| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Azoth" |
| Date: |
05 May 2006 06:20:28 PM |
| Object: |
A hybrid theory |
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
.
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 11:08:58 PM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> said:
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering.
What findings necessitate this approach?
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azoth" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 12:02:51 AM |
|
|
I am simply going by what science has shown and what ancient sumerian
writings tell us, if you take for example the fact of the things they
knew about 6000 years ago then you would know they had to be in contact
with some sort of alien life form, the sumerians knew about DNA and
knew all the planets, their colors, mass and sattelites, how could they
have known this information when we didnt discover pluto until 1933 and
DNA was very popular 20 years ago?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 11:47:05 AM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> said:
I am simply going by what science has shown and what ancient sumerian
writings tell us, if you take for example the fact of the things they
knew about 6000 years ago then you would know they had to be in contact
with some sort of alien life form, the sumerians knew about DNA and
knew all the planets, their colors, mass and sattelites, how could they
have known this information when we didnt discover pluto until 1933 and
DNA was very popular 20 years ago?
Please cite your sources.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 06:04:09 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 06 May 2006 16:47:05 GMT, Jim07D6 <Jim07D6@nospam.net> wrote:
- Refer: <unkp52dt8vaq9d5lh3desqn3loakess7r2@4ax.com>
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> said:
I am simply going by what science has shown and what ancient sumerian
writings tell us, if you take for example the fact of the things they
knew about 6000 years ago then you would know they had to be in contact
with some sort of alien life form, the sumerians knew about DNA and
knew all the planets, their colors, mass and sattelites, how could they
have known this information when we didnt discover pluto until 1933 and
DNA was very popular 20 years ago?
Please cite your sources.
--- Jim07D6
Didn't you know that DNA was popular 20 years ago?
Apparently it has gone out of fashion since then, and did not exist
before 1900.
I think you'll find that this poster's sources are restricted to
internet conspiracy/numerology/ufo sites.
They are unlikely to be the American Journal of Physics, and suchlike.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josh Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 08:50:18 AM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
I am simply going by what science has shown and what ancient sumerian
writings tell us, if you take for example the fact of the things they
knew about 6000 years ago then you would know they had to be in contact
with some sort of alien life form,
*****. Take this nonsense to a sci-fi newsgroup.
the sumerians knew about DNA and
knew all the planets, their colors, mass and sattelites, how could they
have known this information when we didnt discover pluto until 1933 and
DNA was very popular 20 years ago?
The Sumerians didn't know anything about DNA. DNA was discovered in 1869
by Friedrich Miescher. He isolated it from bandages soaked with pus.
DNA's role in genetic inheritance was discovered in 1943, and in 1953
Watson and Crick discovered it's double helix polymer structure. Surely
you're not saying that DNA was discovered only 20 years ago, right?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 05:12:22 AM |
|
|
On 5 May 2006 22:02:51 -0700, "Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1146891771.016675.218780@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
I am simply going by what science has shown and what ancient sumerian
writings tell us, if you take for example the fact of the things they
knew about 6000 years ago then you would know they had to be in contact
with some sort of alien life form, the sumerians knew about DNA and
knew all the planets, their colors, mass and sattelites, how could they
have known this information when we didnt discover pluto until 1933 and
DNA was very popular 20 years ago?
Utter *****.
I study ancient Sumerian writings, and they show no such thing.
It is fanciful nonsense, unsupported by any facts whatsoever.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 09:45:36 PM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote in news:1146871228.678039.279630
@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
Now, the big question is where did these "higher beings" come from? Were
there even "higher" beings who designed them and then even higher higher
beings who designed them, and so on and so on? Or did they evolve
naturally? And if they did, why couldn't we have also evolved naturally
with no "higher being" involved?
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azoth" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 11:57:32 PM |
|
|
I have asked myself these same questions a million times, were they
came from, my guess would be from another planet that we have yet to
discover or perhaps even another galaxy. Maybe they did evolve
naturally, but in the human sence there is no way that mans evolution
took millions of years and then over night in the grand time scale
became intelligent modern man. I am not pushing any "god", I am just
saying this could be a viable explanation. Science has linked homo
erectus and homo sapien to a point but not to a definate point, we are
similar but not the same.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
07 May 2006 05:56:04 PM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> said:
<...>
there is no way that mans evolution
took millions of years and then over night in the grand time scale
became intelligent modern man.
