Would you please read the whole thing, then repond if you want to.?

Question

The theory of evolution depends upon three conditions.

Life Happens
Creative Mutations
Lots of Time
Let's look at each of these conditions, one at a time.

Life Happens
According to the theory of evolution, at some time in the distant past there was no life in the universe -- just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals had to combine to form Frankencell, which came to life somehow. (Presumably, a lightning bolt and a deformed assistant were involved.)

The February 1988 issue of EARTH magazine is a special issue on Origins. The cover promises an article that will tell us "How Life Really Began". The article itself, however, says that scientists just don't know. Even Stanley Miller, whose experiments are cited in most biology text books, states in that article that the origin of life is still unknown.

There are only two documented cases of inanimate objects coming to life.

Pinocchio
Frosty the Snowman
Most scientists consider these two reports to be false.

The notion that dead material can come to life all by itself is not consistent with scientific observation.

Creative Mutations
Under normal circumstances, creatures give birth to the same kind of creatures. One does not expect a lizard to hatch from a chicken egg. Chickens have baby chickens. It is established scientific fact that like begets like.

On rare instances, the DNA in an embryo is damaged, resulting in a mutant child that differs in some respect from its parent. Only a few mutations have been scientifically observed that are arguably beneficial. It is well known that mutations produce inferior offspring. For the theory of evolution to be true, there must be a fantastic number of creative mutations that produce new kinds of offspring which are better suited for survival, and therefore are favored by natural selection.

It is claimed that the reptile-to-mammal evolution is well documented. But for reptiles to evolve into mammals

scales had to have mutated into hair
breasts had to have evolved from nothing
hard-shelled externally laid eggs had to evolve into soft-shelled eggs that were nourished by an umbilical cord and placenta in a womb
etc.
None of these transformations have ever been observed in a laboratory.


The notion that random genetic changes can produce creative mutations is not consistent with scientific observation.

Lots of Time
Sadly, it is well known that living things can die. This has often been observed. It has NOT been scientifically demonstrated that a dead thing can come to life. Despite this, evolutionists believe that given enough time, something dead will come to life by some method or another.

It has never been observed in any laboratory that mutations can cause one species to turn into another. Despite this, evolutionists believe that given enough time, some critters will eventually evolve into other critters.

Evolutionists claim that although we have not actually observed these things happening, that does not mean that they are impossible. They say it simply means they are extremely improbable. It is extremely improbable that you can toss a coin and have it come up heads 100 times in a row. But if you toss coins long enough, eventually it will happen. Evolutionists think the world has been around long enough for all these highly improbable things to happen.

If we observe present processes, and make the assumption that they have have been going on at the same rate since they started, we generally come to the conclusion that the Earth could not be billions of years old. Some of the processes that have been studied that give young ages for the Earth are:

Continental erosion
Sea floor sediments
Salinity of the oceans
Helium in the atmosphere
Carbon 14 in the atmosphere
Decay of the Earth's magnetic field

The old ages for the Earth come primarily from the ages of rocks, which are dated by the presumed ages of the fossils in them. Radioactive measurements of rocks are based on assumptions that were chosen to make the radioactive measurements agree with the presumed ages of the fossils.

The eruption of Mount St. Helens produced many feet of stratified rocks which look millions of years old, but were produced in days or hours. Radioactive measurements of these rocks show them to be millions of years old, too. But we know they were formed in 1980 because scientists saw them formed.

The notion that the Earth is billions of years old is not consistent with a considerable amount of scientific observation.
Conclusion
The theory of evolution is not believed because of scientific evidence. It is believed DESPITE scientific evidence. Science is against the theory of evolution.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://www.ridgecrest.ca.us/~do_while/sage/

I hear ya Yoda, great way to show your ignorance. You could have tried to refute the points, but maybe that would take big words that you might not understand. Plus, you didn't have to be an a**hole about it.

chem says: "It has been fairly well documented that species do mutate according to their environment."


That's not evolution. Even creationists believe in changes whithin the species. The Bible says to "produce after your own KIND", not spiecies.

But evolution where one animal turns into a different animal does not exist, and hasn't.

Every farmer on the planet counts on evolution not happening. When they mate a cow and bull they expect a calf every time. When they plant corn the get corn.

Evolution is a farce.

Danielle S, God has always existed. The bible says He is like a wheel whithin a wheel. He is the Beginning and the End. HE created the universe, time and space. He is all powerful and just spoke it into existence. If you could just behold the awesome power of the Holy Spirit you would changed forever.

