| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Bill Gamelson" |
| Date: |
15 Nov 2005 04:37:37 PM |
| Object: |
Question for "Evolutionists" |
Do you really believe that there may be intelligent life on other planets?
If so, what about the possibility that THEY may have created us, the
universe did evolve, and they were here first?
After all, we have successfully cloned animals and are very close to cloning
human beings. This is the first step in learning how to CREATE humans. How
do you know that these space aliens on a distant planet that we have been
long searching for are not simply millions of years ahead of us in
technology and they created us as a long-term science experiment in their
search to explain THEIR existence?
That would be a plausible scientific explanation for our existence, would it
not?
.
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
19 Nov 2005 03:56:06 PM |
|
|
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:hs6vn1h5uhlioq8igi62pih818819jm3i3@4ax.com...
I am still not aware of any time that even a strong minority of
scientists thought that the universe was contracting. That is why I
questioned your memory.
I very clearly remember our science teacher stating this aloud during class.
I cannot remember the books titles and authors that we were learning from.
The science teacher was very weird, so this may explain some things. He
reminded me of that loony "doctor" on Cannonball Run. Rememebr him?
..
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Matt Silberstein" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
19 Nov 2005 12:54:19 PM |
|
|
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 10:53:07 -0600, in alt.atheism , "Bill Gamelson"
<bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> in <GLIff.35000$0l5.18072@dukeread06> wrote:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:e8jun15o2prrsbmhsj06pj99lfdkjdb525@4ax.com...
Imagine that! Back in the 70's science taught us that the universe had
reached it's full expansion and was now beginning to contract!
Really? Could you point to any scientific articles or quality
popularizations to support that claim? My memory is that in the '70s,
there still wasn't quite enough evidence yet to show that steady state
was invalid as an option. I wasn't aware of anyone claiming that we were
already in a contraction state.
My junior high school science class taught this theory. They were teaching
from scientifically accepted literature and textbooks.
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
All we can say is that we do not know what happened before Planck Time.
We're not talking about Planck time.
--
Matt Silberstein
Do something today about the Darfur Genocide
http://www.beawitness.org
http://www.darfurgenocide.org
http://www.savedarfur.org
"Darfur: A Genocide We can Stop"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
19 Nov 2005 01:16:56 PM |
|
|
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com...
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
And this is because you don't remember reading any material yourself.
Is there some reason why my memory serves no purpose?
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
20 Nov 2005 12:38:45 PM |
|
|
Bill Gamelson wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com...
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
And this is because you don't remember reading any material yourself.
Is there some reason why my memory serves no purpose?
I do remember reading about the topic from a wide variety of sources. I
do remember the issues involved in the question, how it was clear that
the Universe was *still* expanding. We know the Universe is still
expanding because of the near universal red shift from distant objects.
What you remember *contradicts* all that I read on the subject. There
was question on whether it would eventually collapse. The issues then
were the total mass of the Universe, whether it was enough to pull
things back together. At the time the computed mass was exactly in the
range that we could not determine if collapse or continued expansion
was the *eventual* result. Your memory of a junior high text is not
sufficient. You can, of course, provide some other support for your
claim. Or, when I get home, I can show you references to support mine.
(Do a google search, you can find plenty if you look.)
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
20 Nov 2005 12:40:15 PM |
|
|
<matts2@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:1132511925.025551.226820@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Bill Gamelson wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com...
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
And this is because you don't remember reading any material yourself.
Is there some reason why my memory serves no purpose?
I do remember reading about the topic from a wide variety of sources. I
do remember the issues involved in the question, how it was clear that
the Universe was *still* expanding. We know the Universe is still
expanding because of the near universal red shift from distant objects.
What you remember *contradicts* all that I read on the subject.
Well, there's Government schooling for you. They just can't agree on
anything.
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
21 Nov 2005 10:02:27 AM |
|
|
And there, I suppose, is private schooling for you, inability to either
admit error or back up a position. But seriously, you have made a claim
that contradicts everything I have read. If your claim regarding
science were correct you could and should back it up. If you can't,
then admit it was wrong or withdraw it. Attacking something else is
unfortunate.