<...>
Haven't you heard of "the tipping point"? Coming to control fire was
a MASSIVE tipping point, to cite just one example. But it happened
over a few days, probably, in each group it happened. It is not
conceptually hard to figure out, so happened when we were just bright
enough not to light a bonfire IN the unventilated cave -- and that
probably happened, too, a few times, before somebody realized that the
fire god would take our breath away and kill us if we did that. Look
at today. We discover a new technology and after 10 years, it's like,
how did we get along without it? You just happen to be existing in the
middle of a punctuation of evolution.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D6" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 11:49:10 AM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> said:
I have asked myself these same questions a million times, were they
came from, my guess would be from another planet that we have yet to
discover or perhaps even another galaxy. Maybe they did evolve
naturally, but in the human sence there is no way that mans evolution
took millions of years and then over night in the grand time scale
became intelligent modern man. I am not pushing any "god", I am just
saying this could be a viable explanation. Science has linked homo
erectus and homo sapien to a point but not to a definate point, we are
similar but not the same.
Science does not posit "explanations of the gaps" any more than it
posits a god of the gaps. Science fiction might be the place for your
theories, until there is evidence.
--- Jim07D6
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Woden" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 12:00:27 AM |
|
|
"Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote in news:1146891452.309466.301250
@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:
I have asked myself these same questions a million times, were they
came from, my guess would be from another planet that we have yet to
discover or perhaps even another galaxy. Maybe they did evolve
naturally, but in the human sence there is no way that mans evolution
took millions of years and then over night in the grand time scale
became intelligent modern man. I am not pushing any "god", I am just
saying this could be a viable explanation. Science has linked homo
erectus and homo sapien to a point but not to a definate point, we are
similar but not the same.
Bwahhhahaaahaaahaaa. Now, that's a ***** answer to the question.
--
Woden
"religion is a socio-political system for controlling people's thoughts,
lives and actions based on ancient myths and superstitions, perpetrated
through generations of subtle yet pervasive brainwashing."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Santolina chamaecyparissus" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 06:40:12 PM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
(snip)
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering.
Where is the systematized body of data that support this theory?
(snip)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Josh Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 08:35:53 AM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
You've already posted this drivel on talk.origins and had your *****
handed to you there. Are you a masochist?
.
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
10 May 2006 04:46:30 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 May 2006 08:35:53 -0500, Josh Miles <no@thanks.com> wrote in
alt.atheism
Azoth wrote:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
You've already posted this drivel on talk.origins and had your *****
handed to you there. Are you a masochist?
Jabbers is.
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 06:52:54 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 08 May 2006 08:35:53 -0500, Josh Miles <no@thanks.com> wrote:
- Refer: <FKCdndYXYbGx1MLZRVn-qQ@sigecom.net>
Azoth wrote:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
You've already posted this drivel on talk.origins and had your *****
handed to you there. Are you a masochist?
A simple nutcase, I expect.
--
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 06:38:17 PM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
We would then have evidence both theories are correct, would we not? It
seems we only have evidence that the Theory of Evolution is correct, though.
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Of course, nowhere has anyone produced any evidence to support this
theory. There have been no tests with repeatable results, no
observations, no write-ups in peer-reviewed journals. Nothing, except
the wishful thinking of individuals like yourself trying to wedge your
imaginary god into the workings of science.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
You must begin a convincing argument about "higher beings" by first
proving there are "higher beings".
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Member, Earthquack's 666 club
Supervisor, EAC department of little adhesive-backed shiny plastic
L-shaped doo-dads to add feet to Jesus Fish department
It is safe to say that the bible contains equal amounts of fact, history
and pizza.
-Penn Jillette
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "stoney" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
10 May 2006 04:41:51 PM |
|
|
On 5 May 2006 16:20:28 -0700, "Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote in
alt.atheism
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
The rubbish remains garbage no matter how much parfume you apply.
[snip Jabbers' insanity]
--
Fundies and trolls are cordially invited to
shove a wooden cross up their arses and rotate
at a high rate of speed. I trust you'll
be 'blessed' with a plethora of splinters.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 08:18:02 PM |
|
|
On 5 May 2006 16:20:28 -0700, "Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote:
- Refer: <1146871228.678039.279630@y43g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory
Hold everything ***** Tracy!!
