English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I want to know specifics

2006-07-27 01:55:47 · 26 answers · asked by gunterfamily2 1 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

26 answers

There is no logical explanation- here is some real logic and reason:

I urge you to use discernment, reason and logic when thinking aobut evolution- all the things evolutionists accuse us of not using , but really- do the principles of evolution make sense? If this has taken place over the course of millions of years, little by little, then we are being decieved when we are told we are looking for "the missing link" we are looking for millions of missing links- besides that- there are so many common sense, scientific questions that evolution just cannot answer- no matter how you twist it.
If you are really interested in education and not just disproving something that does not fit your mold- read this article, it is fun reading but very informative and common sense-
Meet Gaspy: the lungfish:

http://www.reflecthisglory.org/study/did...

here are other bits of interesting fact for you to ponder :

Charles Dawson, a British lawyer and amateur geologist announced in 1912 his discovery of pieces of a human skull and an apelike jaw in a gravel pit near the town of Piltdown, England . . . Dawson's announcement stopped the scorn cold. Experts instantly declared Piltdown Man (estimated to be 300,000 to one million years old), the evolutionary find of the century. Darwin's missing link had been identified. Or so it seemed for the next 40 or so years. Then, in the early fifties . . . scientists began to suspect misattribution. In 1953, that suspicion gave way to a full-blown scandal: Piltdown Man was a hoax . . . tests proved that its skull belonged to a 600-year-old woman, and its jaw to a 500-year-old orangutan from the East Indies." Our Times--the Illustrated History of the 20th Century (Turner Publishing, 1995, page 94).

Science Fiction
The Piltdown Man fraud wasn't an isolated incident. The famed "Nebraska Man" was built from one tooth, which was later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig. "Java Man" was found in the early 20th Century, and was nothing more than a piece of skull, a fragment of a thigh bone and three molar teeth. The rest came from the deeply fertile imaginations of plaster of Paris workers. "Heidelberg Man" came from a jawbone, a large chin section and a few teeth. Most scientists reject the jawbone because it's similar to that of modem man. Still, many evolutionists believe that he's 250,000 years old. No doubt they pinpointed his birthday with good old carbon dating. Now there's reliable proof. Not according to Time magazine (June 11, 1990). They published an article in the science section that was subtitled, "Geologists show that carbon dating can be way off." Don't look to "Neanderthal Man" for any evidence of evolution. Recent genetic DNA research indicates the chromosomes do not match those of humans. They do match those of bipedal primates (apes).

What does Science Say?
Here are some wise words from a few respected men of science: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." (Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research). "Evolution is unproved and unprovable." (Sir Arthur Keith--he wrote the foreword to the 100th edition of, Origin of the Species). "Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever." (Dr. T. N. Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission, USA).

"To suppose that the eye . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species

A great resource for some education that is logical and common sense is called "The Science or Evolution: expand your mind" You can get this DVD from WayoftheMaster.com

2006-07-30 16:01:54 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Evolution cannot explained or proved logically and scientifically.
Charles Darwin must have been a atheist because he did not recognize that God created everything and chose to make a false theory based on his limited intelligence. Evolution has been shown be a fraud and exposed for what is really is---a big lie and refusing to acknowledge the Supreme Creator 's work. The odds of the universe,animals, planets and humans of starting out as a simpler then evolving into another are a million to zero chance. Based of the false evolution teaching what caused the Big Bang theory? God did it all,our understanding is like grain of sand compared to the wisdom of the Lord.

2006-07-27 02:17:01 · answer #2 · answered by isbros 3 · 0 0

How can you explain God, LOGICALLY?

Seriously, understanding evolution properly is degree level biology. Do you really think that someone is going to post an answer that will answer all your questions. Facts and information contained in volumes of scientific books?

By posting the question in the religion section it seems pretty apparent that you have no interest whatsoever in learning about evolution. You just want to see some Jesus freaks bash it down and talk about creationism or intelligent design.

If you really want to learn about biology take a few college courses and review the evidence and theory for yourself. Otherwise don't try and pretend you are on some quest for knowledge.

2006-07-27 02:04:57 · answer #3 · answered by ZCT 7 · 0 0

Traits which help a species survive are passed down to the next generation. Traits which don't are more likely not, since the species would be more likely to die off before they could reproduce, or be limited in the number of offspring. More offspring means more of that species, and they can take more advantage of resources. The limited species gets crowded out, and dies. I never could see the religious debate. The church fights the evolution idea. I embrace it as just another miracle God created. I don't see why they can't understand that it is more complex to create a being capable of changing to adapt to different environments, than one stable species which can't. Look at the machines and such man has created. To build an adaptable model is incredibly harder than making one stable one. I know if I were the Lord, I would have put in place the ability to evolve. To be honest, I'm overwhelmed at how much forethought would have gone into it all. To me, it's just more proof of God's work, and how powerful He really is.

2006-07-27 02:09:41 · answer #4 · answered by fishing66833 6 · 0 0

Alright, one lesson on evolution, coming right up.

