Scientific proof that God exists?

[BADecker]

BOMBSHELL: “Consensus” theory of evolution of the species falls apart; new mitochondrial DNA study reveals NO animal species more than 200,000 years old

A surprising new study is casting serious doubt on the popular theory that modern animals are the result of millions of years of evolution. After looking at the mitochondrial DNA of thousands of animal species, including humans, researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.

The study was carried out by the University of Basel’s David S. Thaler and The Rockefeller University’s Mark Young Stoeckle. According to the conventional narrative of evolution involving adaption based on genetic mutations and survival of the fittest, one would expect older species and those with big populations spread across the planet to have greater genetic variation. However, the researchers actually found that 90 percent of the animal species have mitochondrial DNA variation that is similarly low.

Read more at https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-06-10-bombshell-consensus-theory-of-evolution-of-the-species-falls-apart-new-mitochondrial-dna.html.

[aicel]

The universe and all of being  are the proof that God exist even the thingd that cannot be seen

[Astargath]

BOMBSHELL: “Consensus” theory of evolution of the species falls apart; new mitochondrial DNA study reveals NO animal species more than 200,000 years old

A surprising new study is casting serious doubt on the popular theory that modern animals are the result of millions of years of evolution. After looking at the mitochondrial DNA of thousands of animal species, including humans, researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.

The study was carried out by the University of Basel’s David S. Thaler and The Rockefeller University’s Mark Young Stoeckle. According to the conventional narrative of evolution involving adaption based on genetic mutations and survival of the fittest, one would expect older species and those with big populations spread across the planet to have greater genetic variation. However, the researchers actually found that 90 percent of the animal species have mitochondrial DNA variation that is similarly low.

Read more at https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-06-10-bombshell-consensus-theory-of-evolution-of-the-species-falls-apart-new-mitochondrial-dna.html.

Wait, are you trying to disprove the existence of your god Yahweh? You think the bible and the world are like 6000 years old, the article says ''researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.'' So thanks for disproving Yahweh.

[QuestionAuthority]

BOMBSHELL: “Consensus” theory of evolution of the species falls apart; new mitochondrial DNA study reveals NO animal species more than 200,000 years old

A surprising new study is casting serious doubt on the popular theory that modern animals are the result of millions of years of evolution. After looking at the mitochondrial DNA of thousands of animal species, including humans, researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.

The study was carried out by the University of Basel’s David S. Thaler and The Rockefeller University’s Mark Young Stoeckle. According to the conventional narrative of evolution involving adaption based on genetic mutations and survival of the fittest, one would expect older species and those with big populations spread across the planet to have greater genetic variation. However, the researchers actually found that 90 percent of the animal species have mitochondrial DNA variation that is similarly low.

Read more at https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-06-10-bombshell-consensus-theory-of-evolution-of-the-species-falls-apart-new-mitochondrial-dna.html.

Wait, are you trying to disprove the existence of your god Yahweh? You think the bible and the world are like 6000 years old, the article says ''researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.'' So thanks for disproving Yahweh.

LOL You’re right, BADecker just disproved the Bible.

[monsmons]

What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam

 Genetic scientists seem to be in general agreement that we are all descendants of one woman and one man. This research was fairly recent, starting about 1978. They, of course, do not believe in the creation story of Adam and Eve in the Bible, but their conclusions are getting closer and closer.

In case you have not heard about this, it makes very interesting reading. But I think it raises a number of profound challenges to the Theory of Evolution.

The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html

just open Quran and read. Everything will be clear.

[storonaa]

What do you think?
Please share your opinion about this article.


101 Proofs For God

A growing list of common sense Proofs for God.

Proof for God, #65 Mitochondrial Eve and Y-Chromosome Adam
The scientists base the above conclusions on the known facts of human reproduction, specifically on properties of the sperm and egg. .....
Full article read here: http://101proofsforgod.blogspot.com/2014/07/65-mitochondial-eve-and-y-chromosome.html

just open Quran and read. Everything will be clear.

also recommend that.

