How can people say that evolution isn't true?

Question

Next to me I have 2 fossilised ammonites one of them is flat the other one the shell curls up wards and out. When you expose bacteria to antibiotics but don't kill them all the develop a resistance to antibiotics which is then passed on when they reproduce. There are masses of fossilised evidence showing how creatures have changed over time go into any good natural history museum and see some of it. Genetically you are more similar to a chimp than a horse is to a zebra. There is plenty of proof for evolution why won't you acknowledge it?

Also in anticipation there are still chimpanzees because our common ancestor some of them left the jungle and became us and other stayed in the jungle and became the other apes. Oh and a theory is an idea either proven or not and it's creationism THEORY so don't say that it's just a theory.

TAFF the amoeba hasn't evoloved because it is suited to its enviroment. It also requires a lot of energy to be a mulit cellular organisem and in the event of a natural disastor you are more likly to survive if you are only 1 cell so perhaps in some ways it is beter to be a single celld organisem.

Lili S who told you that someone outside a church or someone inside one? The fact is you are wrong on both counts ther is plenaty of evidence to support evolution and all credable scientists support it.

leowin1948 now what did i say about saying man and apes live in the same world? Our common ancestor whith the apes left the jungal and went into a new enviroment and evolvoed there whilst the other apes evoloved in the jungal.

Alinda Z WE EVOLVED ON THE SAVANA AND OTHER APES EVOLVED IN THE JUNGAL HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO SAY IT!!! And what evidence is ther for god none.

clevergirl you can say perhaps god started evolutiin and then you just go into the cycle of who created god and who creaded god's god and that can go on forever so you can eather cut it off at what we know to be treu that evolution occourd whith no evidence to say god did anything or you can go on and on for ever not knowing anything just sitting ther going but who created god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god's god?

Answer 1

You are Right, Evolution is true.

Those who dont just happen to take references from their Holy Books to seriously. We must all understand that these Holy Books are a matter of faith and should not be involved in the studies of Science.
Science on the other hand is hard cold truth. The truth in Science is always backed by facts and numbers.

Answer 2

,Maybe you should study the Bible then you may realise how proven it actually is even Darwin himself stated that his findings are mere Theory, he said that there must have been a Creator, If you park an old Ford or Chevy in a paddock, will it eventually turn into a Rolls Royce What about the House you live in did that appear out of nowhere and the desk or the chair you are sitting on and the computer you are using none of those things just appeared did they, All of these things were created by Someone. That is why we have the Universe Planets Humans animals and vegetation. For the last 6000 years aproximately man has been on this planet,Dogs have stayed dogs cats have stayed cats, horses stayed Horses just as they were createdotherwise history woulde haver been written about the changes! You may plant a pine tree you will not get a carrot, just like you won't get an apple tree out of a rosebush and you wouldn' expect to either because deep down you know it wether you admit it or not! And the main reason that evolutionists want to believe in evolution is because they think it will excuse them from any responsibility before God

Answer 3

Simply do not look at the evidence.

Humans are immensely powerful; they can create their own reality and their own experience. This allows them to successfully(for a time, at least) resist observing anything which they do not wish to observe, because it means they would have to change their way of thinking.

Change is painful. Change is life. Most would rather remain unliving. It is easier that way because they do not have to think.

I choose to deny that plumbing systems work. - and for a moment, I experience that denial. But I don't really want to deny it and I'm not putting that much effort into it... so I give it up and admit, "Okay, plumbing systems do work." Fundamentalist Christians have the willpower to simply not give up their beliefs, no matter how much logical and rational thinking they sacrifice as a result.

As for me, I believe in both. ;-) I believe that two ideas, which may seem mutually exclusive at first, can both actually be true at the same time. If the world developed over billions of years... or if God created us in the twinkling of an eye... what is the difference? After all, a billion years might seem like a "twinkling" when compared to Eternity, which is supposedly what God deals with.

Answer 4

There are some theories on the decrease back of this, yet notwithstanding like countless regression in unquestionably fact says "it is for this reason a techniques back we don't comprehend and could no longer comprehend." ideally, we don't comprehend what began out evolution. yet this could desire to be examined greater heavily between micro and macro evolution. Macro evolution maintains to be very completely contested, and a lot of question its validity interior the project of biology. Micro evolution is all approximately adaptaion to survive. Necessity is the mummy of invention...even though it would seem that a lot it particularly is suggested in micro evolution is organic possibility, no longer necessity. the two approach, survival could be a efficient motivator for adapability. it is somewhat little bit of twisted elementary experience, components are constrained so by some ability a mutation happens which components one creature a greater part over others (micro evolution)...finally those mutations will grow to be so surprising that there is an entire new species (macro evolution). even although there looks to need a driving rigidity, because of the undeniable fact that project unearths its lowest good point of vigor, why might it attempt to compete? what's the rigidity? Of course technology Fiction does component out that radiation can mutate lizards into horribly gigantic hearth respiratory beasts.

