I dream about evolution being true after getting some "signs" in real life
-
Ah, the apelike Lucy was a real woman! ;D
Moreover i DO REMEBER QUITE accurately the retile transisiton. I saw the patterns matching and even as i woke up it made perfect sense.
Nothing for it then, good luck with everything working out. I've never seen someone so into evolution though. Maybe Darwin.
-
Salam.
37102 And when he grew enough to work with him, he said "My son, I am seeing in a dream that I am sacrificing you. What do you think?" He said "O my father, do what you are commanded to do. You will find me, God willing, patient."
37103 So when they both had surrendered, and he put his forehead down.
37104 And We called him "O Abraham,"
37105 "You have believed the vision." It was such that We rewarded the righteous.
37106 Surely, this was an exacting test.37107 And We ransomed him with a great animal sacrifice.
37108 And We kept his history for those who came later.
37109 Peace be upon Abraham.
37110 It is thus that We reward the righteous.
37111 He was of Our believing servants.Abraham believed the vision.
Do you also believe the dream?
No offence.Peace.
-
Theory of evolution summarized
Dead matter (clay) + water + time (age of earth) = talking clay?
There are billions of forms of life each distinct and not one giant green glob.
al-Bad?'
http//wahiduddin.net/words/99_pages/badi_95.htm
The Wonderful Originator, The Unprecedented and Incomparable Inventor, The Absolute Cause
The One who creates in wonderful, awesome, amazingly original ways that have no precedent whatsoever.
-
peace Johnny
JK- Holes into creatinism, DEFINITELY. Into intellgent design? Well, that depends how you define "intelligent design". If you are from those ID believers who support the theory of "irreducible complexity", then id say yes there are holes in that. As for the "fine tune" argument of the entire universe, that stands solid and tht my derar friend is also a part if not the most importasnt part of ID. GOD Bless!
ID is just another name for creationism, unless you are saying that ID is "guided evolution."
If "fine tune" is what I think it is, then yes that stands firm.
Evolution, as I see it, is a fact. But there are 2 distinct interpretations of that fact. One is that evolution proves that everything is random and that there is no God. And the other is that evolution shows the intricate design of everything, and thus leads us to a belief in God.But that Family Guy clip was hilarious.
-
Peace "alen",
Salam.
37102 And when he grew enough to work with him, he said "My son, I am seeing in a dream that I am sacrificing you. What do you think?" He said "O my father, do what you are commanded to do. You will find me, God willing, patient."
37103 So when they both had surrendered, and he put his forehead down.
37104 And We called him "O Abraham,"
37105 "You have believed the vision." It was such that We rewarded the righteous.
37106 Surely, this was an exacting test.37107 And We ransomed him with a great animal sacrifice.
37108 And We kept his history for those who came later.
37109 Peace be upon Abraham.
37110 It is thus that We reward the righteous.
37111 He was of Our believing servants.Abraham believed the vision.
Do you also believe the dream?
No offence.Peace.
JK- Now aint tht amazing. I thought about tht verse too in this regard. However i have a real life incident to back my dream up too which i believe cannot be coincidence. Moreover we have scientific evidence of a strking microbiological pattern. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "phoenix1",
peace JohnnyID is just another name for creationism, unless you are saying that ID is "guided evolution."
JK- Yes thts exactly what i meant.
If "fine tune" is what I think it is, then yes that stands firm.
Evolution, as I see it, is a fact. But there are 2 distinct interpretations of that fact. One is that evolution proves that everything is random and that there is no God. And the other is that evolution shows the intricate design of everything, and thus leads us to a belief in God.JK- This is just as crazy as the creationist theory. According to fine tune the probability of the universe emerging by chance is 10^-150 meaning tht the chance tht theres no Intelligent Designer, who controls the evolution process here, is 1-10^-150 > 99.999999999999999999%. At 99.9996% everyone wld except tht the child is his on a DNA parent test. So it would be ludicrous to deny GOD on such a high probability. Infact it would be insanity. Infact evolution makes GOD even look more awesome. Think of an engineer who shoots out micro parts in such a way with such angles that they assemble both into the environment and the object(s) which are to emerge therein. However one muct also not forget tht the above low probability is only with the KNOWN constants of the universe. There can be much more. Infact when we look at it rationally we know that every particle needs to consist of a further smaller particle. Until now weve reached to quarks. Quantum fluctuations are also the successive vibration of particles which consist of further pparticles which consist of yet further ones and so on. In this case we have infinite complexity and thus it would require infinite intelligence to create such right here. GOD Bless!
