Creationists, why ask for evidence for evolution if you have no intention of reading it?

Question

What is the point? I can provide mountains of evidence for evolution, but in my experience creationists simply won't read a word of it anyway. They'll use a cheap hand-wave to dismiss it, but not actually READ it.

Is their faith really that weak?

PS: here's LOAD of evidence, not that any creationist is going to bother to try to understand it.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/



PPS: before any creationist tries to say that they understand evolution but dismiss it anyway, provide proof that you understand it. Give me a brief description of what evolution posits, how it's supposed to work, and whether it makes any statements about theology at all. Don't claim to know what you're talking about. PROVE it, and not with a cute & paste job. Your own words, please.

Not ONE SINGLE creationist was able to describe evolution, and one guy actually talked about whales giving brith to cows. That would DISPROVE evolution.

Like I was suggesting, not a single anti-evolutionist here UNDERSTANDS what evolution is.

How can you be against something that you purposely remain ignorant about???????

Answer 1

Why would you expect them to read evolutionary documentation when they don't even read their own Bible?

Answer 2

In as much as I can recall, evolution has six definitions (please bear with me, it has been a while):
1. Cosmic evolution - how the universe come to be what it is today. I think the Big Bang theory falls into this category.

2. Stellar - the developement of stars and planets. There are a lot of stars out there, but as far as I've read and heard, no one has actually seen the actual 'birth' of a star.

3. Chemical - Periodic table stuff.

4. Organic - this is where the whole question of the origin of life would come in.

5. Macro-evolution - this is where there is a transformation from kind to kind, for example fish to ape, dinosaur to bird. The fossil record is the strongest evidence used for this area of evolution, but there are indeed, holes.

6. Micro-evolution - a more layman term would be variations that happen within a species, like cat and tiger - they're both feline. That sort of thing.

I don't know if this is anywhere near the definition you are looking for. It seems to me you are looking for some magic words. My magic words are in Genesis chapter one.

P.S.- I am a Christian who reads both sides. My biggest beef is the mud slinging from both sides. That aside, I have 2 reading recommends:

~From the Evolution Side: Intelligent Thought - Science Versus the Intelligent Design Movement edited by John Brockman
.........This is a compilation of 16 essays written by evolutionist from all areas of science (biology, philosophy, physics, etc.). It has a lot of research, but a lot of great response to how these scientists feel about the Intelligent Design Movement.

~From the Creationist Side: The Seed - Evolution: Fact or Fiction by Dr. S.V. Job
..........This is a quick read that I just finished, but enjoyed. Christians, if you're looking for a starting point, I recommend this one to get you going. It's full of facts, history, and just plain old science.

Quote of the Day:
"The Truth is Out there"
-Fox Mulder

Answer 3

I am a creationists and I do read evolutionary articles. If evolution was science, then it can be observed, in which ONLY MICROEVOLUTION CAN! Macroevolution cannot be observed or demonstrated in a lab environment. I have never seen a cow turn into a whale. I have never seen a monkey turn into a human. I have never seen an mammal that gives birth to a fish or a reptile. Evolution is backwards. It does not allow our kids to think. Design is the only way to explain how everything got here in the first place. If you think we came from a ricky soup, which came from nothing, then you're the idiot. Matter cannot be created or destroyed so how can the big band (big dud) come out of nothing?

Answer 4

I am so glad you said evidence.. Most evolutionist here say proof. There is No Proof for either school.. I have seen the evidence. Eventually it all comes down to faith, to what you believe. For me that is creation. I have seen attempts to spontaneously generate life is the kind of conditions that science said exited in the primordial world. It didn't work, all that was able to be done was the generation of a slime that dissipated when the electricity was turned off. I might even be able to except that life began that way if you could add in Devinne direction. Any other methods just require more faith than I can summon up... Contact me if you want some evidence of creationism...

Answer 5

Nobody is going to make a life long study of evolution once they get to a few of the basics and find it wanting.. Just like a lot of the cults, once you find that their basics are flawed then you stop studying all the points they try to make that are based on the basics..
A debate on carbon dating in answers is impossible as to its length as no one would read the whole thing.. One can only debate points and leave it at that..

Answer 6

You have a valid point but let me bring up two more points. Number 1: You're judging one whole group of people based on a few. This is not a good idea. Number 2: The door swings both ways. I don't know of a whole lot of Darwinians that take time to research the other side.

I do know, however, of a man that set out to prove that Christ didn't exist. As a non-believer he wanted to prove to his newly born-again wife that Christianity was a farse. In his research he was able to PROVE the opposite. The name of his book is "Case For Christ".

Answer 7

Yeah, they need to remember that this was a gradual process of humans observing for THOUSANDS of years. They saw fossils, strata in rocks, etc.... and believed in various gods the whole time. Eventually they came to realize (prob more than once) that there was a pattern that just couldn't be explained except through the idea of evolution. It has nothing to do with rejecting god or anythting like that.

Answer 8

Why ask evidence for creation if you have no intention of reading it?
Mountains of evidence??Ha! That's laughable. It's not like we're all stupider than you and haven't studied it. Evolution has so many holes in it, it's really quite pathetic that people still believe it.

Answer 9

So basically, in order to answer your question we must play by your rules and dot the "i" and cross the "t" a certain way. I just took a look at the suggested website and it would take several HOURS if not DAYS to read everything in there.

Sorry, I don't know about others, but I don't have hours and days to read and analyze and research my answer to this one question. Not to mention, we're not "allowed" to cut and paste to save time.

Sounds like a pretty unfair system of responding to a question.

Answer 10

i am a Christian. and although our religion is based on faith. the best scientific explanation of creation is given by Kent Hovind. he is a ex science teacher who now runs an organization teaching creation. he debates many evolutionists from universities and has never lost, because evolutionis also a religion based on faith.creation has more scientific evidence than evolution only it is illegal to teach in public schools

Answer 11

If YOU believe in evolution YOU believe in free will, so if someone not wanna read or think in something, do you respect that?
I hope so, because if someone doesn't want to believe the same as you, you don't have to convince the others to believe what YOU choose to believe.
NO MAtter if you think your'e right or wrong.
(Cause don't really matter)

Sorry if there are any misstyping here but the english is not my first language