Instead of debating the details, why don't you just come out and say that a giant, mythical, all knowing and all powerful being that created everything is an impossibility?

It IS impossible.. In our human minds. We have to stop thinking inside the box when it comes to the possibilities of life.

---

I've 'preached' that over and over to my close atheist friends (which is a joke.. lol I love the atheist that harps on faith/religion/etc, then when something bad happens to them or their loved ones, they run to me for prayer.. You hypocrite! lol). I've said, "I'm not willing to gamble with eternity."

Their response? "I am."

---

Excuse me.....where did i say animals were created AFTER the Garden of Eden at the present time?
They arn't.
We have different VARIATIONS of animals already living, but no "new" ones are being created. You can cross breed dogs and come up with a different variation, but it will STILL be a DOG. You won't get a cat, will you?

You can make fun of my desire to spend eternity with God in Heaven. But if i am right, you won't be laughing or making fun of me in the end.
I hope that for your sake you realize this BEFORE you die.

Also....i was wondering,,...why are you so bitter? What happened to you that made you want to lash out at me like that? Did some "religion" do something to you that made you that way?

---

What? If you thought I was being sarcastic in any part of my previous response, you are entirely mistaken my good friend. I truly meant what I said, in that yes, it IS actually appealing to my logic - however I would never convert solely under the premise that it would save me in the event that God exists. No, that would cheapen the religious link. I think I would be lying to myself and God, in that event. Am I against converting to a religion? Absolutely not.

Now, my stance on religion is that I cannot say whether God exists or not - and to an extent I do try to do good in life because, well, it just seems like the right thing to do. Based on my observations however I can say that, in my opinion, that a scientific explanation is more probable than a religious one. I do not discount the possibility that anything, or everything, can be explained by religion. I simply choose to believe that something observable, testable, justifiable by theory, is the more logical conclusion. As you say, it is a choice we all make - whether to believe or not. I sit on the fence on the God exists-does not exist argument, and in that meantime, I accept what science teaches because the observations I make in the world correspond to the theory and hypotheses provided by science.

As for the kangaroos, again I'm confused. I meant no ill will in my questioning and still don't. I thought this was a thread for clarification on the story of Noah's Ark, not a piss on Christianity thread - I'm just trying to understand the Christian point of view. So, with that in mind, a couple of questions. I take it based upon your response that after Genesis, everything is locked in. My confusion was that, as they tend to say, God created everything in those first 7 days. But then we have the whole flood thing happening later in Genesis. Which is why I asked about kangaroos specifically since they are native to an island, and supposing (incorrectly?) that kangaroos were created BEFORE the flood, then it seemed unlikely they could somehow appear on Australia without divine intervention (and thus would need to be created AFTER the flood again, seemingly a contradiction against the everything-was-created-in-7-days). That is what I sought to clarify.

---

Oh, ok!
I wasn't sure how you meant it.
There are animals all over the world that live only in certain areas, and not in other areas. The land WAS all connected at one time. Why are kangaroos only in Australia? Maybe at some time they were in other areas, and were hunted to extinction. Thats happened to animals all over the world. Maybe the conditions were right and the man population low enough in Australia that they thrived there.
We hunted wolve's to extinction here in Wisconsin, till just a few years ago when they brought some more in.
If a person didn't have knowledge of that, they would think there never were wolves in Wisconsin.
With science, they haven't been able to show proof of evolution. Everything they used has been proven wrong. So they ignore that, and go onto other "proof".
"Observations" now can't prove evolution ever happened. Heck, it's not happening now, so why believe it ever did?
I'll get into this more later. Right now i have to drop some things off to the wife of a friend of mine that just passed away.

---

Remember the skeleton they found that they named "Lucy"? (I'm pretty sure that was what they named it, i'm going by memory)
Anyway, it was a partial skeleton. It was completely missing ANY foot bones. They put the skeleton together, said "we found the missing link!" and made a big deal out of it.
They used this "proof" to build what they say "she" looked like, and put their big find on display in museums. They said this find PROVED evolution.
Being as they found NO FOOT BONES, they made up what they "believed" her feet looked like. Guess what? They made her feet EXACTLY like humans today, and put her on display standing upright just like humans today. Forgetting to point out the FACT that their making her with human feet and standing upright like us was 100% FABRICATION on their part.

