Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/god?

[Dogger807]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

well, news flash, the end goal of all scientists is to kick God out of the minds of people. it has been proven time and time again. prayer is now banned from public schools along with the Bible. you can find every other religion in schools, including things like Wikka, but you bring a Bible to school, you get detention, and if you become a repeat offender, suspension and expulsion. I am not sorry that I am a Christian, and, if ever in a public college, i WILL pray and WILL bring my Bible for whatever reasons i have, the teachers will have to deal with that. dont worry, if i get expelled for that, you can see me on the news in a class-action suit on the public school system. I know Dr. David Gibbs will be waiting to jump on that train the moment it leaves the station.

Silly, no one is stopping you from praying in school, on your own time. The restrictions are against leading prayers in an official capacity, such as by a teacher or principle or even another student at an assembly. Atheist never try to take your rights from you but we won't stand for you calling "forcing your religion on others" a right. Every lawsuit brought forward so far has been a defensive move.. not offensive. OK you want to believe in a fairy tale. The more power too you, just don't expect me to want to hear about it or be forced to listen to you present your mythology as fact. Nor may you brainwash my children.

Oh btw, science's goal is to understand reality . Not set the defintions of reality ,but to learn them. Since relgion is a fairy tale it is a victum of the truth. A side benifit of science is the disproving of religion , but it is not the goal.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Re:

Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/god?

I think everyone deep down inside knows there is a higher being. However, they are afraid of the end and would like to think that after this life is over thats it. They are afraid to think of an after life. Thats my opinion. I mean I would think its even harder to conclude that there is no god. I couldnt even imagine a world without God. I mean how did it get here? How did we get here? People need to start thinking outside the box. Becasue we werent just here forever. Someone or something had to make us. Mabe I just like taking the easy way out and conclude that God made everything, but I cant solemly say otherwise cause its soo far fetched.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Silly, no one is stopping you from praying in school, on your own time. The restrictions are against leading prayers in an official capacity, such as by a teacher or principle or even another student at an assembly. Atheist never try to take your rights from you but we won't stand for you calling "forcing your religion on others" a right. Every lawsuit brought forward so far has been a defensive move.. not offensive. OK you want to believe in a fairy tale. The more power too you, just don't expect me to want to hear about it or be forced to listen to you present your mythology as fact. Nor may you brainwash my children.

Oh btw, science's goal is to understand reality . Not set the defintions of reality ,but to learn them. Since relgion is a fairy tale it is a victum of the truth. A side benifit of science is the disproving of religion , but it is not the goal.

then how come my friends got expelled for praying at lunch? how come we cant start a Bible study group but are allowed to start a Buddhist group? why are Wikkan, Buddhist, and Muslim holy books allowed in the school but not Bibles?
i have told you why and you wont accept the FACT that no teacher, principal, or whatever else runs the schools is going to allow Christianity to be put in the schools. face it. the world you live in discriminates against Christians every chance they get, and never will stop.
Oh BTW, why would there be a debate if scientists wanted to be "tolerant"? the main goal, as i said before, is to rid this world of God, not religion. they dont care about disproving Buddhism, Islam, or Taoism, do they?

 

[MrFungus420]

Re:

I think everyone deep down inside knows there is a higher being.

I know no such thing. I have neither seen nor heard anything to lead me to believe that the belief in a god is anything more than a fantasy.

However, they are afraid of the end and would like to think that after this life is over thats it. They are afraid to think of an after life. Thats my opinion.

The reverse is more likely true. One of the thiings that religion gives people is the possibility of an afterlife, the possibility that they won't cease to be after death. Religion plays to that fear.

I mean I would think its even harder to conclude that there is no god.

Why? I would think that it would be easier to conclude that something doesn't exist when there is no proof for it.

I couldnt even imagine a world without God. I mean how did it get here? How did we get here? People need to start thinking outside the box.

It's much better to think outside the book. Admit that there are things that we don't know yet instead of claiming it was all done by a god.

