You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
What side of the family are you from?
A little girl asked her mother, 'How did the human race appear?'
The mother answered, 'God made Adam and Eve and they had children and so all mankind was made.' Two days later the girl asked her father the same question.
The father answered, 'Many years ago there were monkeys from which the human race evolved.'
The confused girl returned to her mother and said, 'Mom, how is it possible that you told me the human race was created by God, and Dad said it developed from monkeys?'
The mother answered, 'Well, dear, it is very simple. I told you about my side of the family and your father told you about his.'
I mean, I don't believe in God, but I would so much rather prefer to be a descendant of God than a descendant of monkeys... destined to die and rot in the ground.
The real question is where did the apes come from? and before them the bacteria? and before them the proper amino acids and intelligence to combine them to create cells?
Amino acids were created in the primordial soup or a similar process. This is how all life as we know it began, scientists have already discovered amino acids in fragments of rock from asteroids, all other life evolved from this. As for the intelligence bit, why do they need intelligence to evolve, why? Have you ever read the Blind Watch Maker or do you not take anything a athiest says seriously.
God created the asteroids and the amino acids and then he put them in fragments of rock from asteroids. God then created humans through a process we call evolution. ;)
God didnt create shit because he doesnt exist. No Joe if you take what i say seriously for second you have might realised that i was briefly describing how the building blocks of life formed.
NO God didnt create those building blocks at least not in the sense that you mean, your conception of God is flawed, look i consider myself a pabthiest(a kind of spiritual athiest, although an athiest would probably challenge me on that). For long time i was a strict athiest, which means i beleived strongly in all the reductionism materialism that athiests beleive in. This beleif in the universe as a sort of mechanistic wasant very satisfying to me. You see if you do consider yourself a christian, thats fair enough, the problem with christians (and most faiths) is that they take the methphors present in their sacfred scriptures and doctrines as being literal, there not meant to be taken that way, there metaphors. The problem with strict athiests is, they see peopel taking them as being literal and thus they become completely unpalatable to any rational person. This i can really sympathise with.
Look God isnt a person, he's even a consciouness, God is the unverse, God is reality, hes the you and me, so when you say he created the buildong blocks in one sense i beleive you to be correct but just not in the way you mean.
Why not. I think your idea of God is very different to what actually exists im afraid.The metaphrs in the bible are not meant to be taken literally im afraid.
I came from God's family starting with Adam and Eve has they had babies their babies had babies over and over again until a cute little adorable baby which was me was born.
Thats just a complete lie, i doubt theres any truth in it at all. I mean theres nothing about it that could be real, if yuour capable of thinkg for yourself about your own reality, and what it means to be alive, you may come to realise that what has gone before you could not be what you envisage it to be.
Except that Adam lived over 900 years. So did Seth, Methuselah, and Noah. Genetically, there is a problem with that. The reason our DNA doesn't unwind at the completed end is due to these repeating structures known as telomeres. The telomeres themselves have to deteriorate at every replication, and there is as yet no known way to prevent this.What this means is that sooner or later your cells can't replace the dying ones. In large enough numbers this leads to organ or system failure. This is pretty much what "dying of old age" tends to mean. Even the healthiest of people can't get much older than 110 for this reason.
So, the absolute closest we can get is telomeres that were about 9 times longer several thousands of years ago. Not exactly "every bit the same genetic material as humans today." Also why don't all the other societies from around 6,000 years ago (yes there were several) have stories of 900 year olds running around all throughout their legends?
Not exactly "every bit the same genetic material as humans today."
Telomeres are comprised of the same material now as they were back then. The only change here is there length. Therefore it is still the same genetic material just shorter!!
The fact that our telomeres decay faster during replication only proves we come from the same pair of humans. As the human population expanded the replication of DNA continues to "decay" at a faster rate. We have only combated this through modern medicine to treat diseases. If not our life expectancy would be much shorter. If our telomeres were the exact length they are now then humans without modern medicine would have died out possibly hundreds of years before our time.
