What are the reasons why you think evolution is a faulty theory?

Question

I'm interested in knowing, in detail, why creationists/ID-proponents feel that evolution is a faulty theory. Please provide reasons not related to your faith but those that objectively deal with the theory.

Also, those who find evolution to be a strongly backed theory, feel free to explain why you think creationists/ID-proponents feel so inclined to make such an argument.

Answer 1

As an "evolutionist" I side with science and logic that evolution is the method of speciation in organisms.

My personal opinion on why Creationists find fault with evolution is two-fold. First, a strict interpretation of the often-translated Bible. It is viewed as the ultimate authority and a "first-hand" account of what happened throughout history.

There are several problems with this, most importantly the translation of words from the original text, into English, which may change the true meaning of words, or more often their isn't a word in English that fits the original word. A good example of this is in Genesis, the main accounting of creation for theists. The word translated into "day" from the original text may have different meanings, it could literally mean a day, or it could mean periods of time. There are hundreds if not thousands of examples of this throughout the bible, but the problem is clear, logically, you cannot maintain a strict interpretation if your reading a interpretation. Also the first hand account isn't really a first hand account, many of the scriptures are oral traditions that were written down long after the events transpired, many were written a few hundred years after the people in the passed away. We've all played whisper-down-the-lane.

Secondly, the scientific account of life, and it's origins (which isn't considered part of the Theory of Evolution by the way) doesn't mention, and doesn't require a god to exist for it to happen. Unable to separate scientific thought, from religious ones, some Creationists find evolution has to be incorrect because it makes no mention of a Creator. Really, ANY kind of science can never make mention of any kind of God, it is a fundamentally unprovable idea. Nevertheless, because of this, Evolution cannot and will not be accepted by many believers.

Personally, there is no reason that both ideas cannot be. While the account of Genesis cannot be true, if a God does exist he has created everything else through natural means, it would only make sense that he would do the same in creating life. The difference is, only one can be taught as a science, the other is philosophy.

Answer 2

Evolution is sooo close to being proven. I've been in university now for nine years. I'm in my fourth year of medical school and I've seen so much progress towards proving evolution. But even if we do prove evolution beyond the shadow of a doubt, religious groups will still be blind to the proof. Religion is a comfort to people, and they won't bother looking at the proof. I love the search for who we are and were we came from, there is just so much proof to give but it's basically up to you. I may criticize religious people because I believe religion to be an opiate. Calm the masses with a sense of security. But who am I to say that science is correct? It's just what I believe. I read books, I do experiments and I listen to my professors. But how is that different than some one who goes to church reading the bible and listening to their priest. I went to church when I was younger and I was a "believer" But I grew out of it because I started to look at it like a fairy tale. Evolution doesn't need to be proven to make me believe in it, it's just what I feel. The existence of god the "truth" of the bible doesn't need to be proven for a christian to believe in it. I believe more than anything else that you should look at everything from all possible angles and then decide what you will believe.

Answer 3

evolution is faulty because man came up with the theory, man can't remember what happened 1000 yrs ago on every date yet they speculate what happened millions of years ago. Darwin had one writing on the origin of life and where is it? It's not out there because even Darwin knew that there was a creator. Cell DNA is another example, there has to be a specific sequence for proteins, did the DNA line up by chance in all the different species? No. Not possible. Sure there are variations in species and sure there is small scale changes that occur due to environmental pressures but if evolution is true that all things evolved from one cell in the beginning...well, that is just plain crazy. I read one book in graduate school that spoke of "during this time period plants invaded the lands" invaded?? Were they walking, crawling, or maybe running! Look at the huge gap on any evolutionary time table between a single celled organism and multicelled organisms. The world was once flat until it was proven wrong, just be patient and as technology increases you will see that evolution is someones delusion. A scientist that wrote a best selling text on biochemical predestination even reversed his theory about life and evolution, and by the way, this textbook was the best selling evolutionary book in the 80's. I hope you continue to look at both sides of this issue and see which one makes more sense. Peace.

Answer 4

Evolution needs to be proved wrong scientifically.

Evolution is currently a hypothesis, since you cannot test evolutionary advancement repeated and get the same results. That prevents it from becoming a theory.

A theory has to be proved repeated without any questionable results coming up in the end. If there is a change in the speculation surrounding that theory, the theory can be modified (ex. quantum physics and its effects on time-space). Evolution is something that occurs over many generations, but cannot be tested or repeated since they arise from random genetic mutations. These genetic mutations are not necessarily beneficial for the organism: they could actually be fatal or just inconsequential.

Creationists and Intelligent Design proponents are also in a quagmire regarding this issue for one major reason: they cannot prove NOR disprove the answer. With that, their opinion remains in the state of hypothesis as well. However, their faith guide their logical progression much like others are propelled forward by their faith, not in God, but in science.

Answer 5

IT IS NOT.
Their argument is there for them to explain how they think their god made the world. Since they have no scientific proof of what they say, they just wedge faith into the argument they present.
It's a lousy circular argument: God made nature because nature is so complex only a god could do it!
Besides, they have been trained to say things like that, they pity you if you make them see the facts.
They have a premise and they stick and bend arguments to fit their faith!

Answer 6

The proof of evolution and creationism are not mutually exclusive. God, if there is a God, could have created evolution.

Answer 7

Fossil records, cell complexity, DNA, there are many animals that prove it wrong, the Bible has been proven correct, the flood... Evolution is a temporary theory that will change in the future just like the geocentric theory in the past. Rent some videos about the different things that prove it wrong and then try to disprove creation... you cant

Answer 8

I think that evolution is faulty because everything came from nothing and everything is just so complex that it could have just evolved. Even Darwin admitted in "the orgin of species" that the eye was to complex to have evolved.

-Pinky

Answer 9

it's plain and simple...the bible goes against it.