Zinalu

Many, not just one since many have their own beliefs that doesn't neccesarily overlap with other religious beliefs. Don't be silly, obviously it doesn't state it like that, I read an article long ago about a woman who refused to go through an abortion of her dead fetus due to her beliefs ( couldn't find it now tough ), tough many doctors who are religious refuse to proceed with abortions that are lifethreatening to the mother http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9680528/The-death-of-Savita-Halappanavar-after-she-was-denied-an-abortion-will-divide-Ireland.html https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/feb/18/michigan-catholic-hospital-women-miscarriage-abortion-mercy-health-partners http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3027599/Jehovah-s-Witness-baby-die-refuses-blood-transfusion-seven-months-pregnant-cancer-80-chance-surviving-treatment.html

YES, certainly some of the religions out there, it prevents so much healthcare, freedom, learning etc, like some religions forbid abortions whatever happens, even if the baby is dead and the mother will die from the dead baby, I mean, come on, it's not an abortion anymore if the baby isn't even alive or in some way developing, it's removing something dead in your body that will kill you, continue to live and make another baby later and enjoy your new family member, others forbid blood transfusions, it's just a waste of your life, theres no proof of an afterlife or heaven so your only life could be over from the refusal of medical help.

I feel like many religious people argue that "science can't prove it never happened" which is kinda annoying, to believe something you gotta prove it in fact happened, Paleotologists can't prove one spiecies evolved from another until they find that skeleton that are in between them, they theorize until they maybe find one, if they never find it maybe it turns out the two spieces they thought were related are not related at all. And there is no Adam anywhere. So why is evolution a reason to deny creationism? Because there is proof evolution happened and not creationism, and as I said, you gotta have proof to see it happened at all. Any reasonable person don't believe in Mary being a virgin ( if these people even excisted she maybe cheated and pulled a lie that it's gods child, how convinient eh? ) , theres a few spiecies of female that give birth to males without fertilation in case there is no male around and then she reproduce with that male offspring ( inbreeding much tough? ) Is there dinosaurs in the bible? Any pre-historic animal? So how does religion prove of what is actually in our ground right now and we just need to dig them up?

There are good people out there who never want to hurt anyone and only tries to help people while there are others who purpously hurt others, those are evil, I am aware of that people make mistakes but to keep forgiving and forgiving when they do horrible crimes, thats irrational to forgive someone like that and let more people get hurt by that person. And it makes no sence to sacrifice his son, for it to matter humanity would have stopped sinning but no, so that sacrifice was for naught, So God did bad parenting by getting his son killed for a bunch of dumnuts. Sorry but, HE? The word "he" stands for the male gender aka god is a THEY if it should be genderless, and men does not symbolize authority, there would be no father without a woman to give birth to the children, it takes two components to make a child and none is more important then the other, oldfashioned conservative bogus is all I see.

When an animal doesn't have any threats it could evolve into gigantism, like the Komododragon, they started off as quite small lizards but due to the none excisting threats on that little island they grew large, often theres giving and taking in evolving and how they evolve depends on what the spiecies need, if a pray has many fast predetors, it's better to be fast and small, then you can run and hide inside bushes, trees, burrows in the ground etc, if your predetors are larger and strong but not so fast , maybe it's better to instead have horns and a large strong body, you will be slow but you can kick the threat, for the predator they might need to be fast and have strong jaws. So really theres some correlation but not neccesarily, in evolution it's more like "Meh this could do" then any proper correlation and since spiecies are evolving all the time they adapt all the time the best they can to their enviroment.

It's called extinction, when climate changes or other changes happen lots of animals die out, or pre-historic animals rather ( since humans have been the cause of many extinctions I only count the pre-historic animals ). Lets say a place flood, obviously all the land walking animals will drown, flying animals will fly somewhere else and water dwelling creatures will just swim away, the landwalkers won't evolve to learn to swim ( cause they drowned ) and extinction happens, if an animal migrates it's for a reason, maybe there wasn't enough food for all of their spiecies and some of them migrated but still into an enviroment they feel comfortable in, and then they probably start to evolve to fit that enviroment better while the ones that stayed of their species will evolve differently since they stayed in their original enviroment.

We don't really have a problem creating living organisms, we cloned a sheep, cloned countless of mice, they use stem cells to repair damaged organs.

Yes, my cat never does anything he's not allowed to, like clawing on the couch, but when I don't give him food within a minute of him starting to meow for it, he starts clawing on the couch and looks right at me with a smug face, never otherwise, he also knows that pulling the blinds downwards will make me pull them up so he can look out the window and more. parrots are one good example, they choose what to play with and they sing along to songs.

