I will eat my hat if you can do this...

I'm always amused by this shallow reasoning. I'm not saying that as disrespect toward you, but that the logic itself is shallow. It's ridiculous because it doesn't explain anything and is basically an avoidance of the issue.

Question: How do airplanes fly?
Answer: Well, they fly because people only copied or improved the type of airplane that didn't crash.

Question: Why do boats float in the ocean?
Answer: People have been making boats for a long long time. When the boats got older replacements were made. Only the boats that didn't sink had replacements made for them.

Question: Why are cheetahs fast?
Answer: Because only fast cheetahs caught food. The slow ones died off.
Question: But then why are turtles slow?
Answer: Next question

Why don't we use this type of logic to get to the moon or to design submarines? Because it's not science. If allowed to continue this logic, I could explain any ridiculous situation I can think of.

Question: Why do cats juggle bowling pins?
Answer: Because only cats that juggle bowling pins survived. This trait is obviously superior.

You see, this logic doesn't answer any questions at all. It merely recycles the same answer for every question. You might as well say "Because that's the way it is" or "We don't know" for every answer. You're not explaining anything when you use this method of logic. Others here may accept this answer, but I'll continue to be amused every time it's brought up.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by dbates]

Dbates I mean no disrespect but your above post makes no sense what so ever to me. I sort of understood your point until the fact you started comparing Turtles with Cheetahs.

By your logic people should have continued to build boats that are heavier then water rather then adapted the ideas that are proven to float and not drown people. Yes the designs of Submarines and other craft that are workable replace the designs and ideas that are failures are you trying to say that this isnt the case ?

As for birds that migrate lets use logical reasoning the species or colony of bird s that didn't find adequate food sources and breeding grounds would have died of starvation or the failure to have enough off spring to continue the species.

So the birds that located adequate food sources and breeding grounds would have survived .

My point is that saying the ones that migrated survived, doesn't answer the question "Why do they migrate?" or "How do they migrate?" The reality is that there is no evidence of evolutionary steps to prove the logic of the given answer. It's not as if we can find birds that only migrated half way, or birds that only migrated 5 miles. There are no slow cheetahs or at least no proof that any ever existed. Still I see people talking about them as if it's fact that some of these types once existed.

I would love to see the fossil of the giraffe with a short neck or one with a long neck and short legs. If these were poor developments that died out, then surely there would be examples of them. A short necked giraffe could find food just as well as a zebra and it's long legs would be an advantage for spotting predators. No proof exists and yet Darwinist claim that these died out without proof that the animal in question ever existed. It's just glossing over the facts with a generic answer.

In truth, no one has ever found an intermediate step between today's animals and ones that existed a million years ago. What we have today simply exists in it's present form *Poof* without proof the necessary steps to reach what it is today.

Ha! Look what I found.


Bing! These guys nailed it. This is exacly what I'm talking about.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by dbates]

I'm no expert but birds usually migrate to breed and birds generally fly to there destination. Surely the species the continued to breed in areas where predators could claim there young easily would have been at risk of going dying out.




Given the time and the resources I'm sure that fossils could be found that debunk your argument.



Well that quiet an assumption your making who is to say that cheetahs didn't evolve from an light weight animal to begin with ?



We don't know all the species that exist on the earth currently little alone the species that existed millions of years ago. Besides logic should tell you that an shorter giraffe would not have been able to survive if the tress were higher then they are today.




So there is no proof that Dinosaurs ever existed ?
What about the modern day crocodile do you deny that they have had relatives that have died out over time ?



Sorry but your way off base here some species Dinosaurs had feathers that you would find on an modern bird so your point is dis proven. birds can be connected to evolution and as time goes on more and more missing links in the chain will be found. And yet as time goes by there is still no more evidence to suggest that an higher power exists and there never will be.

[edit on 9-7-2007 by xpert11]

What if the long neck isn't an evolutionary advantage? Having a longer neck requires more mass to stabalize it, and that means the animal would require more food. You're just focusing on one trait of an animal and guessing that evolution caused it to be that way because it was advantageous. It's a self serving answer.

Well I would hardly call logic self serving. Never the less your point is well taken but your not thinking things thou. For example it is possible that there were a lot of animals competing for the sources of food on the ground so the requirement for more food could have been balanced out by the fact there were less creatures competing for the source of food that the tree tops provided.