(Now why you think that somehow private schools could and should agree
on everything I don't know. I would have thought that the argument was
that private schools would not always agree and so, using the market,
would find a better way. That argument, of course, requires ignorance
of basic economics, but that does not surprise me any more. The number
of suppose free market advocates who don't understand the fundamentals
of a market is quite large.)
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "David Jensen" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
20 Nov 2005 01:11:06 PM |
|
|
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:40:15 -0600, in alt.atheism
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
<_p3gf.43528$0l5.25904@dukeread06>:
<matts2@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:1132511925.025551.226820@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Bill Gamelson wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com...
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
And this is because you don't remember reading any material yourself.
Is there some reason why my memory serves no purpose?
I do remember reading about the topic from a wide variety of sources. I
do remember the issues involved in the question, how it was clear that
the Universe was *still* expanding. We know the Universe is still
expanding because of the near universal red shift from distant objects.
What you remember *contradicts* all that I read on the subject.
Well, there's Government schooling for you. They just can't agree on
anything.
This is why we use sources. Conflicting memory is common and the usual
problem is that one of the people is claiming to remember something that
never happened.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harry F. Leopold" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
21 Nov 2005 03:13:26 PM |
|
|
Posted only to alt.atheism, I am getting tired of damned cross-post from hell
(religious newsgroups.)
On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 12:38:45 -0600, wrote
(in article <1132511925.025551.226820@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>):
Bill Gamelson wrote:
"Matt Silberstein" <RemoveThisPrefixmatts2nospam@ix.netcom.com> wrote in
message news:55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com...
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
And this is because you don't remember reading any material yourself.
Is there some reason why my memory serves no purpose?
I do remember reading about the topic from a wide variety of sources. I
do remember the issues involved in the question, how it was clear that
the Universe was *still* expanding. We know the Universe is still
expanding because of the near universal red shift from distant objects.
What you remember *contradicts* all that I read on the subject. There
was question on whether it would eventually collapse. The issues then
were the total mass of the Universe, whether it was enough to pull
things back together. At the time the computed mass was exactly in the
range that we could not determine if collapse or continued expansion
was the *eventual* result. Your memory of a junior high text is not
sufficient. You can, of course, provide some other support for your
claim. Or, when I get home, I can show you references to support mine.
(Do a google search, you can find plenty if you look.)
Yup, that is the same as I remember it, and anyone can check back issues of
Sky and Telescope, which although written for the amateur star gazer would
certainly have mentioned such an enormously important detail if it had popped
up anywhere in the scientific community.
If the universe were in collapse it, the universe, would look very different
than it does now.
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness
(remove gene to email)
³Of course *you use an operating system hand woven on a loom at a co-op in
the Andean mountains I'm sure.³-Mark K. Bilbo
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Harry F. Leopold" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
21 Nov 2005 03:07:18 PM |
|
|
Posted only to alt.atheism
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 12:54:19 -0600, Matt Silberstein wrote
(in article <55tun1d735qppqcfdaqbmmuk05p2fbgpkr@4ax.com>):
On Sat, 19 Nov 2005 10:53:07 -0600, in alt.atheism , "Bill Gamelson"
<bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> in <GLIff.35000$0l5.18072@dukeread06> wrote:
"David Jensen" <david@dajensen-family.com> wrote in message
news:e8jun15o2prrsbmhsj06pj99lfdkjdb525@4ax.com...
Imagine that! Back in the 70's science taught us that the universe had
reached it's full expansion and was now beginning to contract!
Really? Could you point to any scientific articles or quality
popularizations to support that claim? My memory is that in the '70s,
there still wasn't quite enough evidence yet to show that steady state
was invalid as an option. I wasn't aware of anyone claiming that we were
already in a contraction state.
My junior high school science class taught this theory. They were teaching
from scientifically accepted literature and textbooks.
I find that very hard to accept since I have never read any scientific
material that said we had detected contraction. Either you
mis-remember, misunderstood, or they were making it up.
I got into amateur astronomy back in the early 60's, I read everything I
could on astronomy. I still try to keep up with what is going on currently in
astronomy (at least in general), not once in the last 40 years have I seen
anything from an astronomer claiming that our universe is currently
contracting. Everything I read said that the universe was expanding, and that
someday (if space is negatively curved - I.E. if there is enough mass in the
universe) the universe will collapse. If space is positively curved, not
enough mass to force this collapse) the universe will continue to expand.