We see the effects of telomeres "shortening" through genetic cloning. The adult DNA is dramatically shorter then a child's. This is why clones don't live very long. But make no mistake it is still the same material and composition.
Also why don't all the other societies from around 6,000 years ago (yes there were several) have stories of 900 year olds running around all throughout their legends?
"Extrabiblical evidence to support the long life spans of the people in Genesis is found in the Sumerian King List. This list mentions a flood and gives the length of the reigns of kings before and after a flood. There are many striking parallels between the Sumerian King List and Genesis, such as a flood event, numerical parallels between the pre-Flood biblical patriarchs and the antediluvial kings, and a substantial decrease in life span of people following the flood.2 One author on this subject concludes, “It is highly unlikely that the biblical account was derived from the Sumerian in view of the differences of the two accounts, and the obvious superiority of the Genesis record both in numerical precision, realism, completion, and moral and spiritual qualities.”2 It is more likely that the Sumerian King List was composed using Genesis for numerical information. Obviously, the Book of Genesis would only be used if the person writing the list believed it to be a true historical account containing accurate information."
"Telomeres are comprised of the same material now as they were back then. The only change here is there length. Therefore it is still the same genetic material just shorter!!"
Okay, I'll give you that one. If you'd have stopped there you would have been golden. But then...
"As the human population expanded the replication of DNA continues to "decay" at a faster rate."
If it worked the way that you were implying, we would have died out a long time ago, as each generation would have whatever amount of telomeres their parent's gametes had left over and no more. This would also imply that the children of people who have children in their 30s and 40s should have, on average, shorter lives than the children of people who had kids in their teens or 20s. Or that the younger of kids born ten years apart should have a shorter lifespan than than their older sibling. Yet this doesn't happen. Why? There actually is an enzyme called telomerase that can increase the length of the telomere. The sad part is, only germ cells and some stem cells have this stuff. And even now that we know about it, we can't seem to get it to stick on cells that have already divided.
"We have only combated this through modern medicine to treat diseases."
These medicines don't treat the telomeres, just diseases which are a totally separate entity. The telomere issue wasn't actually a problem until we became good enough at medicine to get people to the point where our telomeres actually broke down all the way.
"We see the effects of telomeres "shortening" through genetic cloning."
I can't believe I have to tell you this, but cloning is not the same thing as sexual reproduction.
"'Extrabiblical evidence to support the long life spans of the people in Genesis is found in the Sumerian King List.'"
Actually, a couple dozen Sumerian King Lists have shown up. None are identical. How do we know which, if any are the true account?
One of the earlier ones has 8 kings ruling for a total of 241,200 years. That's an average of 30,150 years per king! Not only does this blow the Genesis account of the Earth's age out of the water, it also gives us people who lived 30 times longer than the first man! Obviously the Sumerians were prone to hyperbole. And the assertion that the Genesis account is obviously the original is not terribly surprising considering the bias in here. The Genesis account is more realistic? Only in the same way that Star Trek is more realistic than Star Wars.
If it worked the way that you were implying, we would have died out a long time ago, as each generation would have whatever amount of telomeres their parent's gametes had left over and no more. This would also imply that the children of people who have children in their 30s and 40s should have, on average, shorter lives than the children of people who had kids in their teens or 20s. Or that the younger of kids born ten years apart should have a shorter lifespan than than their older sibling. Yet this doesn't happen.
Like I said at the end of my post that the telomeres have stabilized at their current state. What I was demonstrating to you is that the telomeres must have been longer to start with in the past.
These medicines don't treat the telomeres
I never said they did please read more carefully.
just diseases which are a totally separate entity.
That's how we combat there effects. The shorter telomeres leave us susceptible to diseases and hinder our cells from properly replicating therefore can cause death i.e. cancer.
I can't believe I have to tell you this, but cloning is not the same thing as sexual reproduction.
I never said it was, I cited the cloning experiments to show you how we discovered the telomeres shrink within the lifetime of the subject. This was to prove that telomeres shrink.
Actually, a couple dozen Sumerian King Lists have shown up. None are identical. How do we know which, if any are the true account?
