. The only argument against this (which I have never heard uttered) is that the universe came into existence already several billion years old......

You missed the point of the statement. Your trying to measure temperature with a ruler.

This is a flawed statement. Christ's message was never written down until a couple of hundred years after his death. Therefore you are relying on what someone has accredited to Christ. I don't have anything against the message, but don't try and take high ground with this argument.

Their are no high grounds in this argument

It would have to have been a brilliant message, it took scholars years to write. Look up the history of the bible.

Already

So moral repugnancy is the domain of faith alone? I don't think there are too many scientists or atheists that would condone wilful social destruction.

Not at all, that was just an in the box idea that is easily understood.

I agree that many have distorted faith and religion to their own ends and will continue to do so. But your argument and many of those posting against science in these threads distort science and knowledge. I find it annoying that people with a primary or high school knowledge level proclaim science doesn't know (insert here) when anyone who has read more widely would find that ignorance laughable.

I am college educated, and when i debate in these threads i take them from a philosophical point of view. I do not have an argument against science. I actually said that if we have definate proof that something works a certain way it is your responsibility to use that thing to make us better. I very much agree with all the laws science has came up with under the conditions they have been tested under. Your having your argument with the wrong person. What i said is that science is nothing more than a theory, b/c that's all that it is, it's a damn good one and i did not say it wasnt.

Ignorance is the enemy of science. It is ignorance that science is against not religion. It is not science's fault that religion perpetuates ignorance.[/QUOTE]

Religion does not perpetuate ignorance, being satisfied with what one knows does that job better than anything else could. I could not have said it better myself about sciences enemy. Actually that is EXACTLY what i said in Ironslaves ron paul thread. You dont dislike religion you dislike ignornace manifested into someones lifestyle when the answer is already out their somewhere.

 

[El Freako]

Just a couple of points...

Science is a theory. You understand how certain things work under certain conditions. Your arguement about physics just does not hold up with me, it was not my understading, it is anyones understanding of physics that has studied them and looked for flaws that people have found in them. A fellow from nasa was the one who discovered the problem with physics. Weather it be gravity or vacuum or something in space, he says that problems very much exsist.

But it is theory supported by facts. Once a hypothesis has survived testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a scientific theory. This is a logically reasoned, self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of certain natural phenomena. A theory typically describes the behavior of much broader sets of phenomena than a hypothesis—commonly, a large number of hypotheses can be logically bound together by a single theory. These broader theories may be formulated using principles such as parsimony (e.g., "Occam's Razor"). They are then repeatedly tested by analyzing how the collected evidence (facts) compares to the theory. When a theory survives a sufficiently large number of empirical observations, it then becomes a scientific generalization that can be taken as fully verified. These assume the status of a physical law or law of nature. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Science)

What point was actually being argued here? I know you were refuting Skeptics claims about science but are you trying to say that "faith based" theories are equal to scientific theory?

I am not anti evolutionary, evolution within species does happen and that is all their is proof of, everything else is just speculation or ideas bc their is zero proof of evolution form one species to another, that is what most people are against saying a fish turned into a crab.

To start off with, fish evolved from arthropods, not the other way round. Secondly, speciation (divergance of species) has been observed multiple times under both controlled laboratory conditions and in nature.(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution#Speciation)

We're all the retarded offspring of 5 monkeys having buttsex with a fish squirrel.

 

[tkD]

a battle without end

 

[El Freako]

I understand that science is supported by facts. Science was used to date the original texts of the bible. We have used mathematics to discover that the chances of Jesus being anything else but what he says he as according to scripture is 10 to the 27 power. He was prophesized about, the chance of Jesus just happening to fulfill all the prophecies, bc he did fulfill them, is 10^27. Now if we came up with those results in a lab about something we were studying we would with out a doubt say that it must be true. I am not pulling this out of my ass these are facts! They took the number of qualities that the Christ had to have and related them to the number of qualities Jesus did have. The result was the chances of Jesus just by luck fulfilling every thing that was propesized about was 10^27 power. It was not "just by chance" by anyones interpretation of the data.

Can you link me to these studies? I'm happy to read them despite the fact that I think it will be bullshit.

That looks like adaption, i dont see one thing turning into something it completely was not, all i see was the shape of a birds beak change to meet the needs of it environment. Evolution WITHIN species.

Did you read the supporting articles to?