Becasue we werent just here forever. Someone or something had to make us. Mabe I just like taking the easy way out and conclude that God made everything, but I cant solemly say otherwise cause its soo far fetched.

What's far-fetched, that we don't know something yet, or that there is some being out there with infinite powers, tht lives outside of the boundaries of time and space, that decided to create everything?

 

[MrFungus420]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

then how come my friends got expelled for praying at lunch?

He shouldn't have.

how come we cant start a Bible study group but are allowed to start a Buddhist group?

If it's after school, there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to

why are Wikkan, Buddhist, and Muslim holy books allowed in the school but not Bibles?

One point on this, there is no Wiccan holy book.

i have told you why and you wont accept the FACT that no teacher, principal, or whatever else runs the schools is going to allow Christianity to be put in the schools. face it. the world you live in discriminates against Christians every chance they get, and never will stop.

Religion shouldn't be part of public school, Christianity or otherwise.

And, if you want to claim discrimination against Christianity, all I have to say is. How does it feel? With the history of discrimination by Christianity, I'd say it's a case of reaping what you've sown.

Oh BTW, why would there be a debate if scientists wanted to be "tolerant"? the main goal, as i said before, is to rid this world of God, not religion. they dont care about disproving Buddhism, Islam, or Taoism, do they?

Why would scientists want to be tolerant? The goal of science is not to be tolerant. The goal of science is not to disprove anything. The goal of science is to discover, prove and find explanations. If you feel that science is casting doubt on God, then maybe that means that your concept of God is incorrect.

 

[SKILMATIC]

Re:

I know no such thing. I have neither seen nor heard anything to lead me to believe that the belief in a god is anything more than a fantasy.



The reverse is more likely true. One of the thiings that religion gives people is the possibility of an afterlife, the possibility that they won't cease to be after death. Religion plays to that fear.



Why? I would think that it would be easier to conclude that something doesn't exist when there is no proof for it.



It's much better to think outside the book. Admit that there are things that we don't know yet instead of claiming it was all done by a god.



What's far-fetched, that we don't know something yet, or that there is some being out there with infinite powers, tht lives outside of the boundaries of time and space, that decided to create everything?

Well yeah. You cant tell me that this whole universe was created by a big boom. However, by just looking back to science 101 there is already evidence that a craftsman(god) made it. Again I bring it back to the analogy of you cannot constract a steel building without steel. Now how can you even create water if there is no oxygen to begin with? Kinda funny huh? The big bang isnt even close to the equivelence of a toronado buzzing by a plain field and all the sudden the toronado creates a huge metropolis. And that isnt even half as far fetched as the evolution theory. I mean even in todays society the repopulation rate right now in most areas is we double population every 50yrs. Do the math.

Take 1 person and double it ever 50yrs.

I beleive the latest calculation on how old this earth is from the evolutionists is 1trillion yrs old. Well in 1500yrs the earths polulation will be at around 30million people. At 1750yrs the earths pop. will be at 1.8billion. Now we can also conclude that there were natural disasters and huge wars and other catastrophies. But remember only at 1750yrs we are already almost at 2billion people and currently the earths pop. is around 6-7billion. And the earth from the Bibles teachings is around 10thousand yrs old. Now if the earth was just a million yrs old we would have so many bodies they would be stacked from here to the moon not to mention all the animal bodies too. That right there is proof that this evolution theory is just a theory and will never be a fact.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

He shouldn't have.

he was.

If it's after school, there's no reason why you shouldn't be able to

it iwould be held on school property after school, at the same time other clubs have their meetings. there is a Buddhist club and Wicca club on campus

One point on this, there is no Wiccan holy book.

however, there are several books that the Wiccan cult is based on

Religion shouldn't be part of public school, Christianity or otherwise.

And, if you want to claim discrimination against Christianity, all I have to say is. How does it feel? With the history of discrimination by Christianity, I'd say it's a case of reaping what you've sown.

i wouldnt be reaping from the Catholic church's discrimination, I'm Independent Baptist.