Do you understand why we cite things? I was showing you that other civilizations claimed to have long life spans. Since you made the false assumption that no other civilization believed in longer lives then we know today. I refuted your claim that is what we do here.
I never claimed the Sumerians had it right. But they also were aware of the Genesis account. Therefore you false assumption is invalid.
Only in the same way that Star Trek is more realistic than Star Wars.
Now I know where your intellectual litmus test lies.
This would also imply that the children of people who have children in their 30s and 40s should have, on average, shorter lives than the children of people who had kids in their teens or 20s
You are speaking of rapid degeneration here. I have not made that claim at all. You are drawing to false conclusions here.
"Like I said at the end of my post that the telomeres have stabilized at their current state. What I was demonstrating to you is that the telomeres must have been longer to start with in the past."
So we started growing telomerase when originally we had none? Or it somehow became more effective?
"That's how we combat there effects."
Not even close. Diseases, even most genetic ones, have absolutely no connection to telomeres. Gene therapy for cancer does use T-cells, but that just replaces cells.
As long as some of the telomere is still extant, the cell reproduces just fine. A shorter telomere doesn't mean a weak cell. It just means that it has only so many replications left before it won't reproduce.
"This was to prove that telomeres shrink."
I started out my dispute pointing out that telomeres shrink. That is the whole basis for why I don't think its possible for someone to live 900 years. Perhaps you should read more carefully.
The difference between our understandings is that you seem to be implying that the telomeres shrink over successive generations. Cloning adult cells that have already undergone duplication does not support your point.
"I never claimed the Sumerians had it right. But they also were aware of the Genesis account. Therefore you false assumption is invalid."
So your support for your argument is that another kingdom borrowed from the creation count that you are supporting. And you don't even think they were right. How convincing. Can you find a civilization that is not known to have encountered the Genesis Account, say the Mayans, or the Ancient Chinese or an ancient African tribe, that is full of 900 year olds?
i sorta agree with you but still don't because,The Bible says God lowered the life span of Humans because of their wickedness.so could that mean he simply decreased the capacity of cell replacement in Humans?Just a thought..
There are a few problems with long telomeres too, though.
First, telomeres are susceptible to oxidative stress. The longer they are, the more susceptible they are. Different species have different telomere lengths, and different individuals within a species have differing lengths as well. However, depending on the chemical conditions within a cell, there is a maximum limit that a telomere can reach before oxidative stress is too much of an issue to work through. Essentially, the range seen within each species is pretty much as long as they could go.
Also, the production of telomeres and telomerase (the enzyme that lengthens them) is a bit of a notable drain on energy for the developing cell. So to notably increase them (in the case mentioned above, we are talking by a factor of about 9) would require a more efficient or productive system of metabolism within the cell, or would threaten the energy reserves for other functions. This fact and oxidative stress are among the reasons why genetic telomere extension has been problamatic for geneticists so far.
Further, one researcher has hypothesized that unusually long telomeres are more susceptible to cancer, although other researchers believe it might actually decrease cancer rates. Both sides of that debate are highly speculative.
Could God do this? If he exists, sure. But that would have required some serious monkeying around with our cells, and as far as I've seen there is absolutely no evidence of such radical changes occurring within the past 6000 years.
i am a woman made by my Heavenly Father, he and his son Jesus Christ created man in their own image and thus we are here on this earth. although i think it is quite possible that God made it so we have evolved through the evolution chain from the ape. lulz
I am a small part of God's creation :) I think its strange what men manage to conjour up in their state of denial of God - such a state of denial that they actually believe they evolved from a big hairy monkey ...
i am a woman made by my Heavenly Father, he and his son Jesus Christ created man in their own image and thus we are here on this earth. although i think it is quite possible that God made it so we have evolved through the evolution chain from the ape. lulz
God did create us and all other creatures. I urge you not to be fooled by evolutionists we are the same DNA now that we were back then. Don't take mistaken knowledge of variety over evolution.
The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
First I would like to say, Wow!! Your brain is a mess. The massive oversimplification in your statement is astounding.
The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie...