As for an short necked giraffe there could be clues that are still around today your logic may not be correct but the idea of an short necked giraffe may not be that far fecthed.


link

I am open minded kind of guy but all you present is logic that has been dis proven by other species so why would a species like birds have evolved from other species and yet some how giraffes didn't undergo the process of evolution ?

People argued against the evolution of birds despite the evidence so why continue with an argument that gas already been debunked ?

If men keep having sex with each other, will some of them eventually get pregnant, and bear children, giving birth to dual sex children?

Evolution is lunacy!

If you don't want to believe in God, that's up to you.

But you have to come up with a better theory than "some of the fish didn't like the water, grew legs and lungs, and some changed into warm blooded mammals and some changed into cold blooded reptiles"

Now lets see. A fish can stay out of water, for a couple of minutes at the most, so how many trips would it take the fish before legs started to grow? Could the fish grow legs in a lifetime?

Do plants create or filter oxygen? What was the first plant. How did it survive, or did plants come from fish too? Don't all plants come from seeds. Where was the first seed from?

Whaaah??? This is what we are teaching our children? No wonder school violence is so bad. Concept of natural selection. Darwin, is the false prophet.

Those that know right from wrong, and choose wrong, bear responsibility.




[edit on 10-7-2007 by stompk]

Ah! I see you understand that stressing one trait seems to further your assumption works. Homosexuality must be a logical progression of the human species. DANGER! You just leaked a secret about two pet subjects of secularist. Darwanism and Homosexuality aren't compatiable. Still, if you have a narrow minded approach and only focus on one thing at a time you can prove either point. That's a subject outside the scope of this thread so file that away for later discussion.

I have an simple logical question if god created everything around us then what created god ?
:not a one line post :

Riiiiiiight

Your question is a valid point without an easy answer. The best I can give you is the point made throughout the Bible. God is all knowing, all powerful, and ever present. In short his scope and span is infinite. The universe on the other hand is not infinite. It had a beginning that we call the Big Bang. creatio ex nihilo

Only finite things need a beginning. Infinite things by definition, do not, and can not have a beginning. God is without cause. It's hard to grasp that with your mind because as individuals we have lived for such a short period of time. Speaking of time, what is it exactly? It is the relation of objects to each other as they change. Think of a sci-fi movie where someone has the power to stop time. Nothing is moving.

God does not change, so in effect is not subject to time. The universe from His point of view is a static image. Not just the Universe in 3 or 4 dimensions, but most likely in 10 dimensions. Without going into detail here that would mean God has knowledge of all possibilities in every possible Universe that could exist. He knows every possibility. If you think about it for a moment, a creator would need this knowledge to correctly construct a universe that worked.

If you want to dive deeper into this type of thought then here's a good place to start.


I will caution you that the site has some fairly complex philisophical ideas, but it's very entertaining. Aside from that article you'll find enough material to make you disappear forever (Nearly) if you took the time to read it all. My advise is to star in the theology section.

Hope this helps some.

God is out there. If we believers half to prove it to you to have faith, or eat a hat to have faith is wrong. God wanted people to believe by faith, not by proof. If he wanted people to know he was here he would of kept them in heaven.

I bet queen ann 38 or something can respond too those questions better than anyone on this board. For the lady is very blessed.

if i have to take something on faith, what makes your god any more reliable and true than odin, zeus, ra, or amateratsu? i mean, at least i can see both ra and amateratsu because they are the sun... and honestly, what's more reliable than the sun? i mean, even joe pesci is just a close second (i hope someone on here gets this reference)



while i have respect for the one you speak of, blessed isn't the right word. intelligent, clever, or smart work much better, and would be much more useful in responding to this challenge

Note this is just my opinion.
Dbates I read the first article you linked to and while some of it is very interesting the existence of an higher power isnt always necessary to some of the topics at hand (An discussion about time can be had without mention of an non existent higher power .) Now where does it say how the all mightily power came into being we are still expected to ignore logic.

Besides if god created the universe when we look thou the likes of the Hubble telescope shouldn't we see creation at some point ?