One of the big things in the 70's was trying to find out just how much mass
was in the universe, at that time, and continuing into at least the mid 90's,
everything seemed to point to there being exactly the right amount of mass to
split right down the middle of the two extremes.
But again, I never once read of anyone making the claim that we were in
collapse, and certainly not in the 60's-70's.
--
Harry F. Leopold
aa #2076
AA/Vet #4
The Prints of Darkness
(remove gene to email)
³Christians need not wish to get back at atheists, their own life is
punishment enough.³-K.C.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:01:32 PM |
|
|
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lbvef.14250$0l5.11653@dukeread06:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132097834.236097.271830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<...>
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up
for something, sometime in your life." -- W. Churchill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:08:00 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCBDC2A30Afstone69@213.155.197.138...
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lbvef.14250$0l5.11653@dukeread06:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132097834.236097.271830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<...>
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:49:48 PM |
|
|
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:zDvef.14263$0l5.8103@dukeread06:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCBDC2A30Afstone69@213.155.197.138...
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lbvef.14250$0l5.11653@dukeread06:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132097834.236097.271830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<...>
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support
this suggestion, it is implausable?
You got it.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up
for something, sometime in your life." -- W. Churchill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:57:47 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FD40BEEFA5fstone69@213.155.197.138...
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support
this suggestion, it is implausable?
You got it.
Fair enough.
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Alan S" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
16 Nov 2005 03:15:13 AM |
|
|
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote:
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
False, and even it were true, wouldn't help you because he'd be an
extraordinary exception to the rule that 99% of those who were thought
lunatics indeed were so.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
No, it's implausible beacause *nobody* can provide evidence, and
evidence to the contrary exists and is ample.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Colin Day" |
|
| Title: TQOTM nomination was Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
17 Nov 2005 03:02:03 PM |
|
|
Bill Gamelson wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCBDC2A30Afstone69@213.155.197.138...
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lbvef.14250$0l5.11653@dukeread06:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132097834.236097.271830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<...>
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
I don't know if this is theistic, but
begin quote:
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
end quote.
any seconds?
Colin Day aa #1500
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:10:01 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:08:00 -0600, "Bill Gamelson"
<bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCBDC2A30Afstone69@213.155.197.138...
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lbvef.14250$0l5.11653@dukeread06:
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132097834.236097.271830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
<...>
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
I'm sure that if he'd meant that he would have said so. But he didn't.
So why put words in his mouth, dishonest hypocritical Christian?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:21:47 PM |
|
|
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:rk1ln15n40jr65bf37bd4uq001pgdfrse1@4ax.com...
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
I'm sure that if he'd meant that he would have said so. But he didn't.
So why put words in his mouth, dishonest hypocritical Christian?
I asked a question that could be answered with a yes or a no. I never
mentioned Christianity in this thread.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:40:28 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:21:47 -0600, "Bill Gamelson"
<bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:rk1ln15n40jr65bf37bd4uq001pgdfrse1@4ax.com...
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist.
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
I'm sure that if he'd meant that he would have said so. But he didn't.
So why put words in his mouth, dishonest hypocritical Christian?
I asked a question that could be answered with a yes or a no. I never
mentioned Christianity in this thread.
A dishonest question where you knew you were putting words in his
mouth. Stop lying.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:56:44 PM |
|
|
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:6f3ln154c8j1josf0d4u5oj1ij0lfoaakq@4ax.com...
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
I'm sure that if he'd meant that he would have said so. But he didn't.
So why put words in his mouth, dishonest hypocritical Christian?
I asked a question that could be answered with a yes or a no. I never
mentioned Christianity in this thread.
A dishonest question where you knew you were putting words in his
mouth. Stop lying.
Troll.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Christopher A. Lee" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 08:50:54 PM |
|
|
On Tue, 15 Nov 2005 19:56:44 -0600, "Bill Gamelson"
<bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote:
"Christopher A. Lee" <calee@optonline.net> wrote in message
news:6f3ln154c8j1josf0d4u5oj1ij0lfoaakq@4ax.com...