A zombie is still dead correct? Through some fictional virus the body is able to function but the person is still dead. Do I have this understanding correct of your mythical correlation? Jesus Christ is alive in every sense. His flesh is as alive as it was before His Crucifixion.
who was his own father...
This is made clear through the Trinity. Three consciences in one being. These are not separate entities.
symbolically eat his flesh...
It is the acceptance of His suffering on our behalf.
telepathically tell him you accept him as your master...
God is omnipresent and therefore talking to Him is like talking with someone in the room with you. Don't reduce it to mysticism.
remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity
There is no evil force. There is only the punishment for sin. His law states we must die for our evil acts. Jesus (God in flesh) gave His life on the cross for our sins. His resurrection was the proof that He is stronger then sin and death.
because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.
Eve was made from Adam's rib this is correct. That tree was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil. You are trying to discount the occurrences here by oversimplifying what happened.
Honestly, I hate ranting around with devoted christians too much because it all ends up pretty much the same as it begun, as it's kind of the same as talking to a door... The door doesn't assimilate anything I say. But even so, maybe because I'm really dumb I still feel compelled to say something when I read something as absurd as what you have posted right there...
First, I'm more inclined to believe that your brain is the one that's a mess. Why? Read your words carefully. Well, you say the same as every other christian does, which is nothing, really.
So, "Jesus Christ is alive in every sense. His flesh is as alive as it was before His Crucifixion." and "Jesus (God in flesh) gave His life on the cross for our sins."??
Man... make a decision there. He cannot be alive if he gave his life. Or he cannot have given his life if he's alive. But anyhow, no one has ever seen him, unless you count those freaks that think they are Jesus. Don't you think that's kinda strange? Oh, wait, I know, you'll tell me he's alive in spirit or in some invisible form or whatever the hell you can remember this time, like all christians do.
And then after giving me that kind of reasoning, which is the same kind as this "God is omnipresent and therefore talking to Him is like talking with someone in the room with you." and this ""Eve was made from Adam's rib this is correct. That tree was the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil.", you have the audacity to say "Don't reduce it to mysticism."
WOW! That should really make sense.
I really don't want to seem insulting or anything of that sort, even though I may fail at it, but it kinda freaks me out how you people can be so easily persuaded by such fairytaleish... stuff... In the end I don't know what really is the truth any more than anyone else does, but I consider every piece of information that's within my grasp and I can only conclude - through simple comon sense - that from all the information available that kind is the most senseless and the least fundamented. Each one to his own, but you could try listening to yourself and think a bit.
Honestly, I hate ranting around with devoted christians too much because it all ends up pretty much the same as it begun, as it's kind of the same as talking to a door... The door doesn't assimilate anything I say. But even so, maybe because I'm really dumb I still feel compelled to say something when I read something as absurd as what you have posted right there...
I will give you the dumb part of the argument. You may take ownership of that fact.
First, I'm more inclined to believe that your brain is the one that's a mess. Why? Read your words carefully. Well, you say the same as every other christian does, which is nothing, really.
Why is the concept of resurrection so hard for you to understand? You can die completely like what you and most atheists believe. Jesus did die on the cross. He was dead in every sense of the word. I think at this point you fail to fully grasp the concept. On the third day after His death He resurrected Himself. Your response would be "how could he do that if He was dead?" It's because of His omnipresence that He rose again. Jesus, God, and the Holy Spirit are all one. Jesus who is God in the flesh can die for our sins. The Holy Spirit which is still God can resurrect Jesus.
Whether or not you believe in this occurrence it is still a concept that can be easily understood. If you can't grasp the concept of the Triune God then perhaps I then am the one who is talking to the door.
Man... make a decision there. He cannot be alive if he gave his life. Or he cannot have given his life if he's alive.
I already explained this above. You need to understand the Trinity.
But anyhow, no one has ever seen him, unless you count those freaks that think they are Jesus. Don't you think that's kinda strange? Oh, wait, I know, you'll tell me he's alive in spirit or in some invisible form or whatever the hell you can remember this time, like all christians do.