Answer 5

Evolutionists are quick to use many unsupportable arguments to promote their beliefs. The most-often-used example is that of antibiotic resistance. They argue (quite vociferously at times) that one must understand that bacteria will evolve to a state of resistance to a particular antibiotic if that antibiotic is overused. Quite overlooked by the evolutionist are the multiple mechanisms of antibiotic resistance, none of which require or involve so-called evolutionary changes, which would add new information into the genome.

For instance, there are examples of antibiotic resistance found in bacteria recovered from the frozen corpses of people who died before the use of antibiotics. Much antibiotic resistance results from natural selection of populations of already-resistant bacteria. Antibiotics kill susceptible organisms, and resistant organisms survive.

Another mechanism of resistance is what occurs when a mutation takes place that might, for example, cause a defect in the bacteria’s ability to transport the antibiotic into the cell, thus rendering the bacteria resistant to that particular antibiotic. Another mutation might change a binding site used by the antibiotic within the cell, thus rendering it unable to kill the cell. What is never brought up, however, is the fact that any mutation will result in a loss of information due to the change in genetic material. Even in the very unusual occurrence of a so-called “beneficial” mutation, there is an ultimate loss of genetic information available to succeeding generations.

Recently, similar arguments have been put forth to explain resistance in certain strains of the influenza virus. These arguments fail for the same reason. This loss of information is inconsistent with a biological model that proposes to explain how organisms become more complex over time. Loss of information is the opposite of molecules-to-man evolution, and fits well into a creationist model of biology. Thus, antibiotic resistance is not a valid argument for the Darwinian evolutionist.

Answer 6

So much to say and so little space and time to write. I think everything was created after its kind. If there was a sort of evolution, it was in order and done by a creator. Just too much perfection and order to be by chance. Who was directing the changes, molecules????? The real issue I have with evolution is that at no time have we ever found any fossil in the process of change. No half fish half man, half man half ape, half anything half another. And why don't we still see this change in some form or another in front of us today. there is nothing that is changing now. Has evolution stopped? Why has it? Is that possible? The chances of anything existing from nothing and then changing again are so remote than statistically it is impossible. If you went to the forest and found a house, would you say it got there by itself or that it somehow just evolved from an apple tree?

Answer 7

There are 2 basic typles of evolution. There is micro-evolution. This is evolution within a species. This explains different breeds of cats, dogs, etc. It lso explains hair color, eye color, height, etc. in people. Then there is macro-evolution. This is evolution involving a transtion form one species to another. There is absolutely zero evidence for macro-evolution. The fossil record does not contaoin a single example a species in transiont, no not one. Actually what you se in the fossil record is the sudden appearance of new species. This would fit in better with intelligent design. The universe is obviously designed, therefore, there must be a designer. There are many other reasons not to believe in Darwinian evolution, and many scientists are abandoning the theory. Of course, many of them reject the idea of God because they have a naturalistic presupposition. They just make up a new theory to explain the universe without a designer, despite the evidence.

Answer 8

I think evolution is true to a certain extent, Sure you can see it in examples at museums, that dont mean that everything on this planet has had to have evolved from something else.
Its obvious that plants and animals evolve but i believe in the word of God, He made me and you like we are today, only evolution there is that we are now domesticated civilised, have a comprehensive aray of languages and wash everyday....
Thats just me, dont know bout the rest of you. For all i care everyone can believe what they want, why do scientist always argue the point, cant we agree to disagree? Why does everyone have to believe the same thing as you do? Answer me that....

Answer 9

Because there are many parts of the evolution theory that do not work scientifically.

Take the Grand Canyon for instance.

It is said to have taken the river many thousands of years, yet it has very steep sides to the canyon. This is a contradiction, both these statements can not be true.

The age of a rock is determined by the type of fossil found in it, and the age of a fossil if determined by the type of rock it is found in. This is circular thinking and is not scientific.