Why would scientists want to be tolerant? The goal of science is not to be tolerant. The goal of science is not to disprove anything. The goal of science is to discover, prove and find explanations. If you feel that science is casting doubt on God, then maybe that means that your concept of God is incorrect.

the thing is, they dont try to prove anything that would prove evolution as wrong, every test to date has been tailored to make it impossible to disprove evolution. but in order to prove evolution they have to disprove Christian. now i have a question. do you believe that everything that is seen has a beginning???

 

[MrFungus420]

Re:

Well yeah. You cant tell me that this whole universe was created by a big boom. However, by just looking back to science 101 there is already evidence that a craftsman(god) made it.

What would that evidence be?

Again I bring it back to the analogy of you cannot constract a steel building without steel. Now how can you even create water if there is no oxygen to begin with? Kinda funny huh? The big bang isnt even close to the equivelence of a toronado buzzing by a plain field and all the sudden the toronado creates a huge metropolis. And that isnt even half as far fetched as the evolution theory. I mean even in todays society the repopulation rate right now in most areas is we double population every 50yrs. Do the math.

That is today's rate in modern, industrial countries. It is much lower in third-world countries, as it was much lower in the past.

Take 1 person and double it ever 50yrs.

I beleive the latest calculation on how old this earth is from the evolutionists is 1trillion yrs old. Well in 1500yrs the earths polulation will be at around 30million people. At 1750yrs the earths pop. will be at 1.8billion. Now we can also conclude that there were natural disasters and huge wars and other catastrophies. But remember only at 1750yrs we are already almost at 2billion people and currently the earths pop. is around 6-7billion. And the earth from the Bibles teachings is around 10thousand yrs old. Now if the earth was just a million yrs old we would have so many bodies they would be stacked from here to the moon not to mention all the animal bodies too. That right there is proof that this evolution theory is just a theory and will never be a fact.

No, that just shows how statistics can be applied incorrectly.

How about you do the math. Starting with one person, and doubling every 50 years, at 1750 years, we have a population of 34,024,194,048, that's 34 billion, not 1.8 billion. So, if you want to use this as proof that evolution must be wrong, we can also use it to discount the Bible's version.

Also, going strictly be the Bible, the earth would be about 6000 years old, not ten thousand.

 

[SKILMATIC]

That is today's rate in modern, industrial countries. It is much lower in third-world countries, as it was much lower in the past.

Really? In case if you didnt notice or know india has the highest birth rate and its prolly one of the most stricken by poverty. I beleive they will hit 1.5 billion people in the next 25yrs as they already attained a billion as there current population so that argument is hogwash.

No, that just shows how statistics can be applied incorrectly.

How about you do the math. Starting with one person, and doubling every 50 years, at 1750 years, we have a population of 34,024,194,048, that's 34 billion, not 1.8 billion. So, if you want to use this as proof that evolution must be wrong, we can also use it to discount the Bible's version.

Also, going strictly be the Bible, the earth would be about 6000 years old, not ten thousand.

Ok and I still was very conservative on the numbers which in that info you just helped my argument. And the Bible is right on for the flood came about around 3000yrs ago. And we have had 2 major wars which didnt help pop. and the black plague and other attrocities so the Bible is right on.

 

[MrFungus420]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

he was.

it iwould be held on school property after school, at the same time other clubs have their meetings. there is a Buddhist club and Wicca club on campus

As I said, there shouldn't be a differentiation. Either allow all, or none.

however, there are several books that the Wiccan cult is based on

Two points. One, if you want to call it a cult, I will also refer to Christianity as a cult. That is just being disrespectful of other people's beliefs. Two, there are books about Wicca, not that Wicca is based upon.

i wouldnt be reaping from the Catholic church's discrimination, I'm Independent Baptist.

I didn't say Catholic, I said Christian.

the thing is, they dont try to prove anything that would prove evolution as wrong, every test to date has been tailored to make it impossible to disprove evolution.

