It's very unfortunate that the biggest power in the world is taking a giant leap back. America's Christian rebirth is a very scary thing.

It scares me that millions of people worldwide cling on to a god that is obviosly not real and the fact that no one ever asks for evidence is very very scary.

There are good and bad people in the world - it's nature - but only religion can turn a good person bad.

What makes you think God is not real?

Have you got any evidence for him being real?

@punkdude

Its absence of evidence NOT evidence of absence

I have evidence of evolution and natural selection but i have no evidence of a creator.

How old is the world?

I have evidence of evolution and natural selection but i have no evidence of a creator.

How old is the world?

Of course u had evidence of evolution that started from thin air right? The world is millions of yrs old and scripture isnt against that.

It scares me that millions of people worldwide cling on to a god that is obviosly not

How do u define reality. Is it exclusively objects that can be percieved withing the 5 senses only? I'm curious cuzz i'm wondering where we got the words paranormal, supernatural etc.

Where do dinosours come in to this?

Do you believe in buddah?

'Religious people split into three main groups when faced with science. I shall label them the "know-nothings", the "know-alls", and the "no-contests".'
"I suspect that today if you asked people to justify their belief in God, the dominant reason would be scientific. Most people, I believe, think that you need a God to explain the existence of the world, and especially the existence of life. They are wrong, but our education system is such that many people don't know it. "

"A universe with a God would like quite different from a universe without one. A physics, a biology where there is a God is bound to look different. So the most basic claims of religion are scientific. Religion is a scientific theory. "

"The trouble is that God in this sophisticated, physicist's sense bears no resemblance to the God of the Bible or any other religion. If a physicist says God is another name for Planck's constant, or God is a superstring, we should take it as a picturesque metaphorical way of saying that the nature of superstrings or the value of Planck's constant is a profound mystery. It has obviously not the smallest connection with a being capable of forgiving sins, a being who might listen to prayers, who cares about whether or not the Sabbath begins at 5pm or 6pm, whether you wear a veil or have a bit of arm showing; and no connection whatever with a being capable of imposing a death penalty on His son to expiate the sins of the world before and after he was born. "

"Out of all of the sects in the world, we notice an uncanny coincidence: the overwhelming majority just happen to choose the one that their parents belong to. Not the sect that has the best evidence in its favour, the best miracles, the best moral code, the best cathedral, the best stained glass, the best music: when it comes to choosing from the smorgasbord of available religions, their potential virtues seem to count for nothing, compared to the matter of heredity. This is an unmistakable fact; nobody could seriously deny it. Yet people with full knowledge of the arbitrary nature of this heredity, somehow manage to go on believing in their religion, often with such fanaticism that they are prepared to murder people who follow a different one."

"Faith is the great cop-out, the great excuse to evade the need to think and evaluate evidence. Faith is belief in spite of, even perhaps because of, the lack of evidence."

"It is often said, mainly by the "no-contests", that although there is no positive evidence for the existence of God, nor is there evidence against his existence. So it is best to keep an open mind and be agnostic. At first sight that seems an unassailable position, at least in the weak sense of Pascal's wager. But on second thoughts it seems a cop-out, because the same could be said of Father Christmas and tooth fairies. There may be fairies at the bottom of the garden. There is no evidence for it, but you can't prove that there aren't any, so shouldn't we be agnostic with respect to fairies?"

"Science offers us an explanation of how complexity (the difficult) arose out of simplicity (the easy). The hypothesis of God offers no worthwhile explanation for anything, for it simply postulates what we are trying to explain. It postulates the difficult to explain, and leaves it at that."

punkdude:

Where do dinosours come in to this?

Do you believe in buddah?

Dinosaurs existed in the pre-adamite world. There was a world before adam and.. YES.. Adam wasnt the first man but the first man to be made in GODs Image. A lot of events happened btw Gen1 verses 1 and 2 that were summarised in the books of isaiah and jeremiah.

I do not believe in budha cuz i do not believe in religion and Yes..Christianity is different from the christian religion (catholic).

Christians believe in GOD stems out from a paranormal experience. He revealed himself to us. We didnt attribute lack of evidence to the existence of deity but rather the other way round.

Punkdude,

i feel you... just like i do others like you.

Instead of simply asking questions to help you with the many doubts that trouble your mind, you are arrogantly speaking against what you do not understand.

Layi has spoken well. I can show you the description of a dinasour in the scriptures and prove to you that the bible does not deny their having existed only if You ask properly.

I disagree with a lot of what's been said in this thread, on both sides...

However, I am curious:

@ donnie where is your Biblical quote describing dinosaurs?

@punkdude. na wa for u. where is the evidence for evolution. evolution has only a crude theory. according to probabilities, it is perfectly impossible for this world to have evolved in harmony. I was present at my child's birth and i wonder if all those processes could have happened by chance.

if evolution is for real, how come we don't see any work in progress. like half man half monkey or something like that...