Actually if you read the gospels you will see that over five hundred witnesses saw the risen Christ. And no living man has ever seen God's image. That's why God came in the flesh as Jesus.
I really don't want to seem insulting or anything of that sort, even though I may fail at it
Your smarmy attitude reveals the answer to all i.e. like talking to a door.
it kinda freaks me out how you people can be so easily persuaded by such fairytaleish...
I love when atheist's make themselves look stupid. You consider the Bible a fairytale, when you have no way to disprove its accounts or witnesses. That's what it boils down to is your arbitration. You have no facts to discredit what the Bible says yet your only defense is your opinion.
Each one to his own, but you could try listening to yourself and think a bit.
What's crazier, believing that an invisible entity lives in the sky? Or believing that life began with a big bang and we all just somehow ended up here? Truth is, we will never know how life began, or if we were created or not. Why? Because there was no one intelligent enough to document it back then. =p
'Monkey' is a name given to certain extant species of primates with specific morphological characteristics. The last common ancestor of monkeys and apes, Saadanius hijazensis, does not have all the same characteristics is not placed in either of the monkey superfamilies.
Monkeys and apes share a common ancestor, and that ancestor diverged into two separate lineages. One of these lineages ultimately evolved into gorillas and chimps, and the other evolved into early human ancestors called hominids.
Your claim that since we were tree dwellers means we are monkeys is entirely false. We are much more closely related to apes than we are to monkeys.
Well apes and monkeys are part of the same super group. Either way there is no evidence for humans descending from either family. Look at the fossils you have apes or you have humans. There is no transitionary form.
Even so, we did have tails at some point in our evolutionary history.
What evidence do you cite for this claim? I hope you are not using the embryotic tail of a human fetus. Because we all know that is the remnants of the sperm tail. So I hope you have some better evidence.
It's not the remains of the sperm tail, you dummy. The sperm's entire tail falls off five whole days before the embryo begins developing in the uterus.
Well I believe that we came from apes (not monkeys). There are many scientific evidences that show that we had evolved from apes such as their fossils from the past. As for the belief that we are all born from Adam and Eve, there is no evidence supporting it other than the bible and old wives tales where most had already been proven untrue (e.g. If you say good-bye to a friend on a bridge, you will never see each other again.). Hence, I would rather believe that we are descendants from apes.
There are many scientific evidences that show that we had evolved from apes such as their fossils from the past.
The fossil record shows no such occurrence. We have apes and we have humans no transitions.
As for the belief that we are all born from Adam and Eve, there is no evidence supporting it other than the bible and old wives tales where most had already been proven untrue
So you discount the Bible? A historical record of eyewitness testimony over thousands of years of data. You would follow a evolutionist who concludes his theories through assumption rather then observance.
By your logic perhaps you do belong in the ape column. We humans use reasoning and logic. I would rather follow eyewitness accounts then baseless assumptions.
How do we know the Bible isn't just one big tall tale? All that editing and modification over the millenia probably distorted most of the records of what happened before. It wouldn't be the first time such a thing has happened, nor even the hundredth time. Also, there are transitions between humans and apes that have been found. Ever heard of Lucy?
No your an American i have nothing against you, i also having nothing against any other American your just the products of a fucked up system and your country is far too nationalistic, honestly before Obama got into power i thought facism was a real possiblilty, it still may be. You view being American as like being part of an ideology, even the term Americanism which should sound ridiculous is prettty common phrase, beleieve theres no such thing as rishism or italianism and to even suggest it would make ny outside Ameirca laugh out loud, you just fail to see yuor country for it has become.
I admit Obama was a welcome change to George Bush, but many outside your country actually wanted Sarah Palin and McCain to win cuase they knew world opinion was really turning against America and if the extremists were voted in it probably would have really changed. Again, im glad Obama got in but as i said before there twio sides of the same coin, Obama is slightly better but still not very different.
