Question for atheists?

Since you are willing to accept the fossil record, perhaps you could explain the lack of modern animal forms in the early fossil record. Do you believe that god simply places new animals on the earth when he gets the urge?

My answer? You don't have the foggiest of how evolution tends to work. First off, of course transitional fossils are harder to find. Changes in species tend to either be horrendously slow or take place with a small isolated pocket of the species, meaning there would be few individuals existing during the "transitional" period and therefore few would be fossilized. When situations other then that occur the changes are very subtle and take place over such a large period of time they're not really noticeable until the small changes have built up to a big change over time.

I'd probably be able to give a better answer, but for some reason You've asked me and people in religion and spirituality instead of asking it in the science section where it belongs. And thats ignoring your idiocy in associating this with anything to do with the existence of god or not.

"Atheists like to cite the absence of something as being evidence of something else, so...

Here's a taste of your own medicine! Do I have to explain EVERYTHING to you guys?"

Hm, odd. I don't remember dispensing ten milligrams of nonsense lately.

Excuse me, but where did you come up with this notion that evolution must demonstrate "steady progress." The evolutionary theory does not require steady progress. It does not even necessarily require progress for long periods of time. For example, the evolutionary record shows that sharks have remained virtually unchanged for many millions of years. Is this evidence that the evolutionary theory is not valid. No. It is at most evidence that there have not been circumstances that have required the shark to change in order to survive and flourish.

Instead of being a matter of steady progress, the evolutionary record will almost invariably show precisely what you have described: transitional species going through a series of rapid, radical changes, followed by periods of stability.

I am intelligent.

You are right. Evolution is a bunch of bunk, bs, nonsense...pure stupidity.

Ok...is Evolution now off the discussion table? I hope so because I just tossed it to the floor.

Now. Nothing else has changed.

Christians still worship a supreme being that is a baby killer.

Egypt's first born...Amalikites....Flood....she bears sent to murder 40 children...etc...etc..

I don't care about your excuses for worshipping a baby killer. Don't care about your sick minded justifications for why a supreme being can and does murder innocent babies and children. I don't care to hear any defenses for a baby killer.

Yet you still seem to think I need to drop to my knees beside you and worship a baby killer. And christians have in the past severely punished those who spit on the bible's baby murdering god.

You also take offense to my pointing out the truth. You would silence me if you could because you actually do know that worshipping a baby killer is not only stupid, but highly immoral...and quite evil as well.

I do not need anything other than the clear truth to prove that the bible's baby murdering, emotional wreck of a god does not exist.

So I just want to talk about this topic. The topic of the bible god being a baby killer.

I bet you would like to put Evolution back up on the table now wouldn't you?

Much easier to be the attacker...I mean, really, would you actually take the time to defend your belief in and worship of a baby killer?

No. You will run away. And most likely report my response so you can remove the truth from your sight and preserve your nutty faith.

One more thing...keep the bible's baby murderer away from my children please. I am trying to raise them to be good and moral people who know that baby killers are not worthy of worship.

Thanks...

Tell me how many religions there are that say this type of stuff, all the way back in time, name them, and how many of them contradict each other (all of them...), and then, tell me how you can prove which one is right based on which is the most reasonable. Now, after doing this, tell me, is there a very big possibility that any religion makes any sense compared to others? I doubt it. You're overlooking a lot of things my friend.

I'm not stating the absence of anything; I'm stating what's present, and that's the amount of religions, gods, deities, and prophecies there are in the world; too many to count. Maybe you should examine the fact that religion dates back to the start of time, and it's been changing ever since, so you can safely assume that since the beginning of time, because there is no current proof of any God recorded, yet conclusions still change, that no religions are correct.

Most of the preamble to the questions was nonsense.

Q1

"Who created the creator?"

You people answer that with 'he was always there'.

That's not an answer that sits comfortably with anyone having critical thinking skills.

It's actually nonsense.

I claim the universe was always there.

Please prove me wrong.

Q2.

"Why do atheists expect theist to wait decades or possibly centuries for science to eventually catch up to atheists' unproven conclusions like the one above?"

Unlike you people REAL scientists don't follow a nonsense book that has stupid claims like, birds' blood cures leprosy, a man can walk on water or live in a fish for three days, snakes and donkeys can talk, etc, ad nauseam.

No, today's scientists actually look for evidence.

So far there is NO evidence of your imaginary little space chum.

Produce a god, for god's sake... ANY god.

~

Why do atheists expect theist to wait decades or possibly centuries for science to eventually catch up to atheists' unproven conclusions like the one above?

Well first of all research takes time, when you ask the question we cant immediately have a answer unless we researched it before.

Evolution isn't about changing from species A to B, it's about survival for that species. If the living organism's current state is ideal for its environment, then likely it'll stay.

As for unproven, evolution still has more evidence than any god. That's what makes it more believable. If evolution had zero evidence, it wouldn't have much validity.

I would like to cite the absence of evidence of your ability to think rationally as evidence that you currently don't.

You are the one who needs to do research; they just recently found a bunch of transitional fossils.