[edit on 10-7-2007 by xpert11]

I don't know exactly how that works. I guess that the Earth would have had to move away from the Big Bang faster than light for us to be able to see the creation point. Otherwise that light from the distant past has already gone past our point in space. It would be really neat if we could.

i guess that is how it would have to work in theory... but then we'd have to slow down to the exact speed of light once we get there so we can get a good look at it...

granted it would probably just look like a massive flash...

anyway, i still haven't eaten a hat.. and i have one now. i nice red st.l cardinals baseball cap.

don't tell me this thread is dead! come on, i was actually hoping to hear fresh arguments and lively debate over this stuff...
and i honestly wouldn't mind that it would imply that i'd have to eat my hat.

remember, the challenge isn't to refute the arguments completely, it's to come up with a reasoned counterpoint for each argument.

reply to post by JesusisTruth

---

Um.. JIT man created dogs through selective breeding not gods devine will.

reply to post by dbates

---

the light we see is the light that has gone past us, is called backgroung radiation. it is not realy a point.

you can only expect this thread to die, they got off topic fairly quick and that was that . keep trying madness, I'll keep posting.

Get some salt and pepper..

I have a simple answer to your "50 questions".

You say in your title they are "proofs". They are anything but. It was prophesied that people like you would come. People like you who tried desperately to make people believe that God does not exist. I must ask why? Why do you feel the need to try and debunk God? Since you do not know Him you can't understand Him or what He does, or does not do. I am sorry if you can not comprehend that. But I will answer your "questions" and prove they are false.


1- Try praying
My prayers are heard, do you know why? It is because I BELIEVE WITHOUT QUESTION. Do you think God is stupid? Do you think He can't see who is who? Just because I can't see the results right away does not mean my prayers have not been heard. I used the Holy rosary to quit smoking cigarettes and pot, how come the guy who made that website did not seek me out to find that out? Does this person know who's prayers were answered and who's were not answered? Thats pretty amazing! Now thats using the scientific method!

2- Statistically analyze prayer
The author of your "50 questions" did not do this apparently. Now it would be easy just to tell you to read my above statements but I will give you something else to feed on. Do you remember a football player named Dennis Byrd? He played for the Jets and was paralyzed and THROUGH PRAYER he was ordered to "Rise and Walk"! As a matter of fact he wrote a book about his ordeal and they made a movie about it. Do a google search on Him if your not too scared. In any case here is the wiki entry.

en.wikipedia.org...

(Dennis DeWayne Byrd born (October 5, 1966 in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma) is a former defensive tackle for the New York Jets of the National Football League. He attended college at the University of Tulsa in Tulsa, Oklahoma. He had played professionally for the New York Jets for 4 seasons beginning in 1989.

Byrd was paralyzed from a neck injury during an NFL game against the Kansas City Chiefs in a game on November 29, 1992. During the play, he dove in an attempt to sack Chiefs quarterback Dave Krieg, but Krieg stepped up to avoid the tackle, and Byrd collided with fellow Jets teammate Scott Mersereau. The head-first collision resulted in a broken vertebrae that left Byrd paralyzed.

Byrd made a full recovery from his injury but never played football again. During his recovery, the Jets briefly used a Jesus fish logo bearing his number (90). Although not officially retired by the Jets, the number 90 jersey has not been worn by a Jets player since Byrd.

He is the co-author of an autobiographical work titled Rise and Walk: The Trial and Triumph of Dennis Byrd and the subject of a made for television film Rise and Walk: The Dennis Byrd Story. Peter Berg played Byrd in the movie.

Mobile and active, he is currently the defensive line coach at Lincoln Christian School in Tulsa, whose football stadium is named for him.)

3- Look at historical gods
God has a simple answer for this. "I AM THE LORD THY GOD, THOU SHALT NOT HAVE strange gods BEFORE ME"

4- Think about science

From your page, "Notice what happens when anyone is "miraculously cured". A person is sick, the person prays (or a prayer circle prays for the person) and the person is cured. A religious person looks at it and says, "God performed a miracle because of prayer!" That is the end of it.

A scientist looks at it in a very different way. A scientist looks at it and says, "Prayer had nothing to do with it - there is a natural cause for what we see here. If we understand the natural cause, then we can heal many more people suffering from the same condition."

I refer you to Dennis Byrd. Doctors can't explain how he healed. Also By "Thinking about science" I think about the "end times".

But thou, O Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to the time of the end: many shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall be increased.
Source: Daniel (ch7 v4)

Contiuned