Through adaption within species new species are created. Take the Kodiak Bear. It is descended from the Brown Bear. A population of Brown Bears became isolated on the Islands of the Kodiak Archipelago around 10,000-12,000 years ago and due to the rich food sources developed into a unique supspecies that was much larger than the original species. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kodiak_bear)

Prior to that we have the polar bear, another descendant of the Brown Bear that diverged 200,000 years ago. Again speciation occurred due to population isolation. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polar_bears)

Here are two very recent example of evolution where physical similarities still remain. Stretching further back they have fossil and dna evidence showing how bears and dogs diverged from a common ancestor. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bears#Evolutionary_relationships)

I honestly do not understand how an educated person can sit there and try and refute evolution?

 

[BigBen]

All examples of evolution within species. They are all still bears.

 

[El Freako]

Different species of bears!!! How about the relationship of bears and dogs? Did you read into that?

 

[BigBen]

Different species of bears!!! How about the relationship of bears and dogs? Did you read into that?

But still bears none the less.
So dogs and bears realtionship is as follows. Their was Animal A. It migrated to different climates and turned into different versions of itself to adapt to its surroundings. One version that is called a dog(animal Ab) and one that is called a bear(Animal Ac). So basically they are all still the original species just different versions of it. Evolution within species.

 

[El Freako]

But still bears none the less.
So dogs and bears realtionship is as follows. Their was Animal A. It migrated to different climates and turned into different versions of itself to adapt to its surroundings. One version that is called a dog(animal Ab) and one that is called a bear(Animal Ac). So basically they are all still the original species just different versions of it. Evolution within species.

So they are the same species. Then why can't they interbreed? Because they are different species!

Your argument then leads me to understand that since bears are the same species as canines then canines must be the same species as miacids from which they evolved, so all other carnivores which also evolved from miacids are also of the same species. A cat is the same species as a dog.

Why, if you can accept the concept of evolution within the species, can't you accept speciation (divergence of the species)?

 

[BigBen]

So they are the same species. Then why can't they interbreed? Because they are different species!

Are you asking why cant one animal with one set of attributes and one animal from another set of attributes mate and have a baby that is completely of one animals attributes? Genetics. The same reason a black person and a white person have a mixed baby.

Your argument then leads me to understand that since bears are the same species as canines then canines must be the same species as miacids from which they evolved, so all other carnivores which also evolved from miacids are also of the same species. A cat is the same species as a dog.

No thats not what i should have lead you to think. Bc the new animal has different genetics it has to in order have the different features. So of course cats aren't dogs. But is their DNA similar in any way?

Why, if you can accept the concept of evolution within the species, can't you accept speciation (divergence of the species)?

Speciation is really adaption is it not. Their is always still something in common with what the species originally came from, if their was not we would not be able to link anything to anything else with DNA. What is different is the adaption or evolution within the species that had to come about for the animal to survive in its new habitat. The core of what the animal came from is the same, dogs and cats must have some DNA features that are the same if they both evolved from the same original thing the same original thing must be common in both creatures DNA. What makes them different is the adaption that the creature had to make to survive in its climate, this is where the DNA would differ so we name it something else, but the core of what makes that animal what it is is still related to what it came from in regards to its DNA.

Evolution from one species to another(ie fish to rat or something) must then be the complete change of that core into something entirely new where as in the old is completely unrelated to the new.

 

[El Freako]

Speciation is really adaption is it not. Their is always still something in common with what the species originally came from, if their was not we would not be able to link anything to anything else with DNA. What is different is the adaption or evolution within the species that had to come about for the animal to survive in its new habitat. The core of what the animal came from is the same, dogs and cats must have some DNA features that are the same if they both evolved from the same original thing the same original thing must be common in both creatures DNA. What makes them different is the adaption that the creature had to make to survive in its climate, this is where the DNA would differ so we name it something else, but the core of what makes that animal what it is is still related to what it came from in regards to its DNA.

Evolution from one species to another(ie fish to rat or something) must then be the complete change of that core into something entirely new where as in the old is completely unrelated to the new.

Speciation=Adaption=Evolution.

So you've just agreed with me there. Why were you arguing against evolution in the first place? Is your core problem with this argument the origins of man? Because what you just said can also be used to relate humans to primates and back through the eons to fish. A fish never instantly evolved into a rat or a man but through many billions of years of adaption, speciation and evolution they are related.

Evolution from one species to another(ie fish to rat or something) must then be the complete change of that core into something entirely new where as in the old is completely unrelated to the new.

This statement is completely contradictory. One of the core concept of evolution is the relationship between the 2 species.

I have to go to the gym and then to work so I won't be able to reply to this thread for a long while. I eagerly await your reply and would really appreciate it if you could link me to something on the concept of proving Jesus was who he was through maths.