-
Peace "nun de plume",
Theory of evolution summarized
Dead matter (clay) + water + time (age of earth) = talking clay?
JK- This is a gross misrepresentation. The dead matter ,water all have to be placed in such a way under such and such conditions in order for living things to emerge out of them.
There are billions of forms of life each distinct and not one giant green glob.
JK- Yes but they couldve all emerged from the same unit from which they diversified and thats what they most probably did. The microbiologicl pattern btw living things has added enormous proof to this phenomenom. Hence everytghing comes from One Source and there is no argument now that GOD is One.
al-Bad?'
http//wahiduddin.net/words/99_pages/badi_95.htm
The Wonderful Originator, The Unprecedented and Incomparable Inventor, The Absolute Cause
The One who creates in wonderful, awesome, amazingly original ways that have no precedent whatsoever.
JK- GOD indeed creates in the most wonderful way. Nobody should doubt that. The point is HOW did / does GOD continue His creation and the most reasonable by current scientific analysis is through the process of evolution. Evolution is the most exciting concept. Whenever i think of it i feel like being in a space ship travelling with my fellow humans to explore new worlds and understand the marvels of the universe. This is what i believe GOD wants us to do ultimately here in this universe. GOD Bless!
-
JK- This is a gross misrepresentation. The dead matter ,water all have to be placed in such a way under such and such conditions in order for living things to emerge out of them.
Peace jonny_k,
Yes and reason for the ? in the equation.
http//genetics.gsk.com/overview.htm#genome
"We have approximately three billion base pairs (6 billion bases total) of DNA in most of our cells. This complete set of genes is called a genome. With the exception of identical twins, the sequence of the bases is different for everyone, which makes each of us unique."
Indeed there are signs and even identical twins DO NOT have the same prints!
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC8kUPZEHAI
God bless!
-
Peace K,
Maybe those debates we've had will become a thing of the past, after this. handshake
-
Peace "nun de plume",
Peace jonny_k,
Yes and reason for the ? in the equation.
http//genetics.gsk.com/overview.htm#genome
"We have approximately three billion base pairs (6 billion bases total) of DNA in most of our cells. This complete set of genes is called a genome. With the exception of identical twins, the sequence of the bases is different for everyone, which makes each of us unique."
Indeed there are signs and even identical twins DO NOT have the same prints!
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=UC8kUPZEHAI
God bless!
JK- Ofcourse each of one is unique. That shows diversifacation right there doesnt it? This is exactly the idea of evolution that every offspring of a living creature is slightly different from the parents. GOD Bless!
-
Peace bro "andya",
Peace K,
Maybe those debates we've had will become a thing of the past, after this. handshake
JK- Absolutely im very confident about this. Everything finally seems to add up. It is something id never have expected myself but yet it happened. Tell me how many ppl on this planet have actually seen visions regarding evolution being true? All we hear is pschics, quackery and religious events like the virgin mary, etc. i cannot just put away this vision especially it's association with the real life event i experienced. GOD Bless!
-
Peace
Does not the second law of therodynamics refute evolution.Also the Anthropic principle poses problems.Also do not mutations create defects instead of good conditions.The theory of evolution as formed by Darwin must be taken into its imperailst context.Though the modern theory of evolution is diferent from darwin's.I personally neither denie nor accept evolution.On the basis of the Quran evolution is supurtable since the Quran calls God the "evolver".Still therodynamics which I think is considered a fact by sceintists does pose probelms.The anthropic principle also makes things alittle complecated for belivers of the theory.And mutations have posed such a major probelm that some darwinists now denie transitanal forms to save the theory from distorction.Overall their is alot of evidence both for and agianst evolution.If you look at the evidence above it is easy to denie evolution.But it just depends on how you use the evidence ).