Albert Einstein could produce evidence to support his theories.
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
I'm sure that if he'd meant that he would have said so. But he didn't.
So why put words in his mouth, dishonest hypocritical Christian?
I asked a question that could be answered with a yes or a no. I never
mentioned Christianity in this thread.
A dishonest question where you knew you were putting words in his
mouth. Stop lying.
Troll.
Oh, the irony.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 10:15:19 PM |
|
|
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Bill Gamelson
(bill_gamelson@yahoo.com) made the light shine upon us with this:
So you're saying that because I cannot provide evidence to support this
suggestion, it is implausable?
Bingo.
--
Uncle Vic
aa#2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department
----
"GARGOYLES, PSYCHICS, EVERYTHING UNGODLY, GET THE HELL OUT OF MY
HOUSE, IN JESUS NAME I PRAY. THE DARK SIDE, SHE's NOT A CHRISTIAN,
SHE'S DARK-SIDED, SHE'S DARK-SIDED, THIS IS MY HOUSE, I WANT MY GOD
AND I WANT MY FAMILY. I AM A GOD WARRIOR SHE'S A SPIRITUAL WARRIOR,
SHE WAS THROWN IN THE PITS, OH NO THE HORRORS"
Ain't Christianity great?
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
17 Nov 2005 10:55:13 AM |
|
|
Oh, and another thing or two...
"Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist. "
No he wasn't.
"These UFO sightings just might be them checking up on us to note the
progress we are making"
You've got the same problems here that Christians have with their
"evidence." All of it is heresay. All of the evidence for the alien
theory (you're not the first to propose this) involves testimonials of
people claiming to be sincere that they really really really were
abducted and had aliens poking about their anuses, or other such
unverifiable claims.
As for the monuments ancient cultures made, like spaceman looking
sculptures and those landing strip drawings on the ground in Peru,
everyone has always been interested in space, and people have always
wanted gods and/or incredible beings from the skies to come and help
them, but that doesn't mean they came. And I would be very surprised if
intelligent life flew hundreds of thousands of life years to get here
just to mow our lawns in pretty patterns.
That being said, I think there is life all over the universe, some of
it is more advanced, some of it is less advanced, none of which has
made its way here, except possibly for some microorganisms from Mars.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
17 Nov 2005 05:08:48 PM |
|
|
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132246513.878547.287240@g49g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Oh, and another thing or two...
"Albert Einstein was once thought of as a lunatic cultist. "
No he wasn't.
"These UFO sightings just might be them checking up on us to note the
progress we are making"
You've got the same problems here that Christians have with their
"evidence." All of it is heresay. All of the evidence for the alien
theory (you're not the first to propose this) involves testimonials of
people claiming to be sincere that they really really really were
abducted and had aliens poking about their anuses, or other such
unverifiable claims.
Yes, those testimonies sound unbelievable. I personally think they are
making this stuff up. However, I have seen some pretty interesting videos
of unidentifiable flying objects,
As for the monuments ancient cultures made, like spaceman looking
sculptures and those landing strip drawings on the ground in Peru,
everyone has always been interested in space, and people have always
wanted gods and/or incredible beings from the skies to come and help
them, but that doesn't mean they came. And I would be very surprised if
intelligent life flew hundreds of thousands of life years to get here
just to mow our lawns in pretty patterns.
The crop circles turned out to be someone's ides of a joke. A night-vision
camera caught two people red-handed forming the crop circles using basic
equipment.
That being said, I think there is life all over the universe, some of
it is more advanced, some of it is less advanced, none of which has
made its way here, except possibly for some microorganisms from Mars.
Well *if* evolution is true, then I refuse to believe that earth is the only
planet in the universe that can and does sustain human life.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Neil Kelsey" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
17 Nov 2005 05:24:30 PM |
|
|
Evolution IS true, and I as I said, I am inclined to agree with you
that there is life on other planets. I think life is on a lot of
planets. I really doubt that life from other planets has visited earth.
I WISH they'd come, but I really doubt they have. I think your theory
is based on wishful thinking.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Dean" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 06:20:44 PM |
|
|
Neil Kelsey wrote:
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or less
what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more lunatic
cultists.