Today I heard that Obama was attacking Gaddafi and I was so happy because I knew now you would have something to rant about. Obama is no better than Bush ;)
No hes alot better than Bush, hes less cavalier which means more people get to live. Look why did not invade Bahrain when the Saudi army was called in to massacre the people protesting for freedom and democratic reform, you didnt invade, in fact your the ones that armed the saudis wioth the waepons they used to supress those people, and in Yemen on Friday the president decided to firer on his own people and use the tanks and guns you provided to him.
Personally i think ther UK and France are more to Blame in thos Libya conflict, they need to leave that place and leave it now before both side turn on them. There already responsible for nearly as many civilians casaulities as wwere reported during the civil war, so there pathetic excuse that their ptoecting people really doesnt hold any water.
Yes but not at the expense of another countries citizens, so UK and France dont invade Libya, they may suffer some economic consequences if things go pear shaped there and they have no control of the situ. but can you really compare some economic hardship to the destrcution of another country and the kill of its people. Why do you think international law was formulated at all, again im not saying their in breach of it YET but give it time.
Yes i completely acknowledge that, i seen a very good documentary about ronald reagan the other night on BBC, what just said really reminds of one of the overall conclusions of his presidency, at that the documtary.
His son said he promised the american people everything, he said promised a new beggining, he said dont worry about history, dont worry about the energy crisis, dont worry about the lack of oil we'll get more, dont worry about theh economy, essentially he was saying oil is infinite and that the american people didnt have to go without anything.
But thats exactly the American attitude, as long as we have a rich properous country, as long as we have cheap oil, as long as we have security, as long we have everything , fuck everyone else. Now, obviously they dont include that last statement but thats effectively how your foreign policy is refelcted. You dont care about the plight of others, you dont even care about your own people (i.e. the amount of people on or below the poverty line). Whatever you think of Jimmy Carter as president he knew what was wrong with your country, your insatiable thirst for oil, your wastefulness, your materialism etc. etc.
You will have to face these facts sooner or later, i beleive the Wisconson fiasco was only the beginning the cracks have been showing for long time, the voting in of Obama appeased the people for a while but even those people that kept saying giove him time are now starting to realise hes just more of the same, he road into the presidency on the bandwwagon of change knowing full well he wasnt gona change anything. You his presidency was voted the greatest marketing campaign of the year, seriously he best all the bloodsucking companies, none of them could have come up with or managed to sell hope n the way that he did, quite devious and Orwellian if i may say so.
Now one final point; your absolutely right Joe, people dont give a fuck as long as they proper but i honeslty beleive that if people were shown the suffering that their government was causing, i think if they were made to connect with the people whose lives they were turning upside down (i.e. thorigh the media, if you actually had a fair media) they would be so quick to not care. Your ignorance and the ignorance of your country men perpetuates the suffering, you dont question your government ina meaningful way, but as i said i think it will change, the way you've been going has become so fucked up that your not even just harming others peoples anymore your own peoepl are feeling the pinch in a big way.
Did you know bthat your words are worth shit because if i was talking to another stuck up ignorant american he'd be feeding the same crap that you are. Thats what you dont realise, consuming cultural garbage and buying into the bullshit of your government makes you a sample rate
I bet my life is better than yours.... so...., why should I care about what you have to say? Go on and live your crappy life and stop trying to rain on my parade ;)
You know...., maybe if poor people stopped having babies then those of us that provide for them wont feel overwhelmed by their sheer numbers and their lives may improve ;)
Again Joe you astound me with your ignorance, you have a real knack for doin that you know. Poor peopel have proportionately more children in my opinion becaise first all they havent recieved proper education and second of all, theres strength in numbers.
If you were swapped at birth with any of these peopel that you clearly look down on whether you realise it or not i gauratee you, you'd behave in exactly the same manner, your just incapable of seeing anything from your own warped perspective.
Poor peopel have proportionately more children in my opinion becaise first all they havent recieved proper education and second of all, theres strength in numbers.
I think they just need a big screen TV and American programming. ;)
ya thats it Joe they need the same indocrination you've been subjected to, so they can grow up to be the obedient slaves to the corporate paradigm that you are. Thats it,thats it, hey what time is american gladiators on, lets go watch. Can you even remember when you lost your soul.