Pages (11): « First « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 » Last » Post Reply  Post Thread 

Science vs Religion
Author Message
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #11
RE:  Science vs Religion

geyter Wrote:

The weird thing about these religious people is that they only follow the bible if it suits them. The bible also says you can't eat pig and camel and lizard and what not, nobody listens. The bible says peace with your brothers and all men are equal, again they don't listen. No killing, stealing, promiscuity. Nobody listens, in fact they wage holy wars. The bible says not to worship deity's but the church created thousands of saint we have to worship. Nowhere in the bible does it say you have to go to church on sunday, it never says you can't take drugs and never says you can't have protected sex. If they are so fond of their bible, perhaps they should read it once in a while.


*sigh* this is true, most of religion is unfaithfully bogus. But still, half the american population actually beleives that dinosaurs were in the garden of Eden, and that evolution is a myth. So can some one explain to me why they beleive this?





06-24-2007 01:35 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
geyter
Senior Member
****


Posts: 608
Group: Manga Group
Joined: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reputation:
Post: #12
RE: Science vs Religion

Just because they like the idea of not having to think things through.
If God did it, so much for the better.
Plus it gives a great security in life, denying that humans have baser instincts and that we all evolved from the same thing. Makes it easier to scrutinize others.

06-24-2007 01:39 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #13
RE:  Science vs Religion

geyter Wrote:

Just because they like the idea of not having to think things through.
If God did it, so much for the better.
Plus it gives a great security in life, denying that humans have baser instincts and that we all evolved from the same thing. Makes it easier to scrutinize others.


But you can't get too closed-minded, mind you. But you're right, they are somewhat twisting the facts (from what I've seen so far) to match their own theories. When you look at a messy desk searching for a pencil, you'll only find the pencil.





06-24-2007 01:50 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Useless
Posting Freak
*****


Posts: 2,166
Group: Registered
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #14
RE: Science vs Religion

umm what im about to say is probably off topic but if adam and eve were the first two humans then wouldnt we all be related and umm....cross eyed?

and draik, when u said some people believed god helped evolution along, well how come adam and eve were fully developed?




**Hoshigaki Kisame Sword: Samehada Ring: Nanju**
♪ there was a farmer had a cow and it was made into beef ♪
06-24-2007 01:54 AM
Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #15
RE:  Science vs Religion

Useless Wrote:

umm what im about to say is probably off topic but if adam and eve were the first two humans then wouldnt we all be related and umm....cross eyed?

and draik, when u said some people believed god helped evolution along, well how come adam and eve were fully developed?


Umm...yes it would mean that we're all related *awkward moment*
Though I didn't get your question so clearly. By the way, did you know that the linages of all domesticated dogs can be traced back to 9 wolves in mongolia?





06-24-2007 01:57 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Useless
Posting Freak
*****


Posts: 2,166
Group: Registered
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #16
RE: Science vs Religion

my question was rhetorical but im just saying that what people say now and what the bible says(apparently says....atheists dont read bibles) dont match up...
and i did not know that about the dogs but does that mean even little chihuahuas and the likes of the "toys" as well? wolf to purse pooch doesnt really seem like a step up the evolutionary ladder




**Hoshigaki Kisame Sword: Samehada Ring: Nanju**
♪ there was a farmer had a cow and it was made into beef ♪
06-24-2007 02:00 AM
Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #17
RE:  Science vs Religion

Useless Wrote:

my question was rhetorical but im just saying that what people say now and what the bible says(apparently says....atheists dont read bibles) dont match up...
and i did not know that about the dogs but does that mean even little chihuahuas and the likes of the "toys" as well? wolf to purse pooch doesnt really seem like a step up the evolutionary ladder


Oh I see...the something percentage of the people that beleive in evolution but say that god had a hand in the matter...well that's just the things, they beleive that humans evolved over a number of years (and not just like *that* from the beggining), but that it was God that was responsible for guiding everything to the way it is now. So a flood here, a plague there, killing off a species here and there (for good or bad I can't answer), until it came to this point in history. People are thankful for what they have, seeing as how we're the dominant species when we were almost wiped out a couple thousand years ago, and so they say that God was responsible for it. And so they thank him, and say that what God does is for the good of human kind, wther that's true or not, or why they beleive this, I can't say, but this is their perception.





This post was last modified: 06-24-2007 02:09 AM by Draik.

06-24-2007 02:09 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #18
RE: Science vs Religion

Double posting, but apparently no one's monitoring the forums...anyway, here's the actual info:

"All domestic dogs are descended from 9 wolves domesticated in Mongolia around 9,000 B.C."





06-24-2007 02:12 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
geyter
Senior Member
****


Posts: 608
Group: Manga Group
Joined: May 2007
Status: Offline
Reputation:
Post: #19
RE: Science vs Religion

In QI (one of the greatest shows ever) Stephen Fry says that the lineage of all humans can be traced back to 3 woman.
And it's common knowledge that 1 in 5 people is related to Genghis Khan.
And also, they have now proven that incest is not degrading to dna. Actually it increases all the benifits of a benevolent dna, but as a downside increases all the downsides of a wrong dna. So if brother has bad eyes and sister doesn't kiddie will have bad eyes. That's why people thought incest was bad for you, because the inborn diseases came rushing forward. But if genetically healthy siblings do it, it will make a perfect genetical child...

06-24-2007 02:15 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Draik
Senior Member
****


Posts: 643
Group: Uploaders
Joined: May 2007
Status: Away
Reputation:
Post: #20
RE:  Science vs Religion

geyter Wrote:

In QI (one of the greatest shows ever) Stephen Fry says that the lineage of all humans can be traced back to 3 woman.
And it's common knowledge that 1 in 5 people is related to Genghis Khan.
And also, they have now proven that incest is not degrading to dna. Actually it increases all the benifits of a benevolent dna, but as a downside increases all the downsides of a wrong dna. So if brother has bad eyes and sister doesn't kiddie will have bad eyes. That's why people thought incest was bad for you, because the inborn diseases came rushing forward. But if genetically healthy siblings do it, it will make a perfect genetical child...


3 women, huh? Do one of those include a girl named Eve?





06-24-2007 02:17 AM
Send the author an email Send the author a private message Find all posts by this author Quote this message in a reply
Pages (11): « First « 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 » Last »

Post Reply  Post Thread 

View a Printable Version
Send this Thread to a Friend
Subscribe to this Thread | Add Thread to Favorites
Rate This Thread:

Forum Jump: