Tonight CNN is premiering a new special entitled God’s Warriors. CNN chief international correspondent Christiane Amanpour examines the intersection between religion and politics and the effects of Christianity, Islam and Judaism on politics, culture and public life.
Here is the official website.
Here is the schedule:
Jewish Warriors – Aug 21, 9PM ET
Muslim Warriors – Aug 22, 9PM ET
Christian Warriors – Aug 23, 9PM ET
And here’s the Christian Warrior trailer to get your mouth watering :)
Get the Flash Player to see this player.
Related posts:
Once more and with a gusto; evolution does not create anything nor ever has even claimed to create anything. People claiming evolution create something seem to have religious backgrounds.
Formation of life from non-living matter falls under;
Two different concepts with such a different names that mixing them up is not possible.
Can you please explain in your words what is Abiogenesis, I know I can search for it, but I want to hear it from you.
Howdy all,
I think the question “Can you please explain in your words what is Abiogenesis”
is is already ansered by
“Formation of life from non-living matter”
I think what your after is how does Abiogenesis explain the formation of life from non-living matter. I will leave that to someone who has more knowledge of the theory.
Cheers
Simon Bond
@Blasphemaster
I was a born Hindu but i don’t consider myself as Hindu. I would like to call myself Humanist. I was not actually defending my religion for proving evolution. I just wanted to state that if we want to interpret our scriptures, we can do it in many ways for proving that it is right.
Regarding the division of caste among hindu, i agree that it is really horrible. But i have never seen anywhere written that lower castes are untouchables. This whole methodology was formed for smooth functioning of society so that all aspects of society are taken care of.
The profession invariably depended on what our forefathers could teach us. So we ended up doing what our ancestors used to do. The upper caste people formulated the rule of untouchables and whatever for control of society. They tried to give scriptures as proof, which only they could read and others had to just listen and do what has been told.
I have never found any examples where the so called incarnations have told anything to justify untouchability. These whole division works like division of labor so that one person can do the same work and be proficient enough to teach his children and there was nothing wrong about the whole process until we respect our dependency on others to form a cohesive society. But the problems starts when some people start taking advantage of having education as a tool to exploit so-called lower strata of society.
Thank simon for the response, I need somebody to explain how did it happen, in a simple way please, I’m not that smart.
@Mohamed
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proteinoid
See this is one form of abiogenesis. I am not saying that it is the ultimate truth or something and this form of abiogenesis has been tested and deemed to have been possible under the circumstances present in earth in those days.
Now i know you have a lot of things to discard this theory and really it doesn’t matter. At least it doesn’t pressurize you to follow something which is unimaginable. You follow something which doesn’t have any proof. In fact you always get a proof which actually negates the whole theory (fable) proposed by you.
Science doesn’t work that way. You have facts and you derive a conclusion. It’s not that you have a conclusion and you adjust the facts accordingly and throw the facts which doesn’t support the conclusion.
smilingface,
What prood do you want? Do you want me to take pictures, and if there are material proof of God, so what the use of belief? If God want to force people to be all beleiver, he would do it, he just want you to have the choice.
As a material proof like pcitures or so, I don’t have, but I think the proof is out there for who ever has a healthy mind to think about.
Again you struggle to show a proof for existence, and nobody gave an example for something came out of nothing, Nobody has one thing, just one thing, is that hard?
For the translation part, what is the lions head means in 10 incrations you were talking about, I can translate lion head literaly, and it wiill not mean any thing to me even though I understand the word, but you might have better explination for your terms since it’s in Indian.
@Mohamed
You totally misinterpreting my incarnation theory. I never told i support the mentioned theory, but it’s just about interpretation, which makes to prove the evolution. It doesn’t mean i believe in that. In fact i don’t. It’s just a coincidence and even i can’t digest the fact of lion head (a man’s body and lion’s head).
Shall i ask one thing to you? Do you really want to look at both sides of coin? If you are willing and if you can spend 5 hours (1 hour daily for 5 days) watching a youtube video explaining the rationale of evolution etc, which might open a new perspective for you and help you think more rationally.
If you say yes, i will post the link. It was the video which made a change in me drastically. Hope you give a positive response.
In a nutshell;
Non-living chemicals form organic molecules, which then form into larger molecules, from which a primitive organism is born.
Simple chemicals -> polymers -> replicating polymers -> hypercycle -> protobiont -> bacteria
Background;
Miller/Urey Experiment in 1950 proved that using chemicals one can create organic compounds, amino acids which are used in making proteins. In 1961 amino acids were made from hydrogen cyanide and ammonia in water solution. The same experiment produced large amounts of adenine which is one of the base materials for RNA and DNA. It is also part of ATP, the energy releasing molecule. The same experiment was later used to produce other RNA and DNA bases.
The study of abiogenesis is also very young branch of science which is hampered by lack of funding and the requirements for creating suitable test environments.
These books give an opening for the abiogenesis;
Fox, Ronald W., Energy and the Evolution of Life. 1988.
Shapiro, Robert, Origins: A Skeptic’s Guide to the Creation of Life on Earth. 1987.
Cairns-Smith, A.G., Seven Clues to the Origin of Life. 1995.
The true secret of giving advice is, after you have honestly given it, to be perfectly indifferent whether it is taken or not, and never persist in trying to set people right.
Hannah Whitall Smith, 1902
Mohamed, you keep asking people to give them one example where something was created out of nothing. I give you the same challenge, you show me one example. Without pointing to your bible or the existence we have now. The first, because it is just a book and proves absolutely nothing at all. The second because, no matter how much you god people want to claim it, YOU DO NOT know the answer to how we got here. You can delude yourself all you want, but you only THINK you know. I am an atheist, so I can’t attribute it to the workings of some bearded old guy in the sky. I don’t know how we got here. I feel pretty confident that I know by what mechanism we arrived at this point, evolution. I feel pretty confident that the science I have seen shows that we share a common ancestor with the other life on this world. The mechanism of evolution is the most logically consistent explanation for this. The thousands of religions out there that differ in most details do not. They just look more and more silly.
Mohamed:
This man went swimming with his Wife, remind you of anyone?
Do I see a a thin slice of BARE ARM in that picture?
BLASPHEMY! that woman should know better then tempt me like that. When will the stoning be?
Now, I could contribute to the conversation, but I’ve found out long ago that it’s more productive to teach my potted plant superstring theory, then it is to get Mohamed to acknowledge even the possibility of Abiogenesis and evolution, despite all the evidence supporting it.
What evidence are you talking about? I asked him get me one thing out of nothing, he told me that some scientist prove that some bacteria came out of Chemicles, I said out of nothing.
Nothing comes from nothing Michael, God created everything, you can take your science and be happy with it, I have no issue with that, I don’t know why you are so mad that much from my argument, and if you feel you came from monkey, it’s up to you Mr monkey, I can call you monkey, but I didn’t come from monkey, I’m human-being, proud of what God made me, and gave me over all of his creatures, you want to take you self to a monkey, you are free, you want to be a rat, you can be that too.
Back to my conversation, so Bacteria or cells looks like DNA, so what the DNA would do, Would the DNA creat a human being, we know that for human being to exist he needs father and mother, so how the DNA turned to be a creature.
Have someone saw that the Bacteria turned to an animal, Bacteria stayed the same.
I know how passionate you guys about science, but take it easy, you have to think about before you beleive in it.
@Mohamed
I can’t believe the way you present ignoring every theory we give. It has been well mentioned in abiogenesis how we could have originated and still you talk about DNA having fathers and mothers. Bacteria turning into animal is a very slow process, you can’t see it but we have evidences far more convincing to prove it wrong.
By the way the same seeing logic can be applied to your fable too. Has anybody seen you theory happening? Oh sorry, it’s written in a book.
The way people have been representing you, i have a feeling that you are a staunch opponent and no matter what we provide you with, you have turned a blind against any scientific evidence. I still tell you please see that video by Robert Dawkins. Very interesting, you won’t get bored. And you will find all the answers about evolution. Please let me know if you want.