THey have no idea if the skeleton was even human or ape. Now....IF it was human, what does finding one deformed partial skeleton prove? That some poor deformed human once lived, and then died. Look at how many deformities they have happened over the years. Deformed heads, arms, legs. If they "find" one of those skeletons, what would it prove?

Heck, you could find the skeleton of a cow, and "imagine" it once FLEW and fabricate wings for it, and say it's another part of evolution, couldn't you?
With that silly thought in mind, i saw school books that were teaching the tiny bones found inside a whale are "vestigual" (not sure i spelled that right, it means they were left over bones) pelvis bones left over from when whales walked on dry ground! That was being taught to kids in public schools! It said "Imagine whales once walked around on dry ground! It happened!" When in FACT those little bones have NOTHING to do with a no longer needed pelvis, they are in FACT anchor points for muscles that allow whales to reproduce! If those bones were not there, there would be no more whales!
And how about the SINGLE TOOTH that they fabricated a whole missing "human" link out of? When years later they realized this great find was actually the tooth of an extinct pig.
But they never admit these lies. When they get cornered, they ignore and won't admit their "proof" is just made up lies, and go on to try to "find" (fabricate) their next big discovery.
How about the fish the coelicanth? They found fossilized ones deep in the "fossil record" that showed they lived at the same time of the dinosaurs, and went extinct at the same time..............until fishermen caught a LIVING ONE in the 1930's. Since then, they have found many of them, and i have seen divers swimming with them in the ocean depths on TV. Now, they of course change their story and say "Isn't it amazing that the coelicanth survived over millions of years?"
Ok.......lets say it DID survive "millions of years". If thats true, WHY DIDN'T IT EVOLVE? Why is it EXACTLY as it was in the fossil record, supposedly from "millions of years ago"? They SAID that the fish's lobed fins was proof it was evolving into arms and legs! Yet the lobed fins are EXACTLY the same today as they were in the fossilized fish. Where did these arms and legs go? Why did it stop evolving? I know the answer, it NEVER DID evolve. It was a lobed fin FISH since God created it.The only other possibility is that it ISN'T "millions of years old", but only thousands of years old, and survived the flood because it could swim.
Either answer shows evolution never happened.
Either it's "millions of years old" and should have evolved in that time, or the fossil record is only thousands of years old, as the Bible says.
Scientists SEE this, look at it, but look right through it and ignore the obvious, because it blows their whole evolution theory out of the water.

In other words, they are ignorant on purpose, because facing the truth doesn't fit what they believed and are force feeding to children all over the world. These "scientists" think THEY are SOOO smart, that admitting they are wrong is NOT a possibility in their own minds. They won't allow it, no matter HOW obvious the proof is that they were wrong.

---

She did walk upright though:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sn/prehistoric_life/human/human_evolution/mother_of_man1.shtml 





Vestigial structures can still be functional. Think of some birds that cannot fly anymore. Some still use their wings to glide, balance, and even attracting mates.



Of course they admit mistakes! That's what science is! Using the scientific method, testing hypothesis, and writing in peer reviewed journals!

I trust these people because this is what they study and work on their whole lives, while these creation scientists with basically no real scientific background criticize them while quoting from a book written by man. I don't mind people that are spiritual and believe in God. Just don't take the bible literally word for word.

You can believe God had his hand in evolution. Heck, that's what Catholics and Protestants believe. I have many religious friends that believe this.

---

I think you're getting yourself too worked up over this Cheesey. The debate of religion vs science isn't going to come to an end in this thread, or on this forum, or probably on this planet.

I think you're being overly critical of science for no real reason. Given enough time I'm sure we can all find a million retorts and counter-retorts. Let's not devolve this thread into pointless bickering because that's when panties get knotted.

(Speaking of which, am I the only one who thinks that underwear is the single thing in the entire universe that defies gravity and always must ride up as far as it can wedge itself?)

---

We can analyze 'facts' all we want.. No one is changing their views.

Some follow faith, others follow 'fact'. When the end comes we'll know who's right and who's wrong.

---

I'm not looking for answers to faith or religion.

Was just looking for a healthy discussion on Noahs Ark.

I know little about it.

---