I don't think there is an opposite of any emotion but the opposite of strong emotions would be no emotion at all, also depends what love, love for a partner might be lonelyness, love for a hobby might be discouraged, like if you don't feel you are good at anything and therefor don't have a hobby.

"It is no different than a situation where you have a clock. Looking at it from the front side, it goes clockwise. But looking at it from the back side, it goes counter clockwise. But the question is, does it go clockwise or counter clockwise?" Clockwise, since the clock is constructed to measure time as it goes forward, someone has probably created a counter clockwise clock just for the heck of it, but that clock will show time inaccuratly, we are stuck in the present, we cannot go forward or backwards in time and we are alwaus stuck in the now, in this second and we can't do anything about it, if you look at the backside of a clock, it's just the backside of it, the front will still go clockwise and it's not really a matter of perspective there. Experience is learning, learning is survival, wild animal babies play fight with eachother to gain experience in fighting when they grow up so they can survive if attacked, my cat tried to nudge a door and he gained the experience that if he nudge it the door opens in which he can then get to his kibbles, now everytime the door is open enough for him to stick his paw in between he will open the door, he learned from experience that it works. Awerness could be a mixture of several things, instinct, independent thinking, learning and experiencing among other things.

It's not becoming gods but rather solving humanities fears and curiosities, no human wants to be sick in deadly diseases, we want to live for longer, etc ( not speaking for everyone of course ), without curiosity there wouldn't be science cause no one would have questioned anything and wanted to find out about it. We have become highly intelligent animals, and thats what we will always be, even if we live for 1000 years in top health and flying cars.

Global warming is a fact and not an opinion, and whoever thinks it's an opinion needs to read up on it. It is true that the earth itself have changed naturally, but we humans have done a lot of damage.

I thought mostly of diseases and such, a god could also prevent evil people. So if there is a god that allows these things, doesn't sound like a good deal following this thing to end up in heaven.

Theres no scientific proof of a god, thats enough reason not to believe, a lot of religions also hold a lot of morals that are simple common sence and you should simply be a decent human being and be nice without feeling that you have to be nice because of your religion is supportive of it, theres also a lot of bogus in religion, like in some religions the wife belongs to the husband and she has to be there to sexually please him when he wants, he's allowed to beat her etc, just outrageous and outdated it makes me sick, if there is an almighty god up there this being must be rather sadistic considering what happens here on earth to innocent people, and that is certainly not someone I want to follow. When I've read about science if god exists I only find articles that can easily be explained with other things, science doesn't dismiss the idea of god since there is no proof there ISN'T a god, but the lack of proof makes the idea unprobable, when we first found fossils 2000 years ago they thought it was a dragon, it was a dinosaur, something similar might have happened to the conjuring of god, maybe someone ate a poisonous mushroom and hallucinated and voila god was made up or a lot of people had mental illnesses that made them see things, a lot of people still believe in ghosts despite science prove against it. Seen lots of articles mention that the eye is such an amazing thing it must be created by a god, but it's evolution and it came with the evolution of the spine and nerv, the brain is a big lump of nerves, and eyes started to evolve from the primitive brain, tough what they never mention is different types of eyes, like insect eyes that funtion in a different way them human eyes. God comes from a time when humans knew less, god is not explained with science, logic and reason and rather gives people the pack and acknowledgement that we humans as social animals need. it's purely emotional and not scientifical, especially since in general religion doesn't allow homosexuals and claim it's against god and/or unnatural despite it being EVERYWHERE in nature which then means they are dismissing nature itself, the animals out there just doing their thing naturally without weird ideas, musts or preassure, animals don't believe in religion and they don't see it as a crime, it's closeness and fun for them ( or in some cases sexuall frustration )

Some carnivores like cats can't draw nutritions from veggies, so whatever their pray has in their stomach is useless to them, they only need the preys own meat, the veggies are for the prey itself to live out of, not the carnivore.

Of course theres hard to know what extinct beings actually looked like and behaved, but I have a hard time to believe this video, one thing he said is that they ate 99% meat but still they have teeth more of an omnivore, which means they ate both vegetation and meat, to eat vegetation you need flatter teeth to grind the food and sharp for eating meat, I also read that some of todays humans have neanderthal DNA in their genes, which means we mated with them ( not where I read it but I find this still to be a reliable and interesting article to link here http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2014/01/140129-neanderthal-genes-genetics-migration-africa-eurasian-science/ ) I'm not dismissing his theory about how a neanderthal looks, but I feel it's to much shockvalue into it and there is something called convergent evolution ( if I remember the name correctly ), which means that two unrelated lineages evolve the same thing, for example insects and birds flight, both have wings but very different type of wings that they both happened to need, maybe humans and neanderthals went through convergent evolution and they in fact looked very human like, tough much rougher in a way, seems they relied more on muscle while the human relied more on intellect, and thus a bigger brain.