Man I’m not against the evolution is a theory, It’s ok and it exist, but it’s not enought to explain human-being life.
The other thing, how many planet we discovered now, why there are not life on it? why you theory didn’t work there, do you have explanation for it, will you tell me because the Oxgyen and the water, who put the rule that the water makes every thing alive, and the oxgyen is what we live on, and why Oxgyen, not any other elment or Gas.
Why you have blood, and why it happend this way, and look inside your body, every thing in harmony working with out any controll of you, it’s yours but you don’t even controll it which I mean your heart and many other organs in your body, Do you think theory like that would explain all of this things.
Let make it simple for you, why is the Oxygen is the source of life and not other gases, and who put this rule?
Please don’t get upset because I’m arguing, you help me thinking and I helping you too, so be patient with me.
Thank you,
@mohammed
You keep insisting that we should create life out of nothing but why do you want us to exceed the skills of your god?
Allah never created a man out of nothing but from dust, chemicals, then of a drop, organic, and then fashioned a man, complex organic.
Asking why evolution uses oxygen as a powersource or why exactly some mechanism was used is like blind-folding a man, having him walk around for a few minutes, then taunt him and ask him to explain why he walked around so slowly and randomly.
But the reason oxygen is a good source of power is that it’s highly reactive (in fact, if it wasn’t replenished by life it would dissipate by itself), so without bacteria (to create oxygen), there would be no monkeys. This is ofcourse not the only reason more “levels” of evolution can exists at the same time. And (about “levels” of evolution) there are no such thing as a more advanced lifeform compared to another in evolution’s eyes.
And the video smilingface mentioned is here (the one by richard dawkins that explains the basics of evolutoin):
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2043771442443928848
You keep insisting that we should create life out of nothing but why do you want us to exceed the skills of your god?
We will get to the same conclusion, who created the dust, and who created the seed, and even quoting the Quran, makes believe that you believe in Quran, but that’s not our argument.
The reason that God said the description in this verse, because God can say to any thing be and it will be it, he did that for angeles, he said be it and they be it,
but for human-being God create us by his hand and it’s something make us proud of who we are, he makes us superior that a lot of his creation, but people here want us to be from monkey, God made you by his hand, and you are refusing to thank him for this gift, and you want to be lower.
The whole theory fo Evolution want us to be coming from Monkey, and it the same thing that the Devil told our God, when God made the angels kneel down to Adam, Devil told God I’m better than Adam, how do you want me to kneel to lesser than me, and I think the devil managed to make them people think they are monkies.
the inquisition is upon us. But hey, maybe those cattle-sacificing pirimitives who thought that every animal species in the world lived within walking distance from noah’h house knew better than the works of science of our days
Hi:
Nice video vk0. But that was not the video i was talking about. Sorry, Mohamed, you didn’t even take trouble to watch the video to clear out your misconception. You don’t want to see the other side of the coin.
I am posting the links of those video. Each link has cluster of around 6 or 7 videos totaling to around 1 hour which amounts to around 5 hours. It is an ultimate lesson on evolution and Dawkins has presented it in a interesting and entertaining way, very easy to understand.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=AF055C271C94C86B
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=832F0D5F7A43CB0B
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=EC1BF26E34D3DD0A
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=62A795363B746A09
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=47D0EE9A97B085CF
There is a saying in India: “Bhains ke aage been bajana” (Playing flute in front of buffalo). It seems this saying is apt for Mohamed. He doesn’t actually puts any effort on thinking or scrutinizing evolution theory. It’s better to leave him happy in his delusional world.
Primates, meaning humans and apes which share common genes, have evolved from bats, does that trouble you as much as the thought of being related to a monkey?
I already explained this to you Mohamed, yet you continue to ignore all given evidence to counteract your claims. We DID NOT evolve from MONKEYS. We share a common biological ancestor far, far in the past. Think of it this way, which is an extremely simplified version which you might be capable of comprehending, if you deign to try at all:
Way back when, there was this little primate mammal roaming around in a given part of the world. Over time, natural disasters and other dividing factors cause this group to be separated. This creates two groups of essentially the same creature, but in different environments, with differing predators, food sources, topography, climates, etc.