Lareb
-
Peace
Does not the second law of therodynamics refute evolution.Also the Anthropic principle poses problems.Also do not mutations create defects instead of good conditions.The theory of evolution as formed by Darwin must be taken into its imperailst context.Though the modern theory of evolution is diferent from darwin's.I personally neither denie nor accept evolution.On the basis of the Quran evolution is supurtable since the Quran calls God the "evolver".Still therodynamics which I think is considered a fact by sceintists does pose probelms.The anthropic principle also makes things alittle complecated for belivers of the theory.And mutations have posed such a major probelm that some darwinists now denie transitanal forms to save the theory from distorction.Overall their is alot of evidence both for and agianst evolution.If you look at the evidence above it is easy to denie evolution.But it just depends on how you use the evidence .
Lareb
-
Peace
Does not the second law of therodynamics refute evolution.Also the Anthropic principle poses problems.Also do not mutations create defects instead of good conditions.The theory of evolution as formed by Darwin must be taken into its imperailst context.Though the modern theory of evolution is diferent from darwin's.I personally neither denie nor accept evolution.On the basis of the Quran evolution is supurtable since the Quran calls God the "evolver".Still therodynamics which I think is considered a fact by sceintists does pose probelms.The anthropic principle also makes things alittle complecated for belivers of the theory.And mutations have posed such a major probelm that some darwinists now denie transitanal forms to save the theory from distorction.Overall their is alot of evidence both for and agianst evolution.If you look at the evidence above it is easy to denie evolution.But it just depends on how you use the evidence ).
peace
-
Sorry i didnt mean to have 3 textboxes.My bad.I hope you dont mind.
peace
-
Peace
Does not the second law of therodynamics refute evolution.Also the Anthropic principle poses problems.Also do not mutations create defects instead of good conditions.The theory of evolution as formed by Darwin must be taken into its imperailst context.Though the modern theory of evolution is diferent from darwin's.I personally neither denie nor accept evolution.On the basis of the Quran evolution is supurtable since the Quran calls God the "evolver".Still therodynamics which I think is considered a fact by sceintists does pose probelms.The anthropic principle also makes things alittle complecated for belivers of the theory.And mutations have posed such a major probelm that some darwinists now denie transitanal forms to save the theory from distorction.Overall their is alot of evidence both for and agianst evolution.If you look at the evidence above it is easy to denie evolution.But it just depends on how you use the evidence .
peace
Peace L.H.,
-second law doesn't refute evolution because life is not a closed system.
-anthropic principle doesn't refute evolution because it only shows that humans are fine-tuned to the universe.
-most mutations are neutral, the damaging ones don't tend to get inherited but the beneficial ones does.
-forcing to attach imperialism to evolution is just like attaching terrorism to Islam or something like that.
-what darwinists deny transitional forms? transitional fossils do exist. I use one for my avatar here.I invite you to learn more about evolution from talkorigins.org
-
Astrophysicist Paul Davies
?There is no doubt that, even in the crude form, the hypothesis of an intelligent designer
applied to the laws of nature is far superior then the designer considered in the previous
section (of his book red.), who violates the laws of nature from time to time by working
miracles in evolutionary history. Design-by-laws is incomparably more intelligent than
design-by-miracles.If I were an omnipotent being who wanted to make an inhabited
universe like ours, and I could achieve this simply by conjuring up what I wanted when I
wanted it, I wouldn?t regard my activities as very clever. But to select a set of laws that,
without nay periodic fixing up and micromanagment, can bring a universe into being and
bring about self-organisation, self-complexification and self-assembly of life and
conciousness-well, that looks very clever indeed! So the ?intelligent?design beloved of the
Intelligent Design movement strikes me as not very intelligent at all, in contrast to a
designer of laws of nature which by themselves have such astonishing creative ability
without the need for intervention and miracles. Intelligent design of the laws does not
conflict with science, because it accepts that the whole universe runs itself according to
physical laws, and that everything that happens in the universe has a natural
explanation.There are no miracles other than the miracle of nature itself. You don?t
even need a miracle to bring the universe into existence in the first place, because the big
bang may be brought within to explain the origin of the universe from nothing, or by
assuming something like eternal inflation. The designer-of-laws is responsible for the
universe, and might be thought of as upholding its existence at every moment, but does
not tinker with its day to day operation. The type of God I am describing comes close, I
think, to what many scholarly theologians-and for that matter quite a few scientistsprofess
to believe in.?Page 226. The Goldilocks Enigma by Paul Davies, 2006.