You've got it backwards. Things that have been discovered, in many different fields of study, support the theory of evolution. The study of geology didn't try to help prove evolution, but it did. The same thing can be said for paleontology, physics, archeology and genetics. Each of these, and more, have helped to support evolution, none of them had that as part of what they were looking for.

but in order to prove evolution they have to disprove Christian. now i have a question. do you believe that everything that is seen has a beginning???

Evolution doesn't have to disprove anything, and that has nothing to do with what the study of it is doing. The only thing that it is trying to do is determine how life as we know it came about.

Any religious argument tends to fall on it's face because it can't be supported without having belief in it. All religions are equally valid. Before you ask for someone to disprove creationism (or Christianity), you should try to disprove the Roman pantheon and belief system. Or disprove the Islamic faith.

Does everything have a beginning? I believe so, but I'm not sure. I recognize that my belief may have no bearing on what actually is.

 

[MrFungus420]

Really? In case if you didnt notice or know india has the highest birth rate and its prolly one of the most stricken by poverty. I beleive they will hit 1.5 billion people in the next 25yrs as they already attained a billion as there current population so that argument is hogwash.

There is a big difference between birthrate and population increase. Birthrate tends ot be highest in places with the lowest increases in population.

Ok and I still was very conservative on the numbers which in that info you just helped my argument. And the Bible is right on for the flood came about around 3000yrs ago. And we have had 2 major wars which didnt help pop. and the black plague and other attrocities so the Bible is right on.

Ok, if the flood was about 3000 years ago, then the population in the year 750 would have been about 34 billion. There is no way that this can be used to prove the Biblical account, any more than it can be used to disprove evolution.

As I said, it's a case of applying statistics incorrectly.

 

[SKILMATIC]

There is a big difference between birthrate and population increase. Birthrate tends ot be highest in places with the lowest increases in population.



Ok, if the flood was about 3000 years ago, then the population in the year 750 would have been about 34 billion. There is no way that this can be used to prove the Biblical account, any more than it can be used to disprove evolution.

As I said, it's a case of applying statistics incorrectly.

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHA birthrate has everything to do with population. Did you know we get our pop. from giving birth to people like u and me? Where do you get this stuff? Its so funny. Look your mathis all wrong start by using 1 person then doubling it every 50yrs. In 750yrs the pop would be around 16000people. Where do you even get a billion. Its very simple math. What are you doing squaring the number? You just simple double it.

For example, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16380(app), etc. Take 15 multiply it by 50 and you get how many yrs its been which is 750. So where are you getting those number from?

 

[Ryan]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Oh BTW, why would there be a debate if scientists wanted to be "tolerant"? the main goal, as i said before, is to rid this world of God, not religion. they dont care about disproving Buddhism, Islam, or Taoism, do they?

No offence, but you are clearly blinded by your ego. There is no battle between science and religion/god. The purpose of science is simply this; to explain the unexplained, with evidenciary findings. Science isn't against religion/god, it simply has no proof of such a being and therefore, it cannot support the notion. Science is built of evidence, it's as simple as that and to date, there is no evidence to support religion/god. Oh and by the way, science treats every religion in the same fashion. Buddhist's have their own higher being, which science has no way of proving either and therefore it cannot confirm it all the same.

the thing is, they dont try to prove anything that would prove evolution as wrong, every test to date has been tailored to make it impossible to disprove evolution. but in order to prove evolution they have to disprove Christian. now i have a question. do you believe that everything that is seen has a beginning???

That's absurd. Stop drawing a connection between scientists and evolution. NOT ALL SCIENTISTS BELIEVE IN EVOLUTION and MANY SCIENTISTS BELIEVE IN GOD. Stop acting like the whole world is some bloody conspiract against Christians, life is not black and white. Not only that, but your statement is fundamentally flawed... Whether you believe in god or not, everything has a "beginning".