One group’s environment was more arboreal, or full of trees, and didn’t have as many high protein foods available which are so crucial for developing higher intelligence. This necessitates the continued development of the prehensile tail, small bodies, and high agility. Thus, this one group adapts to this environment, over the millenia becoming an even wider range of creatures we refer to as monkeys.
The other group’s environment was more plains-like, with fewer plant food sources and more high protien foods. This necessitates the ability to hunt, eventually in groups. This gives rise to greater intelligence, upright posture/walking, and the beginnings of society. Thus, this group adapts to their environment, spawning an even further range of creatures over the ages, one of which is modern man.
So you see, we do not come from monkeys, as you and so many other ignorant religious folks LOVE to claim in an effort to try and discredit evolution. We are distant relatives. Trying to claim that we come from monkeys is essentially claiming that we are collectively descended from our greatx1,000,000 second cousins. Ludicrous.
I have a master in biology with a minor in philosophy, psychology and anthropology. I am a Catholic (former atheist) and with my studies and research, have realized that it’s not ‘religion or science” but rather “religion and science”. No-one can deny the advances of science and the proof it offers us about the material world, in fact I teach science at a community college (university in a few years when I receive my doctorate). Nothing in science contradicts the bible (if read in its proper context) and vice versa. In a way I know where most of you are getting your ideas, some Christian denominations out there preach a literal “creating in 7 days” etc, which is not compatible with science amongst other examples. If you want to argue against Christianity do so with an intelligent well thought out argument that covers all Christian thought, not just those ignorant Christians that don’t accept science. Don’t argue with your emotions, but with reason. I suggest you do a study on world religions, its no mistake that you find similarities between Christianity and Hinduism, as well as pagan Greek gods and Aztec gods. Humans were made to worship and recognize a creator, that’s why there is an inclination to believe in a God which can be seen in the anthropology of cultures. Even you (if you are an atheists), know that human knowledge can only go so far, there are still many concepts (scientifically speaking) that are difficult for us to grasp. Take an 8 1/2 X 11 sheet of paper. Pretend that all that space is total knowledge. Now draw a circle that represents how much of that knowledge we have come upon. I would go draw a circle of 1 inch diameter. There is still all that space outside: the things yet to be understood. Is there not a chance that the reality of God can be outside of our understanding? What’s my point? We cannot completely discredit the possibility of the existence of God. If you really want to dialogue scientifically, theologically, anthropologically and physiologically regarding Christianity, religion in general and the existence of God, then get your research done.
Ok guys I will agree with you, so why it didn’t happen in any other planets in the universe, you don’t get it yet.
why nothing happen in Mars, where there is not enough oxygen, whey there are not creature where can leave with the Mars conditions? Can you tell me why it works on the earth and it doesn’t work on any other planets.
@mohammed
This is somewhat rantish, sorry.
Always looking for the instant gratification, eh?
There is some 100 billion (100,000,000,000) stars in our galaxy and there is no telling how many galaxies there is. The number ranges in the millions but 2dF survey recorded 100,000 galaxies during two years period. How many habitable (not necessarily earth like) planets there is?
Who says there is no comparable civilizations to humanity out there?
There is no life as you seem to equate life on mars but there can be life. It is not like we have explored mars, few pictures and odd probes do not equate exploration.
Our space technology is primitive, barely intra system. With the immense distances between mere planets, not to mention stars, the communication or even detection is hardly possible, yet.
It is too early to say there is no life out there as we cannot explore stars and even exploration of our planets still needs solutions we do not have.
You are also quite fixated on the oxygen, humans have adapted to it even if it is quite harmful gas in itself. But oxygen is fickle compound as too little or too much will harm you or kill you.
But even on earth there are anaerobic organisms which do not need oxygen but use lactic acid fermentation for respiration. Some cannot even grow in environments where oxygen is present in larger than nanomolar quantities. And of larger specimens, the deep sea fish like lanternfish and anglerfish are good examples of life sans oxygen.
