So have does that mean you're no longer an atheist and are now agnostic? You're placing faith in what astronomers and scientists think they know by looking through their telescopes, because I doubt you actually gone out and looked at the evidence for yourself. And my point is you can know the Creator, there are billions that do. Glad you asked, Jesus is God made flesh who came to atone for the sins of the world. But I just find it funny that evolution would program virtually the entire human race throughout to seek something out that's not there. We are wired to worship God. Point is every society in the history of the world believes in God or a higher power. And they have every right to.
Actually this is still a free open forum; so opinions still can be made. We talked about philosophy on the other thread and look where it took us? There is nothing wrong with objectively talking about what makes me feel like something sounds unhealthy to the mind.
it's cool if you want to change topics, but obviously denny was talking about what is true, not what is healthy to believe.
How is keeping on the topic that the meaning of life, based on the theory life will just fade away into nothing not on topic. It's one thing to think something as minimal as our life is to the grand scheme of things; but to realize that all existence will cease to exist is absolutely another.
That's not logical. An agnostic doesn't know therefor he doesn't believe. The atheist knows god doesn't exist. They are two separately different things.
an atheist by definition is someone who does not believe in god - not someone who claims to "know" god does not exist. atheism is a statement about lack of belief, not a claim to knowledge. an agnostic by definition is someone who doesn't believe knowledge of something is possible. someone can be both, particularly when it comes to the origin of the universe.
Take all the time you want, and again don't feel obligated to read it all. I'm a science major and a lot of it makes my head hurt hahaha, just way technical stuff.
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/dinosaur.html I thought that this is impossible? The radioactivity of the Carbon has a shelf life; regardless of conditions of at most 50,000 years. Can someone explain this to me and how you can preserve "Red Blood Cells" without life to combat Carbon 14 degradation?
I'm still reviewing your studies; but I have some conflicting issues here. I do understand the common mutations; but wouldn't that be a "micro-evolution" finding? Because again; there are the same characteristics and genetic mutations; but these "mutations" are possible without symbiotic transformations. What I mean is the eye would require thousands of mutations having to happen in genetic sequence; for let's say "A lizard" to transform into an "Eagle Eye". I think those are the records I'm really searching for. Things that must require the other in sequence; and mutating simultaneously. But there is still a lot of reading, and some incredibly hard "scientific vocabulary" I have to sift through to get any conclusion.
MAGS, this is funny [video=youtube;1BxpDzXNI-4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1BxpDzXNI-4&feature=g-u-u&context=G2745813FUAAAAAAAAAA[/video]