 

[dthmstr254]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

You've got it backwards. Things that have been discovered, in many different fields of study, support the theory of evolution. The study of geology didn't try to help prove evolution, but it did. The same thing can be said for paleontology, physics, archeology and genetics. Each of these, and more, have helped to support evolution, none of them had that as part of what they were looking for.

and each of these areas has shown contradictions to the evolution theory. they have too many conflicting items to make a single theory.

 

[MrFungus420]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHA birthrate has everything to do with population. Did you know we get our pop. from giving birth to people like u and me? Where do you get this stuff? Its so funny. Look your mathis all wrong start by using 1 person then doubling it every 50yrs. In 750yrs the pop would be around 16000people. Where do you even get a billion. Its very simple math. What are you doing squaring the number? You just simple double it.

The places with the highest birthrate usually are the ones that also have the highest mortality rate. If, in a given generation, the birthrate equals the mortality rate, then there is a zero population growth. The birthrate must exceed the mortality rate for there to be an increase in the population.

And, I said in the year 750, not in 750 years. I was basing it on 1750 years from when the flood supposedly occured, which you said was about 3000 years ago. Sorry if that caused any confusion.

For example, 1, 2, 4, 8, 16, 32, 64, 128, 256, 512, 1024, 2048, 4096, 8192, 16380(app), etc. Take 15 multiply it by 50 and you get how many yrs its been which is 750. So where are you getting those number from?

I am doubling. Let's continue the progression: 8192, 16,384, 32,768, 65,536, 131,072, 262,144, 534,288, 1,048,576 (1000 years), 2,097,152, 4,194,304, 8,388,608, 16,777,216, 33,554,432, 67,108,864, 134,217,728, 268,435,456, 536,870,912, 1,073,741,824, 2,147,483,648, 4,294,967,296, 8,589,934,592, 17,179,869,184, 34,359,738,368 (1750 years). Sorry, I did make a little error on the last post. I came up with 34,024,194,048.

(I had already typed all the numbers in before I realized the confusion was with the year 750 vs. 750 years. I put the effort into typing them in, and I'm leaving them!)

 

[Naughty Nurse]

HAHAHAHHAHAHAHAAHA birthrate has everything to do with population. Did you know we get our pop. from giving birth to people like u and me?

But then you have to take into account infant mortality rates (very high in third world countries, and in the USA), disease, hunger etc etc. Birth rate does NOT = poulation growth.

 

[MrFungus420]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

and each of these areas has shown contradictions to the evolution theory. they have too many conflicting items to make a single theory.

What contradictions? Most of what I see people refering to as contradictions are cases of creationists making errors in a desperate attempt to show evolution wrong.

Please, share some of the contradictions. I'm willing to bet that they fall into that category.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

What contradictions? Most of what I see people refering to as contradictions are cases of creationists making errors in a desperate attempt to show evolution wrong.

Please, share some of the contradictions. I'm willing to bet that they fall into that category.

Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (Neandertal man) - 150 years ago Neandertal reconstructions were stooped and very much like an 'ape-man'. It is now admitted that the supposedly stooped posture was due to disease and that Neandertal is just a variation of the human kind.

Ramapithecus - once widely regarded as the ancestor of humans, it has now been realized that it is merely an extinct type of orangutan (an ape).

Eoanthropus (Piltdown man) - a hoax based on a human skull cap and an orangutan's jaw. It was widely publicized as the missing link for 40 years.

Hesperopithecus (Nebraska man) - based on a single tooth of a type of pig now only living in Paraguay.

Pithecanthropus (Java man) - now renamed to Homo erectus. See below.

Australopithecus africanus - this was at one time promoted as the missing link. It is no longer considered to be on the line from apes to humans. It is very ape-like.

Sinanthropus (Peking man) was once presented as an ape-man but has now been reclassified as Homo erectus (see below)

Australopithecus - there are various species of these that have been at times proclaimed as human ancestors. One remains: Australopithecus afarensis, popularly known as the fossil 'Lucy'. However, detailed studies of the inner ear, skulls and bones have suggested that 'Lucy' and her like are not on the way to becoming human. For example, they may have walked more upright than most apes, but not in the human manner. Australopithecus afarensis is very similar to the pygmy chimpanzee.