There is also the alternate base compounds for life, carbon is common but not the only one which could be the basis of life, boron is good candidate with the tendency of forming covalent molecular compounds. Or nitrogen which is probably even more likely candidate due the ability to form long chains at low temperature in a ammonia or hydrogen cyanide solvent. On earth the environment was suitable for carbon but with the number of places in space there is no telling what kind of different conditions can create life.
One of the problems I have had when talking to religious people is that they have trouble thinking in big numbers. There is some kind of underlying desire for quick result or yes/no solutions.
Science is not that old, merely few thousands of years. There is so much to discover still given time and it is not stuck to one path. Think newtons laws of motion. Those are true up to a point after which they no longer give right answers but new formulas which grew out of their failure can give you answer beyond the original limitations.
Think big, in millions of years, in billions of changes, in trillions of possibilities. Envision beyond our shape and limitations, get over the triviality of single truth
Jagannath,
Thank you for taking the time discussing that with me, you almost getting to the point I want to get to.
My point is why Evolution and the other theories that you adopt as source of creation didn’t work on Mars, or the moon, which I hope you understand my point right, I’m not talking about the human-being alike, I’m talking about any source of life.
I think Evolution and other theroies should get creatures or species where they can live in Mars living condition and they should be able to survive. And actually I like your point about the Oxygn, that’s exactly my point, Evolution should find way to create othe species where the don’t Oxgyn to survive, and as long as it works on Earth, it should work any where else.
Did you get my point? I hope so, sorry that sometimes my English doesn’t enable me to get the point I want to discuss.
I found this video and it’s off topic, but it’s really interesting, I hope Gasonmo add as thread on the website, but it’s up to him. And actually it’s really related to the topic of this thread but not to the topic I’m arguing with Jagannath.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=owCXbDVTLRE&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Eturntoislam%2Ecom%2Fforum%2Fshowthread%2Ephp%3Ft%3D17275
@Mohamed
How is it different from radical islamist? They are both the same and that’s why religion gives birth to more bullshit. This whole things is ultimately going to create more division amongst Islam and Christianity.
I laughed when one person told that “it’s a good deal to die in earth than to face eternal torment in hell.” This is the same what Muslims tell. How do i believe in any of them?
It’s better i keep my reasoning with me because there is always a chance of me burning in eternal torment. At least i am contended to be living rationally in little time i spend in earth.
smiling face,
We don’t create wars and starve people to make them belive, is there are extermist in Islam, can tell how many of them out there that they are willing to start war to convert people, they are few which the media show them like that all Muslims, which it is not true, I will talk for myslef and I know most Muslims feel the same way like I do, If I want to convert somebody, I would like him to be convinced by his own will, not because he is hungry or becaue he is in need.
If you watch the video, it looks like it’s trend in Christians, the funny thing look at the places that the christians target, these place for the people in need, where they can use the money to convince people which is material thing, they don’t have in their bible any thing mentally to convince people.
Thank God that Islam talk to people mind not to their stomach.
Nice going mohamed, you almost had us. Quickly accuse someone else to cover your own fallacies.
You refuse to grasp the fact that abiogenesis and evolution are two different things.
The fact that there is no life on the moon, is because it does not have the right conditions for life of any sort.
To carlos
“”What’s my point? We cannot completely discredit the possibility of the existence of God. If you really want to dialogue scientifically, theologically, anthropologically and physiologically regarding Christianity, religion in general and the existence of God, then get your research done.”"
See, that’s the problem. Nobody can possibly argue against something that undisprovable, like a deity or Russell’s teapot, using solely scientific evidence.
What I see here instead, is a counter-argument to so-called ‘scientific evidence’ that god exists.
Take Mohamed here, he says that there has to be a god because there is life. All the arguing here is done to show that that is not a valid argument, because life could have been come into existence by a method that does not involve divine intervention.
If you want to have a philosofical discussion why god does not exist, you should ask Sidfaiwu on this site.