They'll tell u it takes millions or quintillion of years to move in between epochs (notable change) and homo sapiens is yet to spend a million yrs. probably

I still ask. Did evolution start from "thin air"?

I wonder if I have to repeat the same things over and over again, but here it comes:
see the following contributions I made(just in 1 thread, if you like, I could also search in some of the other threads):
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.32.html#msg128860
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.64.html#msg132020
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.64.html#msg132020
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.64.html#msg132020
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.128.html#msg137480
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.128.html#msg137480
https://www.nairaland.com/nigeria/topic-3833.160.html#msg142618

Note: The Theory of Evolution does [b]not [/b]explain the origin of life or the origin of the universe. That is not in the scope of the Theory of Evolution

layi:

They'll tell u it takes millions or quintillion of years to move in between epochs (notable change) and homo sapiens is yet to spend a million years. probably

The oldest evidence of Homo Sapiens is only 195.000 years old (fossils found in Ethiopia)
The oldest Homo Sapiens left Africa only 50.000 years ago

layi:

I still ask. Did evolution start from "thin air"?

Of course not. Should it?

where is your Biblical quote describing dinosaurs?

The Bible refers to many the common animals we know today. The list includes lions, wolves, bears, sheep, cattle and dogs along with various kinds of birds, rodents, reptiles, and insects. What is interesting is that this extensive list includes three animals that we no longer recognize. These three are (in the original Hebrew language) tanniyn, behemowth and livyathan.

Reading the Bible carefully, you will realize that no living creature matches the descriptions of behemoth and Leviathan. However, if you check out features of dinosaurs in museums, you will notice several possible matches for each one

See the features of Behemoth according to Job 40:15-24
We would expect behemoth to be a large land animal whose bones are like beams of bronze and so forth, so whatever a behemoth is, it is large. It also has tails like Cedar. A key phrase is “He is the first of the ways of God.” This phrase in the original Hebrew implied that behemoth was the biggest animal (wit tail) created.
Biblical description of Behemoth matches the features of Brachiosaurus - Largest dinosaur.

See the features of Leviathan according to Job chapter 41, Psalm 104:25,26 and Isaiah 27:1
Unlike behemoth, who is huge, Leviathan is ferocious and terrifying and its spits fire. I know fellow Nairaland forumites might go   (can an animal really spit fire?). Truth is, there is an animal that spits fire even today's world. Its called a a bombardier beetle. So its possible.
Biblical description of Leviathan matches that of kronosaurus - aquatic dinosaur.

layi:

See the features of Leviathan according to Job chapter 41, Psalm 104:25,26 and Isaiah 27:1
Unlike behemoth, who is huge, Leviathan is ferocious and terrifying and its spits fire. I know fellow Nairaland forumites might go (can an animal really spit fire?). Truth is, there is an animal that spits fire even today's world. Its called a a bombardier beetle. So its possible.

Actually, you are wrong. The bombadier beetle does not spit fire, and I seriously doubt any animal that ever existed would have had the capabilities to spit or breathe out fire. IIRC, the most likely candidate for the Leviathan, is the Komodo Dragon.

Biblical description of Leviathan matches that of kronosaurus - aquatic dinosaur.

I'm pretty sure the kronosaurus (whatever that is) lacked fire spitting capabilities.

Did evolution start from "thin air"?

No.

Just say u want me to be wrong because u got no proof against what I've said.

The bombardier beetle does spit fire. Do your research well. I'll help u wit just a few links
www.thematrix.co.uk/texttopic.asp?index=3
www.aboundingjoy.com/beetle-fs.html
www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardier.html

I can't even answer the other points u raised because u got no proof of anything.

layi:

Just say u want me to be wrong because u got no proof against what I've said.

I don't want you to be wrong, you are wrong.

The bombardier beetle does spit fire. Do your research well. I'll help u wit just a few links
www.thematrix.co.uk/texttopic.asp?index=3
www.aboundingjoy.com/beetle-fs.html
www.talkorigins.org/faqs/bombardier.html

I can't even answer the other points u raised because u got no proof of anything.

I'm probably missing something, so could you point out where any of the sites agree with your assertation.

@the first poster of this thread........how can you prove that God does not exist?The God I know exists and is real.I pray he reveals himself to you soon...

dejiolowe:

@punkdude. na wa for u. where is the evidence for evolution.

Please come back after you've read this. Mind you this is only a very tiny portion of all the evidence there is for evolution

dejiolowe:

evolution has only a crude theory.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory

maybe you need and introduction in what a scientific theory really is and where evolution fits into all of that:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html
http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html

dejiolowe:

according to probabilities,

Probability of what in what context?

dejiolowe:

it is perfectly impossible for this world to have evolved in harmony.

What is harmony, by what process?

dejiolowe:

I was present at my child's birth and i wonder if all those processes could have happened by chance.