Homo habilis - there is a growing consensus amongst most paleoanthropologists that this category actually includes bits and pieces of various other types - such as Australopithecus and Homo erectus. It is therefore an 'invalid taxon'. That is, it never existed as such.

Homo erectus - many remains of this type have been found around the world. They are smaller than the average human today, with an appropriately smaller head (and brain size). However, the brain size is within the range of people today and studies of the middle ear have shown that Homo erectus was just like us. Remains have been found in the same strata and in close proximity to ordinary Homo sapiens, suggesting that they lived together.

There is no fossil proof that man is the product of evolution. Could it be that the missing links are still missing because they simply do not exist.
"Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being" (Genesis 2:7).

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c008.html

 

[dthmstr254]

But then you have to take into account infant mortality rates (very high in third world countries, and in the USA), disease, hunger etc etc. Birth rate does NOT = poulation growth.

wouldnt that make population lower than the birth rate. not higher, as Mr Fungus said...wasnt it something like 34 billion??? population can not be higher than the number of children born.

 

[kal-el]

Re:

Thats my opinion. I mean I would think its even harder to conclude that there is no god. I couldnt even imagine a world without God. I mean how did it get here? How did we get here? People need to start thinking outside the box.

I agree with thinking outside the box. But you are not, my friend. I can't help it if some people were willingly spoonfed that there is a "God", with a white beard, sitting on a cloud, hurling thunderbolts at people, and likewise,a red-skinned, monster of a devil, sitting eternally in a burning abyss, plucking up sinners with a pitchfork. That is mythology my friend. Like you said, it's your opinion, but a rather naive one at that.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re:

if this is your interpretation of the Bible, you must be reading a sadly mistranslated version of it.

 

[kal-el]

Re:

if this is your interpretation of the Bible, you must be reading a sadly mistranslated version of it.

At least I'm free to think what I want. Your mind seems to be shackeled in this "mysterious" belief, that offers no precise explanations for events other than ,"supernatural" doings. Hence, no need for an explanation than. That's how these religious leaders maintain power,they spoonfeed an open-mouthed congregation into buying into the "mystical", or else, fear an eternity of damnation.

 

[DonRicardo]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

Homo sapiens neanderthalensis (Neandertal man) - 150 years ago Neandertal reconstructions were stooped and very much like an 'ape-man'. It is now admitted that the supposedly stooped posture was due to disease and that Neandertal is just a variation of the human kind.

Ramapithecus - once widely regarded as the ancestor of humans, it has now been realized that it is merely an extinct type of orangutan (an ape).

Eoanthropus (Piltdown man) - a hoax based on a human skull cap and an orangutan's jaw. It was widely publicized as the missing link for 40 years.

Hesperopithecus (Nebraska man) - based on a single tooth of a type of pig now only living in Paraguay.

Pithecanthropus (Java man) - now renamed to Homo erectus. See below.

Australopithecus africanus - this was at one time promoted as the missing link. It is no longer considered to be on the line from apes to humans. It is very ape-like.

Sinanthropus (Peking man) was once presented as an ape-man but has now been reclassified as Homo erectus (see below)

Australopithecus - there are various species of these that have been at times proclaimed as human ancestors. One remains: Australopithecus afarensis, popularly known as the fossil 'Lucy'. However, detailed studies of the inner ear, skulls and bones have suggested that 'Lucy' and her like are not on the way to becoming human. For example, they may have walked more upright than most apes, but not in the human manner. Australopithecus afarensis is very similar to the pygmy chimpanzee.

Homo habilis - there is a growing consensus amongst most paleoanthropologists that this category actually includes bits and pieces of various other types - such as Australopithecus and Homo erectus. It is therefore an 'invalid taxon'. That is, it never existed as such.

Homo erectus - many remains of this type have been found around the world. They are smaller than the average human today, with an appropriately smaller head (and brain size). However, the brain size is within the range of people today and studies of the middle ear have shown that Homo erectus was just like us. Remains have been found in the same strata and in close proximity to ordinary Homo sapiens, suggesting that they lived together.