[BADecker]

BOMBSHELL: “Consensus” theory of evolution of the species falls apart; new mitochondrial DNA study reveals NO animal species more than 200,000 years old

A surprising new study is casting serious doubt on the popular theory that modern animals are the result of millions of years of evolution. After looking at the mitochondrial DNA of thousands of animal species, including humans, researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.

The study was carried out by the University of Basel’s David S. Thaler and The Rockefeller University’s Mark Young Stoeckle. According to the conventional narrative of evolution involving adaption based on genetic mutations and survival of the fittest, one would expect older species and those with big populations spread across the planet to have greater genetic variation. However, the researchers actually found that 90 percent of the animal species have mitochondrial DNA variation that is similarly low.

Read more at https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-06-10-bombshell-consensus-theory-of-evolution-of-the-species-falls-apart-new-mitochondrial-dna.html.

Wait, are you trying to disprove the existence of your god Yahweh? You think the bible and the world are like 6000 years old, the article says ''researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.'' So thanks for disproving Yahweh.

LOL You’re right, BADecker just disproved the Bible.

Just the opposite. Trying to show you jokers that science is finding out that their misguided theories and assumptions about where things came from are just what they are... misguided. It is turning our that former science was not nearly knowledgeable enough to determine anything. And now that we are getting more accurate science, we are moving toward finding out that the Bible is 100% accurate.

You watch. In a few years science will prove multitudes of things that show that God exists and that the Bible is right... even if it is done by proving that their own theories are all wrong... just like mitochondrial science proves that essentially all life can be no older than about 200,000 years.

[Astargath]

BOMBSHELL: “Consensus” theory of evolution of the species falls apart; new mitochondrial DNA study reveals NO animal species more than 200,000 years old

A surprising new study is casting serious doubt on the popular theory that modern animals are the result of millions of years of evolution. After looking at the mitochondrial DNA of thousands of animal species, including humans, researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.

The study was carried out by the University of Basel’s David S. Thaler and The Rockefeller University’s Mark Young Stoeckle. According to the conventional narrative of evolution involving adaption based on genetic mutations and survival of the fittest, one would expect older species and those with big populations spread across the planet to have greater genetic variation. However, the researchers actually found that 90 percent of the animal species have mitochondrial DNA variation that is similarly low.

Read more at https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-06-10-bombshell-consensus-theory-of-evolution-of-the-species-falls-apart-new-mitochondrial-dna.html.

Wait, are you trying to disprove the existence of your god Yahweh? You think the bible and the world are like 6000 years old, the article says ''researchers reached the stunning conclusion that nearly every species dates back just 100,000 to 200,000 years.'' So thanks for disproving Yahweh.

LOL You’re right, BADecker just disproved the Bible.

Just the opposite. Trying to show you jokers that science is finding out that their misguided theories and assumptions about where things came from are just what they are... misguided. It is turning our that former science was not nearly knowledgeable enough to determine anything. And now that we are getting more accurate science, we are moving toward finding out that the Bible is 100% accurate.

You watch. In a few years science will prove multitudes of things that show that God exists and that the Bible is right... even if it is done by proving that their own theories are all wrong... just like mitochondrial science proves that essentially all life can be no older than about 200,000 years.

You said you believe that God created Earth 6000 years ago.  You don't see a problem in what you believe and what the article says?

It seems to me that most of the times he doesn't really understand his own arguments, it's just the delusion in his head.

[BADecker]

Just the opposite. Trying to show you jokers that science is finding out that their misguided theories and assumptions about where things came from are just what they are... misguided. It is turning our that former science was not nearly knowledgeable enough to determine anything. And now that we are getting more accurate science, we are moving toward finding out that the Bible is 100% accurate.

You watch. In a few years science will prove multitudes of things that show that God exists and that the Bible is right... even if it is done by proving that their own theories are all wrong... just like mitochondrial science proves that essentially all life can be no older than about 200,000 years.

You said you believe that God created Earth 6000 years ago.  You don't see a problem in what you believe and what the article says?

No problem at all. Why not? At least 2 reasons:
1. Secular science says it. If secular science said they found solid evidence "that God created the earth 6000 years ago," I'd be shocked;
2. Science has long thought that life appeared possibly millions of years ago. Now they have found out that life couldn't have appeared over about 200,000 years ago. So, why should I be upset that science is finally moving in the direction of the truth? Obviously they aren't there yet, and that's too bad. But the fact that they are finally going in the right direction is applaudable.

You couple of jokers can't even seem to wrap yourselves around the idea that secular science is proving that its former ideas (which you BELIEVE in) are wrong. Soon they will get down to 100,000 years; then 50,000 years; then they might even start to say that everything before the time of Christ is halo images, and we honest folk will have to start proving that the pyramids are really thousands of years older than only 2,000 years.

[Astargath]

Just the opposite. Trying to show you jokers that science is finding out that their misguided theories and assumptions about where things came from are just what they are... misguided. It is turning our that former science was not nearly knowledgeable enough to determine anything. And now that we are getting more accurate science, we are moving toward finding out that the Bible is 100% accurate.

You watch. In a few years science will prove multitudes of things that show that God exists and that the Bible is right... even if it is done by proving that their own theories are all wrong... just like mitochondrial science proves that essentially all life can be no older than about 200,000 years.

You said you believe that God created Earth 6000 years ago.  You don't see a problem in what you believe and what the article says?

No problem at all. Why not? At least 2 reasons:
1. Secular science says it. If secular science said they found solid evidence "that God created the earth 6000 years ago," I'd be shocked;
2. Science has long thought that life appeared possibly millions of years ago. Now they have found out that life couldn't have appeared over about 200,000 years ago. So, why should I be upset that science is finally moving in the direction of the truth? Obviously they aren't there yet, and that's too bad. But the fact that they are finally going in the right direction is applaudable.

You couple of jokers can't even seem to wrap yourselves around the idea that secular science is proving that its former ideas (which you BELIEVE in) are wrong. Soon they will get down to 100,000 years; then 50,000 years; then they might even start to say that everything before the time of Christ is halo images, and we honest folk will have to start proving that the pyramids are really thousands of years older than only 2,000 years.

Unfortunately for you, they were only talking about life, not earth. Maybe life couldn't have appeared over 200.000 years ago but earth is still far older, let alone the universe. ''Soon they will get down to 100,000 years; then 50,000 years'' And you know this how?

Let's not talk about evolution, let's talk about your trash argument, you claim we are designed but you never explain how you know something is designed or not.

[BADecker]

Let's not talk about evolution, let's talk about your trash argument, you claim we are designed but you never explain how you know something is designed or not.

But I am not the focus.

Since you don't seem to know that things were designed simply by looking at them, you really need to go back to school to learn about designing.

[Astargath]

Let's not talk about evolution, let's talk about your trash argument, you claim we are designed but you never explain how you know something is designed or not.

But I am not the focus.

Since you don't seem to know that things were designed simply by looking at them, you really need to go back to school to learn about designing.

I do know the things that are designed by looking at them. I know a house and a watch are designed by people, that's it. Your conclusion is: People design things therefore anything that's not designed by people has to be designed by someone else. A conclusion that makes no sense because you don't explain how you know when something is designed or not. I know when something is designed because I have seen humans do it, have you seen gods designing things?

[BADecker]

Let's not talk about evolution, let's talk about your trash argument, you claim we are designed but you never explain how you know something is designed or not.

But I am not the focus.

Since you don't seem to know that things were designed simply by looking at them, you really need to go back to school to learn about designing.