Evolution works based on natural selection. Natural selection is the natural weeding out of incapable individuals from the environment. Let's use the example of giraffes. The ancestor of the giraffe had a short neck. But some individuals were born with slightly longer necks, which made them able to reach slightly higher leaves. These giraffes were more likely to survive than those with abnormally short necks or even regular necks and were more likely to breed and pass on thier DNA. Over an immense period of time, because evolution is pretty slow, giraffes became what they are today.

Natural selection works on all creatures, and is why evolution happens.

2006-07-27 02:07:28 · answer #5 · answered by Lioness 2 · 0 0

Just one example. This example of evolution recently happened in the last 20 years. And just so you know I am a Christian.

On one Island in the Galapagos there was a species of finch who had no competition. It had a medium sized beak and could eat most kinds of seeds on the Island. Then a flock of a different larger sized finch with a larger beak flew to the Island and established itself. With it's larger beak it could eat more of the larger seeds and medium sized seeds but has difficulty eating the smallest seeds. It quickly ate the large and medium seeds and left very few for the smaller sized finch. Over a period of twenty years the smaller finch developed an even smaller beak than it had before in order to fully take advantage of the smaller sized seed that the larger finches had some difficulty eating so that the smaller finch could eat all the seed before the larger finches could get to it. Now 100% of the smaller finch has the smaller beak and eats only the smaller seed species. Here we see two changes. Beak size and Diet. This is proven Evolution that we can see with our own eyes. Does this mean we came from monkeys? You will have to decide that for yourselves.

2006-07-27 02:07:16 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Wouldn't this question be better asked in the biology section of Q&A? By posting it in the religion section, it might come across as trolling.

Anyway, let me refer you to a message board thread that explains evolution so you can understand it...
http://www.atheistnetwork.com/viewtopic.php?t=3035

In short, biological evolution explains the diversity of life on earth from a scientific/natural viewpoint (i.e. without a supernatural explanation).

Imagine a tribe of little furry creatures. We'll call them Fuzzy Winkers. They live in the trees in the jungle. One day, some of the Fuzzies leave the jungle and travel to the beach. Now, the Fuzzies in the jungle are in a totally different environment than the ones on the beach with a totally different set of enemies, food sources, etc.

The ones on the beach play in the water, eat fish, seaweed, etc. Those fuzzies with a bit more fat on their bodies float better than those without and are therefore less apt to drown. Natural selection gives them an advantage to survival. They pass this genetic tendency towards a subcutaneous fat layer on to their children. Those fuzzies who remain fat-free/lean end up dying out. Likewise, by standing tall on their hindlegs, they can see farther along the ocean and the beach. This gives them an advantage looking food or for enemies.

The fuzzies in the jungle however, remain lean. Because of the thick jungle growth, there is no advantage towards standing up on hindlegs. If anything, it is an advantage in speed to stay on all fours. Fuzzies who move quickly on all four legs are more apt to survive and pass that trait onto their offspring.

Slowly, the two different tribes of fuzzies divurge. After a million years, they no longer resemble one another and can no longer breed together (because of all the genetic differences that have added up).

I'm not a biologist, so I hope I explained this okay. good luck!

2006-07-27 02:13:24 · answer #7 · answered by imrational 5 · 0 0

***Just an example, BASED on science****

Long ago, giraffes had shorter necks, but there was some variety...some giraffes had a little longer and some a little shorter...The food that they eat was leaves from the tops of the trees...it was very easy for the longer necked giraffes to reach the leaves, so they were healthier and stronger...when the mated they picked other giraffes with long necks because they were healthier and strong too...then their babies had longer necks and over time, no giraffe wanted to mate with short neck giraffes, so they eventually became obsolete...now all we have are long neck giraffes, and that's how evolution works...

If you really want specifics, I can get into genetics and recessive and dominant genes, but that would take some time, and you didn't post this in the science forum...

Maybe you can explain to me how the above story contradicts anything in the Bible?

2006-07-27 02:05:29 · answer #8 · answered by jillymack06 3 · 0 0

Logicially, evolution is a mathematical impossiblilty. the chance of naturalistic evolution occuring are one in 10^1447. to put that in perspective, if you gathered all the matter in the universe, or even 14 of them, it would be like selecting a particular electron out of all that matter. There hasnt been enough time for evolution to occur. on top of which, mutations are generally harmful and add no information to the DNA, making them insignificant in going from single-celled to multicellular organisms.

2006-07-27 02:03:36 · answer #9 · answered by Spellcaster97 2 · 0 0

Not so difficult, survival of the fittest...

And no, don't attack me with the fact that we have found no prove of mutating species in fossiles. That can very easily be explained by the very low number of actual finds. One of the best knowm dinosaurs is T Rex. but did you know there have been less than 50 of them found? Since changes will occur relatively rapid, betweem longer mpre stable times, and we find only so few fossiles of the stable periods, finding a mutating one would be the proverbial needle in the haystack, and a darn big haystack too!

2006-07-27 02:00:56 · answer #10 · answered by Gungnir 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers