So the big question here is how do you think human life as we know it started was it  Creationism: The belief  that everything there ever was,is and will be like life and the universe was all created by a supernatural being.The most famous the Abrahamic God creating Adam and Eve. Evolution: The belief that humans today evolved from primitive ape like creatures over thousands of years. or the lesser known and appreciated Ancient Astronaut theory:  the belief that human life and culture was created or influenced by extraterrestrial lifeforms. also that most of religious deities are actually extraterrestrial and that there advanced  technology was misunderstood by primitive man thus giving them a divine status Please give honest answers and try not to bash another's belief. 

---

I believe in Evolution and the Ancient Astronaut Theory, but mostly Evolution. I think Ancient Astronaut Theorists have very interesting ideas, and, being a huge believer in aliens, I'm really into them, but not the totally outrageous ones.

---

being a huge believer in aliens, I'm really into them, but not the totally outrageous ones.

lol

Evolution: The belief that humans today evolved from primitive ape like creatures over thousands of years.

This is what we have the most evidence for. Abiogenesis is, IIRC, the most likely way that life first began on Earth, according to science. 

---

(bump)

---

"MikhailTal" wrote:

being a huge believer in aliens, I'm really into them, but not the totally outrageous ones.

lol

Evolution: The belief that humans today evolved from primitive ape like creatures over thousands of years.

This is what we have the most evidence for. Abiogenesis is, IIRC, the most likely way that life first began on Earth, according to science.

Of course, two things kind of backtrack Evolution. 1. second word in the grand title of Evolution. "The THEORY Of Evolution" 2. Darwin doubted Evolution, but because smart people liked it, we just ran with it! Putting ape bones and human bones togather to make L.U.C.Y. I eman, there have been so many hoax attempts and so very few Eolvutionary cases where they do not contradict other aspects of DNA or Evolution. (and even at that they can be proven wrong by small scale Adaptation)

---

"AlphaT" wrote:

"MikhailTal" wrote:

being a huge believer in aliens, I'm really into them, but not the totally outrageous ones.

lol

Evolution: The belief that humans today evolved from primitive ape like creatures over thousands of years.

This is what we have the most evidence for. Abiogenesis is, IIRC, the most likely way that life first began on Earth, according to science.

Of course, two things kind of backtrack Evolution. 1. second word in the grand title of Evolution. "The THEORY Of Evolution" 2. Darwin doubted Evolution, but because smart people liked it, we just ran with it! Putting ape bones and human bones togather to make L.U.C.Y.

lol'd

---

"MikhailTal" wrote:

"AlphaT" wrote:

"MikhailTal" wrote:

being a huge believer in aliens, I'm really into them, but not the totally outrageous ones.

lol

Evolution: The belief that humans today evolved from primitive ape like creatures over thousands of years.

This is what we have the most evidence for. Abiogenesis is, IIRC, the most likely way that life first began on Earth, according to science.

Of course, two things kind of backtrack Evolution. 1. second word in the grand title of Evolution. "The THEORY Of Evolution" 2. Darwin doubted Evolution, but because smart people liked it, we just ran with it! Putting ape bones and human bones togather to make L.U.C.Y.

lol'd

Yeah comment my other one (I acidently hit enter)

---

Yeah comment my other one (I acidently hit enter)

k

Of course, two things kind of backtrack Evolution.1. second word in the grand title of Evolution. "The THEORY Of Evolution"2. Darwin doubted Evolution, but because smart people liked it, we just ran with it! Putting ape bones and human bones togather to make L.U.C.Y.I eman, there have been so many hoax attempts and so very few Eolvutionary cases where they do not contradict other aspects of DNA or Evolution. (and even at that they can be proven wrong by small scale Adaptation)

lol'd To anyone who thinks his comedic post is legitimate: Scientific theory =/= collolquial use of theory Darwin didn't doubt evolution, but was a skeptic, as every (good) scientist is. 

---

Before you make your re-post, AlphaT "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” "“When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei,2 as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.”"

---

"MikhailTal" wrote:

Before you make your re-post, AlphaT "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree.” "“When it was first said that the sun stood still and the world turned round, the common sense of mankind declared the doctrine false; but the old saying of Vox populi, vox Dei,2 as every philosopher knows, cannot be trusted in science. Reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a simple and imperfect eye to one complex and perfect can be shown to exist, each grade being useful to its possessor, as is certainly the case; if further, the eye ever varies and the variations be inherited, as is likewise certainly the case; and if such variations should be useful to any animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, should not be considered as subversive of the theory.”"

wtheck? Wait I remember that from Darwins Book, it was included in " Arguements Christians Shoudlnt Make" By answersingenesis...why is this directed to me, furthermore what do you mean by repost?

---