Alcari,
I don’t know, may be I don’t make sense to any body, my question is why abiogenesis and evolution didn’t work on the moon.
your answer that there is not the same conditions on the moon, that’s not enough asnwer, becaue these two theories should work it out with different species where they can take the moon condition, and they will be able to survive.
I’m sure you understand my point.
By the way I don’t accuse any body, as I told you before I belive because I think about what’s going on around me, it’s not because the book told me so, and even the Quran instructs me to look around in the universe and think about it, and the questions I’m saying here is valid, and I’m sure alot of people thought about.
If I’m offending somebody with the way of my thinking, I will be glad to stop the discussion.
Abiogenesis ‘didn’t’ work on the moon because the moon exists in a vaccuum. However, we can’t be sure, since we have barely explored even the moon. There may be sub-surface life, who knows. You also don’t seem to have a good grasp of astronomical time. It is entirely possible that Mars was once covered in life, especially with the significant evidence pointing towards a past mars which had a good deal of water on the surface rather than just Ice Caps. Perhaps it was not nearly as complex as human life, but Martian life HAS been found in the form of fossilized bacteria.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_on_Mars
So you in face, are wrong again. Just because there isn’t active life that we can see NOW, does not mean that there never has been.
Perhaps it was not nearly as complex as human life, but Martian life HAS been found in the form of fossilized bacteria.
I’m not wrong, you didn’t prove any thing, my point still stand, if you want to think on wide range like somebody asked me to do in this thread, these two theories should work and we find more advanced creatures than some Bacteria.
My idea is as these two theories create such a perfect and complex life on the earth, they should also creat something even close to it on any where, where these creatures know how to survive in this enviroment, and I can gave you millions examples in the earth where there are species could survive in a tough enviroment.
Again, it’s just discussion, nobody take it offensive way, you have to question every thing.
So what’s your point? You suggest that if abiogenesis exists, which it does, and that evolution works, which it does, that they should work anywhere. Some places just don’t have the conditions required to develop life as we are capable of recognizing it at this point in time.
So it has to be somebody put these conditions to make it work at least, or was it by accident? that it happens to be on earth.
It doesn’t make sense, and if you really belive that science you should ask your self the questions that I’m imposing here, otherwise you contrdict your self.
The other thing you know my point, my point is these two theroies if they work the same way everybody assuming here, they should work any where.
I feel like I’m repeating my self, but I will stick with you to the end of the road.
If these two theories works in just these conditon on the earth, who put these condtions, or is it accident?
Why do you fear the chance?
And why do religious people always fear the chance and change?
You need suitable variables. If the variables are not within acceptable range the process does not begin, with luck you have the suitable variables and abiogenesis begins. It is simple as that, with wrong parameters you do not get results.
You would not drive at 100 miles per hour and then change to reverse gear in expectation of increasing your speed to 200 miles?
No one created the conditions, those just happened. Say if some fragment would have hit earth during its early phases, it could have knocked earth of kilter and no planet would have formed or it would be in deep space.
It was an accident as you say but there is nothing wrong with it. Most everything in life is due such ‘accidents’. If one would to prove it beyond doubt that humans exist only because of a chance, would that cause you to vanish in thin air as figment of someones imagination?
Ok,
Let’s see how far the accident would take us in creation, I will computer components and put around me, and I will for the accident to happen, and get me the computer assambled, I don’t fear the accident like you claim, accidents or chances have limits, and I don’t it will take Dizillions of accident( I don’t more than trillion) to create such perfect human-being like you, not only that, creating all the species around.
Wow accident.
Now you are beyond grasping straws, that is so amusing example, yet so prevalent in religious circles.
Abiogenesis and evolution do not exclude outside influences. Many of the outside effectors are required and essential for the processes. Basic chemistry can spontaneously create organic molecules, you just add external influence in form of energy.
You also bring in the odds question, one of the classics.
For fun, lets assume an earthquake strikes your home while you sat there surrounded by the pieces of computer. That is an accident of sorts, being indoors when it happens. Now the tremors shake your house like it was a box and everything not attached will fly around.
If you assumed that it forms working computer with the specifications and programs you had in your mind, then the odds are against it, highly against it.