ID is NOT a theory.
Not by any means, shape or form.
The rest of your writing is therefore based on an entirely false
premise.
Please try again.
that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
--
.
|
|
|
| User: "Azoth" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 11:51:40 PM |
|
|
Yes it is a theory
.
|
|
|
| User: "Josh Miles" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 08:39:12 AM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
Yes it is a theory
Intelligent design is not a scientific theory. It's not based on any
empirical data and observations; it's not falsifiable; it has no
predictive power; it's not testable. These are the criteria necessary
for a scientific theory.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Chris Johnson" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 08:57:25 AM |
|
|
Azoth wrote:
Yes it is a theory
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
And no, it's not a theory. A theory explains facts and produces
testable hypotheses. ID says "Evolution isn't perfect! Therefore there
is some mysterious creator. It doesn't have to be my favorite god. (It
just so happens that it is.)" It makes no predictions, it provides no
answers. It takes our ignorance, and instead of labelling it "God", it
labels it "intelligent designer".
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
08 May 2006 10:29:56 AM |
|
|
On 8 May 2006 06:57:25 -0700, "Chris Johnson" <effigies@gmail.com>
wrote:
Azoth wrote:
Yes it is a theory
http://www.safalra.com/special/googlegroupsreply/
And no, it's not a theory. A theory explains facts and produces
testable hypotheses. ID says "Evolution isn't perfect! Therefore there
is some mysterious creator. It doesn't have to be my favorite god. (It
just so happens that it is.)" It makes no predictions, it provides no
answers. It takes our ignorance, and instead of labelling it "God", it
labels it "intelligent designer".
Based only on the religious presumption that there is one. Which has
no basis in the real world.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Douglas Berry" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
06 May 2006 11:15:39 AM |
|
|
What's so funny about peace, love and "Azoth"
<azothinflames@gmail.com> posting the following on 5 May 2006 21:51:40
-0700 iin alt.atheism?
Yes it is a theory
OK, state it as a scientific theory. Which means explain how you plan
to test it and produce evidence to support it.
--
Douglas E. Berry Do the OBVIOUS thing to send e-mail
Atheist #2147, Atheist Vet #5
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as
when they do it from religious conviction."
Blaise Pascal (1623-1662), Pense'es, #894.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "William Wingstedt" |
|
| Title: Re: A hybrid theory |
05 May 2006 11:01:11 PM |
|
|
On 5 May 2006 16:20:28 -0700, "Azoth" <azothinflames@gmail.com> wrote:
I hope this is the correct place to post this, please note on the
creation part of this I have it backed up with ancient sumerian beliefs
which outdate christianity and hebrew beliefs by thousands of years.
In modern society the struggle for individuality has been greatly
impacted by factors such as religion and science, on one hand you have
Darwin's theory that says man evolved from a single cell organism, on
the other you have the intelligent design theory that says man was
created by a intelligent being, what if both theories are correct?
Science has proven undoubtedly that evolution exist in every life chain
on the planet, so why wouldn't the same apply to man? It undoubtedly
does, let's create a hybrid theory and call it evolutionary design.
What is evolutionary design? It is the basic theory that man evolved
from a single cell organism and was then later on in history
intelligently altered by way of genetic engineering. If we take science
and apply it's methods and theories, then we take the earliest known
religious beliefs (Sumerian) it basically says that man evolved to a
certain point in time and was then taken by a higher being and
genetically altered to create a new form of man called homo sapien.
So what I am experiencing right now is the product of some "higher
being" tinkering with genetics? Frankly, I am disappointed then. When
this character you're referring to can get up off it's "higher being"
***** and make with the flying like a bird and swimming like a dolphin
along with the ability to ponder it is about when I'll take notice.
Until then, I'd just a soon be a product of the natural world. Don't
take me wrong, I think rearing up on my hind legs and looking out over
the savannah while I stride across it, wielding pointy sticks and
stones is all well and good, but certainly not the sort of achievement
that any "higher being" needs to get all uppity about and further
demand that I worship it. Besides, how do you know that we mightn't be
even better off if this "higher being" you're on about hadn't just
left us alone?
Note: Let me put the "Higher being" into proper context, when I say
higher being I am reffering to someone who is like us, but may be more
advanced and intelligent.
.
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
