Hmmmm....Completely incorrect? Also what stories are you referring to when it says Man was created first and Man was created last?

The Church of Satan Bible does not count. I must have missed that story in the bible that you are talking about. Did you not read the two wall of words above this? They seem to have everything covered.

Lol! I guess I did. Because I do not remember anything about what you are saying. I do remember the first chapter, which I can agree with you on.

So your Parents pushed religion on you , and now that you are 18 you said enough is enough? Or you went to college and your professor said enough is enough, "This is what I want you to believe". Is that the gist of it?

This conversation has no purpose. We have plenty of is God real threads laying dormant in the database. I am sure a Mod will allow it to be opened up. This is a thread that is based on the assumption that God is real, the bible is real, and evolution is real as well. You can be an atheist and believe that Christians should accept it. You can say that if you are a christian then you cannot accept it. Or you can be a Christian and do the same thing. That is pretty much the "gist of it" pending a few other variables that I am sure will be pointed out at some time.

This is not a bible is incorrect thread.

So at this point I stick my tongue out and say good day sir!

Joelcool7 said:
Well I don't have time to read every page. This is often because atheists and many Scientists bundle all of Evolution theory with fact.

Evolution occurs and within a species is fact. However their is little evidence of a species completely changing into another. Most evidence is circumstantial. Many also don't believe much of what scientists say because they are often wrong. In history how much Science still remains proven fact? Not much.

So you reject all of science then? That's a pretty extreme position

Also the fossil record is inconsistent. Species are found on a regular basis that are supposed to be extinct some over 400 million years ago. Yet their found living and breathing today. So when a scientist says this animal was.extinct 400 million years ago or a billion years ago not many take them seriously.

'Meant' to be extinct? The theory of evolution can't say when a species is meant to die out? Are you referring to living fossils, species which have not evolved much over a very long period of time? If there is no natural of sexual pressure on these species to evolve then species will quite likely remain largely the same over long periods.

Abiogenesis and Big Bang theory are both unlikely to ever be recognized. Because they are used to disprove God which they might but they also might not.

Abiogenesis and the Big Bang are not part of the theory of evolution.

Many Christians today support Micro Evolution and even convergent evolution. They will not support anything that is scientific theory. Only fact.

Like so many other people you misunderstand the meanings of fact and theory in science. In science fact is an observation, theory is an explanation of that observation. As such in science evolution is considered both a theory and a fact, the fact is the observed evolution throughout the fossil record. The theory is the explanation behind this consisting of things like natural selection.

Christians often hold a view that the English translation Genesis is completely fact. If they read the actual Hebrew and other translations. Their is reason to believe that the story was fact but not as the English translation necessarily says.

The Genesis story does not explain in detail how God created the earth. So much theology and interpretation involved. No believer in any belief system is going to be swayed by anything not entirely proven in fact. As such Atheists and Christians and Jews, Muslims they will never be swayed and science will never prove God does or does not exist.

Joelcool7 said:
Well I don't have time to read every page. This is often because atheists and many Scientists bundle all of Evolution theory with fact.

That's because the occurance of evolution is a fact, the theory of evolution by natural selection explains the fact. This is basic science. A theory doesn't then turn into a fact once it's proven, a theory gives explanations for facts. 

Evolution occurs and within a species is fact. However their is little evidence of a species completely changing into another. Actually, there is a lot of evidence, we've found many transitional forms, even by it's strictest definition. Homologous structures? For example: In the calf of humans is the Plantaris muscle, it looks like a ligament due to it's length and width, but with the use of a microscope, we can see it's made out of muscle tissue. Heart surgeons usually harvest this muscle when needing extra muscle tissure for heart surgery, and after removal there is no effect on the patients walking or balance, at all. But although this muscle is useless in humans, the same muscle is much more developed in other primates and serves an important purpose. This muscle allows other primates to grasp with their feet. This is just one out of the huge amounts of examples of a homologous structure that acts as evidence of common ancestry of humans and other primates, this is macro-evolution. 

Most of the evidence is found in genetics. Here is a massive compilation of the evidence for macro evolution: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

And with a quick google I've found that macro-evolution has been observed: http://www.dbskeptic.com/2008/06/21/macro-evolution-observed-in-the-laboratory/

Most evidence is circumstantial. Many also don't believe much of what scientists say because they are often wrong. In history how much Science still remains proven fact? Not much. We improve our understanding based on new evidence, the only instances where it changes drastically is something that isn't a proven fact, like the world being flat. E.g. Evolution is a fact, and though incredibly unlikely, if another theory were to replace Darwins, this wouldn't disprove evolution, it is still a fact that evolution occurs, what this would do is change our understanding of HOW it occurs.

Also the fossil record is inconsistent. Species are found on a regular basis that are supposed to be extinct some over 400 million years ago. Yet their found living and breathing today. So when a scientist says this animal was.extinct 400 million years ago or a billion years ago not many take them seriously. Urgh, I'm just getting sick of these fossil record arguements. The fossil record isn't inconsistent, your understanding of it is. It'd be great if you could watch all of this, but for a specific part of the fossil record skip to 7:00:  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w57_P9DZJ4&list=PLD07D73CD6333903F&index=3&feature=plpp_video 

Abiogenesis and Big Bang theory are both unlikely to ever be recognized. Because they are used to disprove God which they might but they also might not. "Are both unlikely to ever be recognized"? By who? You? This has nothing to do with evolution, and I doubt I'm educated enough on these topics to argue either way, so I'm not getting into this.

Many Christians today support Micro Evolution and even convergent evolution. They will not support anything that is scientific theory. Only fact.

Again, observations are facts, a scientific theory is the explanation of these observations. People like this won't support scientific theory because they don't know what a scientific theory is. You demonstrated this clearly.

Christians often hold a view that the English translation Genesis is completely fact. If they read the actual Hebrew and other translations. Their is reason to believe that the story was fact but not as the English translation necessarily says.

The Genesis story does not explain in detail how God created the earth. So much theology and interpretation involved. No believer in any belief system is going to be swayed by anything not entirely proven in fact. As such Atheists and Christians and Jews, Muslims they will never be swayed and science will never prove God does or does not exist.