Why do creationists lie and say there is no evidence for evolution?

Question

For several decades now evolution has been prven beyond a doubt in uncountable labs and class rooms throughout the world.

How?

Through the breeding and study of flies. Scientists have been studying hundred if not thousands of generations of flies and have documented genetic mutations in these flies that has led to evolution.

Or, how about we look at the world of medicine. Viruses evolve every day. Thats the problem with the bird flue, it has evolved from being just a bird born disease to one that is capable of killing humans.

Or, how about bacterias. Antibiotics are becoming less effective everyday due to the fact that bacteria are EVOLVING and becoming resistant and immune to the drugs.

So how can creationists ignore these facts and outright lie and say they do not exist?

Ah, so you want an example of animals changing, ok.

The evidence for that is in fish.

Mudskippers and snake heads are just two, both have evolved to WALK ON LAND AND HOLD THEIR BREATH.

Answer 1

Creationists are 'educated' in church where they are told how the world works by some kind of minister of religion. They are given half truths and misinformation by various 'experts' to confuse them and turn them away from science.

To continue their Biblical delusions they ignore any real facts or scientific data, and shy away from actually learning about how things really work.

Answer 2

Concerning the debate going on about intelligent design and evolution: is it possible that the final answer about which of these two seemingly opposite ideas is correct could simply be yes?

With one position firmly held by the believers and the other just as fearlessly defended by the non-believers, if you happen to be in a position somewhere near the middle, it does not look all that complex. From this position, you wonder why either-or has to be the answer.

If you believe that some higher being created the universe by intelligent design, what more elegant and intelligent design could there have been than a self-regulating system that continually checks its own errors and makes its own corrections in mid-stream as an integral part of the process.

This all seems quite logical to me although it probably won’t satisfy the believers because they are afraid to see any truth other than the one they have been told to believe in. Inversely it certainly won’t satisfy the non-believers because it leaves them stuck with a god that they are so obviously terrified of.

To sum up this view from the center, it might be most easily be explained by saying perhaps the designer was intelligent. Problem is, the designer was likely so intelligent that those seeking to prove that it is intelligently designed may be incapable of ever understand it well enough to see it for the elegant self regulating design that it has always been.

The nonbelievers will be similarly handicapped due to the internal terror the have about the idea that there may be a God. Neither side being able to leave their entrenched position for fear they may have to admit they were wrong. While the rest of us stand by trying to figure out what all the fuss is about. Personally I don’t think anyone is wrong, I just feel both sides are about half right.

Answer 3

Oh c'mon. Lie is not a good word to choose. You would have to know a persons motives but personlly you far overstate the case and the uppper hand is with the creationists not the evolutionists.

Everyone agrees there is animal adaptations, it is animal type to anmimal type that is not supported by evidense There are animlal change because of the fall, micro evolution by adaptation and adaptations be hybrid. Creationists rightly believe however monkeys however do not turn into Democrats and elephants do not turn into Republicans..

Actually, at times both creationist and evolutionists use really bad arguments.

Both creationists and evolutionists look at the same data and come to different conclusions. In the case of mutations I recommend Are you familiar with the work on genetic information and mustations IN THE BEGINING WAS INFORMATION by information scientist Werner Gitt ?
see audio and DVD at
www.answersingenesis.org


by the way, really bad arguments not to use by creationists are
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/faq/dont_use.asp

and bad arguments used by evolutionists are
http://www.answersingenesis.org/home/area/re2/appendix1.asp

Answer 4

Absolutely Brilliant! Through the breeding and study of flies there are now documented accounts of flies evolving into creatures that have little hands so that they can eat leftover pizza at family reunions.

Evolution is a theory for fools.

Answer 5

Creationists have generally mixed up the difference between "there is no evidence that convinces me" with "there is no evidence at all." They think that since they're not convinced, the evidence is nonexistant--not that it's just not enough to compel them.

In court, "evidence" doesn't mean "the jury will be convinced by this." Evidence is details offered to support a premise... and there is evidence of both evolution and creation. That doesn't mean anyone "must be convinced" of either of those (nor that they're mutually incompatible); it just means that some facts support each idea.

Answer 6

Ok, here's a question to answer your question. Is it not concievable that God uses evolution to create? To all the Christians I ask this.... Have you ever read your own bible and not wondered at things like God using an earthquate to free Paul, or who Cain married (adam and eve only had 2 children, both boys and one killed the other, you do the math) or read a bit deeper into Mary, It says she was not forever a virgin.... So if it is possible that everything I said is proveable and true with your own bible, then is it possible that God does in fact use evolution for creation?

Answer 7

I believe in Creation. I also believe there is room for evolution to some extent in the Creation theory. Did the flies become a different kind of insect or animal or did they just develop different charactaristics within their own species? There is a big difference. Check out the DVD's that offer up some scientific explanation on the Creation Theory or "Intelligent Design," and let me know your opinion after viewing them. You should watch the one titled "Unlocking the Mystery Of Life" and there is one on Darwinian evolution too. Thanks I appreciate it.
http://www.illustramedia.com/orderlaunch2.htm

Answer 8

That is not evidence of evolution. So what did your genetic mutated flies evolve into? Viruses and bacteria have not "evolved" into nothing. If that is "facts" to you, you have got some mutated brain cells.

Answer 9

Reminds me of Bush and the WMD's. He overreacted based upon faulty information provided to him than lied about it...than asked forgiveness (unfortuantely we were a bit too forgiving). He had FAITH in the information he was given and acted accordingly. The same can be said for Creationists. They operate from faulty information, yet to them it's truthful enough. Regardless the proofs to the contrary they continue operating under false assumptions built on faulty data. PEACE!

Answer 10

Some of them actually say that there are no transitional fossils. Another outright lie. There are THOUSANDS of transitional fossils. They are kept in strange and esoteric vaults of arcane knowledge called Museums.
The link provides numerous examples of transitional fossil data.

Oh and bobm, your ignorance is showing. When you can form a coherent sentence that doesn't refer to a thoroughly discredited website, some of us may take you seriously. But I doubt it.