Fossils are found in different types of stone that is shaped and made out of different materials depending if it was soil, bottom of the sea, lake etc, the layers of the rocky ground tells you what time period they are from, when it comes to human remains they tend to be more on the surface since the modern lifestyle of houses and tools is very recent in the earths history, there are of course lot of times where fossils come up to the surface due to the movement and overlapping of tectonic plates, so something that was on the bottom can then end up on top on the surface ( like these footprints https://twistedsifter.files.wordpress.com/2013/10/cal-orko-wall-of-dinosaur-footprints-sucre-bolivia-2.jpg?w=800&h=600 ), one way of dating is with radiometric dating ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating). Fossil really means "dug up", but typically we think of fossils as remains from beings that lived millions of years ago, it's "easy" to know that since todays animals we can easily take skeletons from, and if we dig up a skeleton that looks nothing like the animal skeletons of today, it's something that have gone extinct, the skeleton and teeth also gets a darker color as it lays underground for millions of years due to the surrounding minerals. One thing to see if it's a dinosaur is if the skull has a fenestra, which also means that theres a lot of misconceptions about what is a dinosaur, not all prehistoric giant lizards are dinosaurs, and that is why birds are dinosaurs, they have a fenestra in their skulls ( https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/tetrapod-zoology/files/2012/08/Darren-Naish-Tetrapod-Zoology-corvid-skull-bird-pelves-CDII-Aug-2012-340-px-tiny.jpg ) and birds are the only animal of today that has an antorbital fenestra. We humans have been finding fossils for about 2000 years, tough back then it was thought to be dragon bones, so since then we have been finding more bones, and that have given us lots of time to puzzle the skeletons togheter into an evolutionary tree, tough a lot is still missing and theres questionmarks how subject 1 evolved into subject 3 since subject 2 is not found yet. Theres a lot of studying modern animals to understand prehistoric animals, if we take the famous T-rex as an example of logic in evolution, it has big strong jaws, long strong tail and then the silly little arms, why? If we look at the dinosaurs that T-rex evolved from, they have smaller jaws and head, the T-rex evolved to kill pray with strong bites, which meant more muscle in the jaw, however it then became to heavy in the front and the arms shrank, the T-rex didn't need arms with a killerjaw anyway. When it comes to if an animal had feathers, scales or skin, there are sometimes marks ont he stone that shows scaley skin, feathers etc, like with this specimen http://i2.cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/150717010131-zhenyuanlong1-super-169.jpg you can clearly see the lines from the feathers, or this one that shows clear scales http://www.sciencebuzz.org/sites/default/files/images/amia.jpg Evolution wasn't about survival of the fittest, but more of "you're good enough" and if they happened to be lucky, if there was a flooding all land aimals would drown while flying animals can simply fly to another place and therefor that spiecies survived. Something to always remember is that there is proof that dinosaurs existed millions of years ago and we can puzzle the skeletons togheter into an evolutionary tree, but since we can't time travel a lot is still theory and imagination, the color of prehistoric animals is impossible to know unless we are lucky to find mummified pieces which is extremly rare, like this tail http://edition.cnn.com/2016/12/08/health/dinosaur-tail-trapped-in-amber-trnd/ and there we also see clear feathers, but a lot of time, behaviour among other things, are logically theorized comparing the remains of prehistoric animals to todays living animals, tough theres no proof.

So me and my boyfriend came to talk about this, time is affected already right outside the earths atmosphere where it goes a little slower, so the further away from gravitation, the slower time goes if I have understood it correctly, time always goes, night becomes day and day becomes night, but if we remove the idea of hours and time into an understanding like animals have, they just exist in the present, if we take lets say a deer, their lifespan can be about 14 years in captivity, if two deers get born at the same time, one is sent out into space and one stays on earth, would the space deer become 14 earth years or not? Time goes slower in space, and does that in anyway affect the biological body? Would the space deer live for 14 space years which might be equal to 200 earth years there or would it still live for 14 earth years since the body of the deer might be "programmed" to age and eventually die in a certain speed which equals 14 earth years and doesn't have the knowledge about time at all, since it's a body. Is biological aging affected by the slower time in space and thus age slower or not?