Chance is a minor component of the theory of evolution. I think you do not really know what the Theory of Evolution is about:
1. The Theory of Evolution does not deal with the existence of the universe, only with how life evolved from simpler life forms to the complex ones we see today.
2. Chance is a very minimal component of the Theory of evolution. The only place where chance plays a role is in the fact that the genome of all living organisms is undergoing random mutations.
3. The processes of natural selection, punctuated equilibria, genetic drift and sexual selection are anything but chance driven processes.

dejiolowe:

if evolution is for real, how come we don't see any work in progress.

The process of evolution generally works on geologic timescales for complex organisms (thousands to millions of years), so the results would not be that obvious at first sight (but they are there, even in humans: sickle cell anemia, lactose tolerance,...) We do see rapid evolution in progress in simpler organisms with a faster lifecycle such as bacteria or insects. Resistance of bacteria against antibiotics is a perfect example.

dejiolowe:

Like half man half monkey or something like that...

There were several hominid species walking the earth a few ten to hundred thousand years ago. The success of our own species, Homo Sapiens, drove them to extinction.
There are already animals that could be called half man - half monkey: chimpansees, but that's probably not what you want to hear

snazzydawn:

@the first poster of this thread........how can you prove that God does not exist?The God I know exists and is real.I pray he reveals himself to you soon...

It's up to you to prove that he [b]does [/b]exist in the first place. If you happen to meet him on day, tell him I'd like a chat

@nferyn i rest my case. coz u know the truth. arguing fiercely for or against evolution doesnt change the fact. it only changes opinion. time will tell.

but as last shot, you talk of life forms.. hmm. why dont someone see a perfectly working TV with digital reception on a TV stand somewhere and it could be proven that it evolved? if we came from simple life forms, how did those simple life forms got there? which came first, the chicken or the egg since each is inter-dependent.

if someone is going to fry your ar*se one day, i can sure stoke the fire...

dejiolowe:

but as last shot, you talk of life forms.. hmm. why don't someone see a perfectly working TV with digital reception on a TV stand somewhere and it could be proven that it evolved? if we came from simple life forms, how did those simple life forms got there? which came first, the chicken or the egg since each is inter-dependent.

I could explain this to you in detail, but I'm not going to invest the time and energy if you're not going to listen anyway. It's up to you.
First go and read this:
http://blogs.salon.com/0001561/stories/2002/11/18/refutationOfThebyDesignArgumentForTheism.html
http://easyweb.easynet.co.uk/~ursa/philos/certs2e1.htm#conclusion
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/

If you still have objections, point them out in detail and I'll address them.

I advice you to meet any Jevoha Witness in your vacinity to give you book taking about "does the world came into being through evolution?"

charlisco:
I advice you to meet any Jehovah Witness in your vacinity to give you book taking about "does the world came into being through evolution"

I can already answer that one for you. No, the world did not come into being through evolution. Evolution does not deal with the origin of the world. It's of no use asking a carpenter to do your plumbing, as carpenters are not in the business of plumbing.

Evolution does not explain how the world come into being,

All the world religion admit the existence of a supreme being. Am sure the originator of the traditional Yoruba religion did not have any contact with Budha, etc

That shows that there must be a supreme being that unite them on all continent together.

There are miracles that are happening today that defies all known logics and postulates by scientist

joftech:

Evolution does not explain how the world come into being,

Nobody that understands evolution ever would

joftech:

All the world religion admit the existence of a supreme being. Am sure the originator of the traditional Yoruba religion did not have any contact with Budha, etc

Buddhists do [b]not [/b]believe in a supreme being

joftech:

That shows that there must be a supreme being that unite them on all continent together.

Your first premise is incorrect. And even if it were correct, how does that prove anything? Please explain

joftech:

There are miracles that are happening today that defies all known logics and postulates by scientist

Record them and submit them to James Randi (http://www.randi.org/research/), you could win 1 million dollars. Nobody has won the prize yet though. How many miracles were you talking about?

People arguing for and against God should read the following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

joftech:

People arguing for and against God should read the following http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God

Thank you for the link, I did't read anything new, though. What's your purpose?

didnt think any topic would entice me back into this forum (was alomost leaving for good), to the matter at sight, i belive in GOD and science, i try to blend both together and its possible the fit in perfectly, the bible is a very logical book, its just dat many people (nigerians in particular) read the bible at a surface the most times avoide dicussions like this.

homo-abilis were said to be very strong and huge, homo erectus could stand erect and den mordern man, the bible as its own version.. the fact is this, just as science as said earth was once hit by a mediorite (hope i got the spelling), this maede the earth filled with darkness and killed the generations of the dino's same the bible said the earth was befor GOD made a revamp, both really go, plants where before animals, them came man, form science like stated from planktons.. wich is a form of plant..
and dont forgt that the bible says one day to GOD is like a 1000 yrs to man.. that may also have been a million yrs