There is no fossil proof that man is the product of evolution. Could it be that the missing links are still missing because they simply do not exist.
"Then the Lord God formed man of dust from the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living being" (Genesis 2:7).

http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-c008.html

Obviously your christian website is not up to date. http://www.handprint.com/LS/ANC/evol.html

This is no valid argument, because:
1. Chances are very small to find intact bones and skeletons. They must remain free from erosion and others. Natural events might have wiped them out. We are not able to dig at the bottom of the oceans. Every year 2cm of land dissapears in the oceans.
2. Some scientists claim 90 % of all animal races yet have to be discovered. Why would one claim so fast that the missing link will never be found?

What you say is not correct. Break a window. Smack it on the floor. If you claim you will find all pieces back and be able to reconstruct the window completely, you're wrong. Some pieces might eventually disappear - if you wait 100 years before repairing it.

I believe it is only a matter of time before such questions are solved. The Darwin problem (fish to land) has also already been solved.
Many people are not even aware of that.

Very interesting article :
http://www.bbc.co.uk/science/horizon/2000/missinglink_transcript.shtml

The irritation for palaeontologists was that no one had yet unearthed a transitional form between fish and our earliest ancestor with legs.

Ahlberg believes livoniana really is an elusive transitional form, almost exactly half fish and half tetrapod. It is certainly the only fossil yet discovered that shows the process of change between the two actually taking place. It also has one freakish feature: there are seven rows of teeth. It is unlike any other creature we know of. This suggests it must be one of the host of mutants that made this change, just one of which would eventually become our ancestor. Livoniana is a real missing link. Darwin's 360 million year old riddle about how we developed our legs has been solved.

It was vegetation on land and in the water that let flourish an explosion of mutations among lobe-finned fish. The most successful of these mutations, the one that stood the test of time, was the development of limbs with fingers and toes. In this new world of forest and rivers bordered by swamp a whole new way of life was born, for in these shallows the distinction between being in the water and out of it became blurred. It was out of this swampy area that our earliest ancestor came crawling over land. It was not pre-ordained, but chance, a series of evolutionary accidents, but it just so happened that that creature's children would indeed inherit the earth one day.

I recently even had persons who wrote books about the problem of the Darwin theory while it was solved back in 2002 (Ichthyostega).

One more question: Why do dolphin babies look like humans? If you deny evolution, there has to be a lot of more coincidence that man ressembles ape and dolphin babies. Just place your knee and elbow to the same direction. Pull up your pants so both arm and leg are naked. Place your hand next to your foot on the floor. Compare elbow to knee, foot to hand, and leg muscles with arm muscles.

Watch the giant hole behind your thumb. Our ancestors fingers diminued from 8 to 7 to 5. Now this explains why the thumb is fat unlike other fingers. It must be a composition of multiple grown fingers.

I'm sorry, but I cannot believe that you are actually doubting evolution.

I believe - as in the article - that man evolved from fish, who came to land and created fingers on their fins to escape larger fish in swamps.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re: Why do Athiests and other non-god believing people have a problem with religion/g

evidence by scientist on september 6 this year:
"Microevolution is possible; macroevolution is not. Of course there has been evolution among apes, though not to the point of speciation - the Dmanisi skulls are those of apes that evolved to the point where their skulls had some superficial similarities to those of some humans, but this does not mean that they were human or that they were human ancestors.

It is deeply significant that these animals died out, too (after all, there are no similar apes alive today): this indicates that such significant changes made them unsuited to survive. In short, the Dmanisi skulls are in themselves further evidence of the impossibility of macroevolution.
How was that? Anyone else got a better explanation?"
here is a recent agreement to that.

 

[dthmstr254]

Re:

it isnt very mysterious. just take the Bible at face value and, bang, mystery unraveled. i challenge you to read straight through the Bible just once, starting at Genesis, and going through the books till you get to Revelation.