I do know the things that are designed by looking at them. I know a house and a watch are designed by people, that's it. Your conclusion is: People design things therefore anything that's not designed by people has to be designed by someone else. A conclusion that makes no sense because you don't explain how you know when something is designed or not. I know when something is designed because I have seen humans do it, have you seen gods designing things?

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

[Astargath]

Let's not talk about evolution, let's talk about your trash argument, you claim we are designed but you never explain how you know something is designed or not.

But I am not the focus.

Since you don't seem to know that things were designed simply by looking at them, you really need to go back to school to learn about designing.

I do know the things that are designed by looking at them. I know a house and a watch are designed by people, that's it. Your conclusion is: People design things therefore anything that's not designed by people has to be designed by someone else. A conclusion that makes no sense because you don't explain how you know when something is designed or not. I know when something is designed because I have seen humans do it, have you seen gods designing things?

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

How do you know that we designed them, tho?

[BADecker]

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

How do you know that we designed them, tho?

If you can't even explain what your "them" is, how is anyone supposed to answer your question? Since you are afraid to express yourself clearly, for fear that you won't be able to respond against an answer appropriately, why not simply accept the fact that there is design in everything? - design, indicating that there is a Designer.

[Astargath]

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

How do you know that we designed them, tho?

If you can't even explain what your "them" is, how is anyone supposed to answer your question? Since you are afraid to express yourself clearly, for fear that you won't be able to respond against an answer appropriately, why not simply accept the fact that there is design in everything? - design, indicating that there is a Designer.

Your argument says that we know plants or rocks are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. Does a plant use the mechanism inside of a bottle of water? How does your argument work exactly?

[BADecker]

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

How do you know that we designed them, tho?

If you can't even explain what your "them" is, how is anyone supposed to answer your question? Since you are afraid to express yourself clearly, for fear that you won't be able to respond against an answer appropriately, why not simply accept the fact that there is design in everything? - design, indicating that there is a Designer.

Your argument says that we know plants or rocks are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. Does a plant use the mechanism inside of a bottle of water? How does your argument work exactly?

"Does a plant use the mechanism inside of a bottle of water?" Some of them, especially if you grow the plant along with the water inside the bottle. What are you even talking about?

[Astargath]

Complex design.

Inner Life Of A Cell - Full Version.mkv

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKW4F0Nu-UY

How do we know it is design? Because it uses all the mechanisms inside the things that we design, plus a whole lot more. In addition, it is more highly miniaturized than we can make things of complex operation that is this complex. In fact, the complexity and miniaturization is so great, that the designer would only fit our definition of "God." And indeed, our definition is extremely weak when compared to what God really is.

If complexity in the universe is something that comes by accident or randomness, then that is why we aren't getting anywhere near as great as this video complexity, in our design of things, right? After all, we don't use randomness when we design. And few of our great designs come about by accident. But when they do, they can't hold a candle next to the midday sun with regard to the design of nature.

How do you know that we designed them, tho?

If you can't even explain what your "them" is, how is anyone supposed to answer your question? Since you are afraid to express yourself clearly, for fear that you won't be able to respond against an answer appropriately, why not simply accept the fact that there is design in everything? - design, indicating that there is a Designer.

Your argument says that we know plants or rocks are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. Does a plant use the mechanism inside of a bottle of water? How does your argument work exactly?

"Does a plant use the mechanism inside of a bottle of water?" Some of them, especially if you grow the plant along with the water inside the bottle. What are you even talking about?

Your argument says we know plants, rocks, planets are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. We designed water bottles, what's the mechanism of a water bottle and how does it relate to the other things you claim god designed?

[Johnsonyu]

Scientists are not gods and even they fail to prove that God exists.. Are they the one that made both visible and invisible things. I know that God exists

[BADecker]

Your argument says we know plants, rocks, planets are designed because it uses the mechanism inside the things that we design. We designed water bottles, what's the mechanism of a water bottle and how does it relate to the other things you claim god designed?

Why do you think a water bottle has a mechanism?