Evolution vs. Creation - Part 2?

Question

There has been quite a response. I DEFINITELY believe that species of animals, plants, humans have all evolved to a small degree, under God's eye.
But please tell me - where did the original hydrogen, ooze, or other things those on the strict evolution side have named, come from?
I wish only to the fallacy of the "evolution only" argument to be seen, along with the truth of a loving Creator God

Answer 1

They teach us that God created the heavens and earth in 6 days and on the 7th rested...the bible says so?
my history book also says that a month used to be something like 22 days long in the past ...the world was flat?
I can believe in the big bang theory, the collision of two forces which caused the formation of that which we call earth and life...look what a few atoms can do (talking about the bomb)
If you take away the thought process that restricts a day to 24hours the two evolution and creationism go hand in hand...as far as humans NOT evolving compare the build and stature of the early american settlers with the average american today; heck I'm still amazed at the size of the feet our younger generation!

Answer 2

Evolution is false science.

Nowhere else in science do you find anything evolving from the simple to the complex. Radium loses particles and decays into lead. Not the other way around. Stars also de-evolve (throw of all particles but neutrons and eventually collapse).

Planets lose atmosphere (like Mars). Most chemical compounds destabilize and form sub-compounds over time. Bullets use up their energy and fall to the ground.

But Darwin defied all that. Single celled creatures became many celled creatures. Many celled creatures became the precursor of apes and man. His evolution defies science by evovling from the simple to the complex

I thnk myself that life obeys natural rules Genes age, genes die, genes split, genes become corrupted through chemical insults and radiation. In the process they become less complex.

So life began complex and decayed, not the other way around. Adam was our ancestor and as the lines decayed, they formed new branches. The branch on which modern man sits held a lesser decayed creature. The branch on which a chimpanzee sits is a greater decayed branch.

We are related to chimps, but they diverged from our branch and ours in the main branch (of hominids, God also created many non-hominid branches).

One argument against this is that no remains of our species can be dated as older than 200,000 years. But it wasn't too long ago that the number was placed at 100,000. The problem lies in assuming that places like Olduvai Gorge are typical. They are not. They are places where catclysm tore up the earth and raised the old layers high enough for us to investigate. That only proves that other remains lie hundreds of feet underground.

Darwinists use an old, logically flawed argument. "No million year old Homo Sapiens has ever been found. Therefore none existed" Most people recognize the fallacy of the "lack of evidence is evidence of lack" nonsense. I'll not honor it with further comment.


I will probably not live to see them excavate the first million year old human. But when they do, the anomaly of reversed evolution will be recognized.

Answer 3

Many primitive cultures say they came from the soil. Adam was created from clay, or soil. The primordial ooze could be the reference point. The Bible was written wel into man's history. It was based on earlier writtings. Noah's flood was written about at least three times previously. Many bible stories are simply retellings. My favorite bible myth is the Three Wise Men, or the Magi. The Magi were the high priests of Zoroastrianism, the predominant religion in the Middle East at the time of Christ's birth. By having the Magi bow to Jesus, the Gospel writers were telling the Zoroastrians it was O.K. to worship Jesus. We, as with most cultures believe our dogma to be the right one. Yet, we tend to forget there is a great big world out there. Look for my next question on this subject.

Answer 4

The basic elements of dirt - were created by God - they are also the same basic elements we are made up of as we were made from the clay or dirt of the earth - if a Creator knew that it would take certain elements in progressive state, as the order he created things, to produce the elements in which all would cycle and continue, then what more does one really need to know or be concerned with? The mere idea that a cingle cell of anything from anywhere slid out of anything and began a tedious process of dividing and mutating and bringing forth what we have of our planet today is quite illogical and defies all common sense. It is far easier for the imagination to grasp onto a creator who spoke into existence all that was needed than it is to believe a single cell of who knows what evolved into the many billion cells of what we now have. Both require faith - it's a matter of which one a person chooses to put their faith in - why didn't the cell leave us some trace of its plans and a guide for direction, was it not all-knowing and therefore couldn't know that we would actually be quite dependent people? At least a Creator took claim of all-knowing and gave us, however right or wrong it might seem, but having been proven correct over and over and over by sociological study, that we would need guidance as dependent people, a means by which we receive guidance. What did cell do again? Given the two options, I see little evidence that cell did anything of its own accord and everyone wants to know who created God, well, who created cell or whatever its name is ? And when did cell ever represent itself as man, so as to know and feel and think and hurt as man, so as to build a relationship with man? At least God did that. I'm just blinded by the awesomeness of what God claims versus the what of cell?

Answer 5

superb. Your professor doesn't seem to comprehend evolution ok. first of all, you could bypass extra back then unmarried celled organisms. there is extra undemanding kinds of existence. and also you're superb that the clinical starting place of existence is abiogenesis, not evolution. And the tremendous Bang is thoroughly off topic to evolution. perhaps you ought to position in writing the paper with the tremendous Bang, abiogenesis, and evolution. And leave a huge area of your paper to describe why those are separate theories that purely combine even as attacked by using creationists. also, none of those theories say issues "lined up" to help existence. that is like declaring water molecules in simple terms "line up" to create a crystalline structure even as frozen.

Answer 6

God is only the creation of the fragile human mind trying to find hope in hopelessness and trying to give reason to his worthless existence...
Everything started frm nothin...first there was nothin n then was the big bang..after tht we hav all the theory u need...
Its hard to imagine nothin but im sure u can...n there u;'ll see no god...we r just animals...just evolvin
SO do the evolution

Answer 7

Here we go again. Do you think that space is empty, an infinite vacuum of perfectly still nothing. If you do you are wrong. All matter is fundamentally energy, held together by other forces to form atoms, These atoms form together using natural forces to create molecules. The molecules .......to make slime. God this is boring....

This is a damn sight easier to believe than an intelligent creator or designer

Answer 8

nobody knows. not the creationists or the evolution est.
Infinity is impossible for the human mind to comprehend. That explains why people can't accept death as final. They cannot comprehend that there is nothing more forever, Infinity.
The same for evolutionist. If live came from the sea, where did the sea come from? Was it always there waiting? If so, can we comprehend it having been there forever? No!!!

Answer 9

Bless you my ID brother. Why do the "evolution only" believers deny the hand of God created everything they believe in?

We can only hope America will see the error of its ways and incorporate Intelligent Design into its schools so the next generation of scientists will not be so blind.

Glory be ID.

Answer 10

There is no such thing as evolution in humans. Humans have been created.

Only thing that might have evolved are plants and animals. How can some people degrade themselves ad compare themselves to animals.