But, for abiogenesis and also to evolution there is no expected end result and the computer pieces flying around most likely form something, not the computer you wanted but something which can have a function.
You may not understand it but that does not have no effect on its function. And you are now happy father of a new non-created entity.
Taking the example of computer components.
There is too little change that they will assemble by themselves, naturally.
Then we give them abit of life, like giving them the ability to move around randomly, there is still too little chance of assembly.
Now we give the components an ability to know when they have done good (moved closer to another component in which it fits in).
Now the components will assemble itself, it may not be that quick, but it will likely happen before the universe dissipates into nothingness.
Ofcourse, real life produce more life instead of moving around randomly, and they know when they have done good when they survive long enough to produce more life.
Just once I’d like to see Mohamed make an argument without committing the straw man fallacy.
Are you really belive in that guys?
It’s really funny that you belive in that, I think you convinced me now to go buy computer components ans wait for the earth quake to happen and shake my house.
Any way I’m not making fun of you guys, I just wanted to show how far these theories from the truth, I’m not trying to disapprove your ideas, but I wanted to show that your theories have a lot of holes and it is not even close to expalin any thing.
Hey, those burn nicely but then again that is pagan tradition ;)
Hey guys, it will be the end of discussion for me on this web site, I don’t feel like arguing with you any more.
God only guides who he wants, I was here to give you different kind of thinking from what you hear in the media or what you read in the books. I think you are really smart people who can make the right choice and take the consequences for it, so good luck for you all.
If you have any question about Islam and you want to learn about Islam, just drop me your question on my blog and I will be happy to help you to find the answer together.
Thanks,
@Mohamed:
Hope you come back to see this post. The problem with your computer theory and with earthquake is that it has got a destination. It has got a destination of making a computer. But evolution doesn’t have a destination. It is just that if one mutation in gene turns out to be favorable for existence, it passes on to the next generation and thus this slow change brings about a whole new species. It was never preconceived that finally we need to get to the said species. It just happens by “chance” that your result turns this way.
This is what chance is all about in evolution. It’s not that air blows all the things together and makes one whole new species by “chance”.
Regarding your whole life in moon thing, i would like to point out that abiogenesis is the first factor, which will ultimately lead to evolution. For abiogenesis to occur you need favorable condition, like distance from sun, gravitation force, state of water, temperature and it just happens that earth has right conditions for this process. Now it’s not necessary that god created this whole condition. Out of so many numerous things in universe (beyond our imagination) just earth seems be the right planet to have abiogensis. It’s not necessary that it is the last place or the only place. May be somewhere else, too far away, we have right conditions where abiogensis might have happened, might be going to happen in future, may be evolution is in a different phase.
Think about it in this way. Creationist get afraid with the idea of humans having no purpose in this universe. We happen to develop this large brain just because in some phase of evolution, we might have had a distinct advantage of having a little developed brain, which we passed on to our next generation, which kept on developing this advantage until we came to a point where we had a brain to think of our purpose and the easiest answer we could find was that we have been created by somebody to serve that thing.
hehe, I find it very amusing and very typical.
The argument is inescapable, undeniably and mohamed runs away.
I guess that’s the only way to adhere to outdated beliefs.
Smilingface explains it very nicely it think. Never underestimate the power of millions of years of cumulative mutation.
Charles Darwin wrote The Origin of Species based on his
study of the quran as handed over by muhammed and traveld to
his destinations by carpet. Sponsored by Aladin & Co. lol
Note:
There has been no acknowledgement to the quran not to offend
Revd. John Henslow (being Church of England) who put Charles
on the expedition.
In all my years as a university biology technician I must
admit that the theory of evolution according to Mo, strikes
me deep and confuses me.
So our resident ignoramus has surrendered? I expected him to hold out a bit longer. Wonder when the next topic will start…
You know, I already miss the little fella. His blind desperate attempts to make his delusional belief system seem anything other than laughable was endearing. Its funny, when you show truth to the barbarians, they run and hide. Or murder you. Rarely do they react favorably.