I used to be an atheist too. Now I am enlightened.

Bless you all.

I meant chim, not chem on the above reply.

Answer 1

wow, that's really interesting. I'm gald i read the whole thing, thanks for putting this up here. Where did you find all this information? I'd love it if i could look into it even more, or if you could do some more research and put your findings up here again.

Answer 2

Evolutionist say everything happend on billions of years.
Creationist say everything happen in 7 days, after that they tell you the day are not human days.
Reality is somebody played with our genoma, we only have 46 chromosomes, apes 48.
We don't relate to monkeys even any Darwinist will tell you.
When it comes to food, which Monsanto lab was opened 10000 years ago to alter Zea Maize to actual hybrid corn as we know it.
Go for the pig and the answer is similar.
But I like this one, how many people have seen a dog mate with a cat, to create a "mixture" let' say.
What is the Cheetah a canine mixed with a feline, and on top of this all of them are clones, same genetic code.
When it comes down to creationist, they used the word Elohim, to say he was created to our image, but Elohim is plural that means 2 or more.
The discussion is long, but certain planetary collision changed our destiny. Also don't forget that water is very abundant on the solar system on the external planets, not on the internal ones, we are the third on line from the Sun.
Maybe Nibiru and Taymat are not just one more story, they are real.

Answer 3

OOOOHHHH!! Awesome way to say what I have been trying to say!

Evolution is a theroy on a theroy on a theroy, with much science, some fact, but little proof and confirmation. They can trace cells, show that evloution and adaptation has taken place, but they can only guess at what caused life to spring forth from nothing, and they are still missing the single thing that would prove the jump from Ape to man, the "missing link". Both evolution theroies are still un proven, although they claim they are getting closer.

Yes, Evolution is still a theory, as the two main views, and what caused them, the "big bang" and the "darwin theroy" are missing the main points at the text, how and what proof. An educated evolutionist (yes I know some) will even tell you some of the "proof" is missing. Anothers that believe thats not true, have not researched their own belief.

Sorry, got a little wordy, but wanted to say Awesome Job!!

Answer 4

Okay, I do not have the patience to read all of that $hit. Personally, look at it this way...we (most of us, anyway) know how (human) babies are made, right? Why do so many people think that the whole of the universe is any different? From the smallest thing to the largest, there is little to no difference in how it is created.
People "think" too much.

Answer 5

I did read it all
and I'm sorry
but I don't think the science here is very good at all
next time perhaps just explain why you believe in creationism?
I particularly find the st helen's mountain claim a bit on the edge

Answer 6

You proceed from a false assumption. Hardly surprising since 90% of what you've posted is absolute bunk.
You need to pull your nose out of whatever creationist's pseudo-science rag you've been reading and get some REAL information for a change.
I've provided a link. PLEASE get some information before you post utter and outright LIES like the one above; "Science is against the theory of evolution" Which despite being funny, is also kind of tragic. Tragic because someone out there is actually stupid enough to believe it. You have my pity.

Answer 7

Instead of copying and pasting all that, why didn't you just give the url (http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/) you took it from?

In answer to your "question", Carl Sagan put it best: "In many cultures it is customary to answer that God created the universe out of nothing. But this is mere temporizing. If we wish courageously to pursue the question, we must, of course ask next where God comes from? And if we decide this to be unanswerable, why not save a step and conclude that the universe has always existed?"

My postscript: we DO have proof the universe exists.
We have no proof any God exists.

Answer 8

I am not inclined to write a dissertation on your postulate but, what you are forgetting is it was not just one reptile or one mammal or one homo sapien that evolution was touching but millions. It has been fairly well documented that species do mutate according to their environment. Survival of the fittest. The fittest would live longer; more equipped to handle environmental conditions. They would also mate more often passing their, well equipped genes, to their off spring.

It is just silly to believe the earth is a few thousand years old. There are pages and pages of documentation clearly demonstrating that the earth is billions of years old and the universe we live in is almost 14 billion years old.

Answer 9

am I 'reponding' correctly?
nice use of defining life to create a circular argument

Answer 10

Excellent. Evolution has been proven to be a crock. Science and Christianity are on parallel courses to the same destination.

Answer 11

But... you also can't scientifically prove the existance of a God or Higher Power. You are at an impasse.