For more example check out this web site.
www.drdino.com

Answer 10

There are just as many experts in the the science and archeological fields that have proof evolution did NOT take place millions an dmillions of years ago.
Evolution assumes that man dropped out of the trees 1 to 5 million years ago and became fully human approximately 100,000 years ago. Yet archeological records show civilization arising only about 5,000 years ago (based on evolutionary thinking). In other words, by evolutionary reasoning, it took mankind 95,000 years after becoming fully human to figure out that food could be produced by dropping a seed into the ground!

Carbon dating:
Scientists do not know 100% that the carbon-14 decay rate has been constant. They do not know that the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere is constant. Present testing shows the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere has been increasing since it was first measured in the 1950's. This may be tied in to the declining strength of the magnetic field.

Fossils:
Fossils are the preserved evidence of past life
But the fossils themselves tell us neither their age nor how they became encased in the rock layers. Rather, they must be interpreted within some view of earth history. Now, we have to depend on man to tell us when with his theories or expertise. Cant men make mistakes? Yes.
Now many people have been led to believe that the existence of fossils proves that millions of years have passed. But in reality, it have been seen, therefore proven, fossils can form quite rapidly. Heat and pressure from rapid burial can accelerate the fossilization process. (floods, volcanos). Yet there are mass burial sites throughout the world that are tightly packed with millions of fossils. Apparently, billions of organisms were washed together by the mass destruction of the worldwide flood, completely buried, and rapidly fossilized. Flood? That brings to mind an account in the Bible...Noah...

Cave men:
Archeological evidence clearly shows that these "stone age" people buried their dead. Forty billion graves should be easy to find. Yet only a few thousand exist.
Or consider the Archaeoraptor, promoted in a 10-page color spread in the November 1999 National Geographic as the "true missing link" between dinosaurs and birds. The fossil was displayed at National Geographic's Explorers Hall and viewed by over 100,000 people. However, it too turned out to be a fake – someone had simply glued together fragments of bird and dinosaur fossils. Or take the Piltdown Man. It was declared an ape-man, 500,000 years old, and validated by many of Britain's leading scientists. But what did the Piltdown Man actually consist of? A very recent orangutan jaw, which had been stained to look old, with its teeth filed down to make them more human-looking, planted together with a human skull bone, also stained to create an appearance of age.


But hey! If you have proof! Then go to

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/hovind

He is giving away $250,000 to any one who can prove this event took place...funny, though, that none of the evolutionist experts have taken him up on this? Hmmm...?

If evolution vs. creaion is on anyone's minds, I reccomend to them to go to:
http://www.drdino.com/articles.php
Here they will find resources that will debunk the theory of evolution as some claim- billions of years ago.

Answer 11

here are some wonderful quotes for you

Evolution is a fairy tale for grownups." Dr. Louis Bounoure, Director of the Zoological Museum and Director of Research at the National Center of Scientific Research in France, J. Rostand, "LaMonde et la Vie," October 1963, p. 31 from V. Long, "Evolution: A Fairy Tale for Adults," Homiletic and Pastoral Review, Vol 78 (1978), no. 7, pp. 27-32

One of the reasons I started taking this anti-evolutionary view, was ... it struck me that I had been working on this stuff for twenty years and there was not one thing I knew about it. That's quite a shock to learn that one can be so misled so long. ...so for the last few weeks I've tried putting a simple question to various people and groups of people. Question is: Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true? I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing -- it ought not to be taught in high school'." Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Paleontologist, British Museum of Natural History, London Keynote address at the American Museum of Natural History, New York City, 5 November, 1981


Biologists are simply naive when they talk about experiments designed to test the theory of evolution. It is not testable. They may happen to stumble across facts which would seem to conflict with its predictions. These facts will invariably be ignored and their discoverers will undoubtedly be deprived of continuing research grants." Professor Whitten (Professor of Genetics, University of Melbourne, Australia), 1980 Assembly Week address.

"In fact, evolution became in a sense a scientific religion; almost all scientists have accepted it and many are prepared to 'bend' their observations to fit in with it." H.S. Lipson, FRS (Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, UK), 'A physicist looks at evolution'. Physics Bulletin, vol. 31, 1980, p. 138.

and from the father of mordern sceince;

"A little science estranges a man from God; a lot of science brings him back.". . . Sir Francis Bacon

so to admit that sceintist do not have the answer to evolution leaves it in the world of theory in need of hard unshakeable facts. which have never been produced. if you have proven facts go to this page and collect 250,000 dollars.