Holy *****! Is that stuff serious? How delusional would you need to be
to believe that? (No offense to your family.)
Hey, all you xians: google Urantia and read some of that crap. When
you dismiss it as utter nonsense, come back here and let us know.
Because now you know how atheists feel about your bible.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 06:43:14 PM |
|
|
"Dean" <dionysus_2112@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132100444.145325.86530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Neil Kelsey wrote:
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or less
what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more lunatic
cultists.
Holy *****! Is that stuff serious? How delusional would you need to be
to believe that? (No offense to your family.)
Hey, all you xians: google Urantia and read some of that crap. When
you dismiss it as utter nonsense, come back here and let us know.
Because now you know how atheists feel about your bible.
Which is the same attitude us intelligent humans had concerning space flight
200 years ago.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Fred Stone" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 06:58:09 PM |
|
|
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:ogvef.14254$0l5.10755@dukeread06:
"Dean" <dionysus_2112@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:1132100444.145325.86530@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
Neil Kelsey wrote:
My idiot brother believes in the Book of Urantia, which is more or
less what you have theoried. Check it out! The world needs more
lunatic cultists.
Holy *****! Is that stuff serious? How delusional would you need to
be to believe that? (No offense to your family.)
Hey, all you xians: google Urantia and read some of that crap. When
you dismiss it as utter nonsense, come back here and let us know.
Because now you know how atheists feel about your bible.
Which is the same attitude us intelligent humans had concerning space
flight 200 years ago.
And yet it took less than seventy years to go from powered flight to the
moon landings. You've had more than 2000 years to get Biblical evidence
right, and you *still* haven't managed it.
--
Fred Stone
aa# 1369
"You have enemies? Good. That means you've stood up
for something, sometime in your life." -- W. Churchill
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bill Gamelson" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:02:30 PM |
|
|
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCB49AD87Cfstone69@213.155.197.138...
Which is the same attitude us intelligent humans had concerning space
flight 200 years ago.
And yet it took less than seventy years to go from powered flight to the
moon landings. You've had more than 2000 years to get Biblical evidence
right, and you *still* haven't managed it.
Why are you dragging the Bible into this discussion?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Jim07D5" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
15 Nov 2005 07:43:37 PM |
|
|
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> said:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCB49AD87Cfstone69@213.155.197.138...
Which is the same attitude us intelligent humans had concerning space
flight 200 years ago.
And yet it took less than seventy years to go from powered flight to the
moon landings. You've had more than 2000 years to get Biblical evidence
right, and you *still* haven't managed it.
Why are you dragging the Bible into this discussion?
Great approach, Bill, it is the kind of challenge that is needed. Why
should an extraterrestrial influence on the evolution of terrestrial
life be a problem for evolution theorists?
I ask this question to you and the entire group of people replying to
you. IMO it is not in any way a problem. We do have a geological
record that seems to go to pretty simple life forms, but this does not
preclude extraterrestrial influences.
And I have already asked you concerning an extraterrestrial non-divine
explanation: "Would it satisfy you?"
You have not answered.
--- Jim07D5
.
|
|
|
| User: "Dubh Ghall" |
|
| Title: Re: Question for "Evolutionists" |
16 Nov 2005 10:55:25 AM |
|
|
On Wed, 16 Nov 2005 01:43:37 GMT, Jim07D5 <Jim07D5@nospam.net> wrote:
"Bill Gamelson" <bill_gamelson@yahoo.com> said:
"Fred Stone" <fstone69@earthling.com> wrote in message
news:Xns970FCB49AD87Cfstone69@213.155.197.138...
Which is the same attitude us intelligent humans had concerning space
flight 200 years ago.
And yet it took less than seventy years to go from powered flight to the
moon landings. You've had more than 2000 years to get Biblical evidence
right, and you *still* haven't managed it.
Why are you dragging the Bible into this discussion?
Great approach, Bill, it is the kind of challenge that is needed. Why
should an extraterrestrial influence on the evolution of terrestrial
life be a problem for evolution theorists?
Because it begs the question, "Where did the extra terrestrials come from?"
And then, the question, "Where did *those* extra terrestrials, come from?"
And so ad infinitum.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
