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

All the evidence supports them. Don't they realise how stupid they sound when they say it, it's like saying "I don't believe in air" It's staring you right in the face just remove the blindness that religion causes and see for your self. Use a bit of logic for once in your life. Say no to jesus http://www.saynotojesus.tk

2006-08-02 09:28:41 · 17 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

17 answers

i agree 100%. I am a scientific person and in my opinion, "creation" is not possible. We have all the scientific evidence to support our theory of evolution. I feel it's a lack of intelligence to believe the bible story of creation. I think we live in a society where people use the word "god" to explain things away, that they don't understand.
thank you for asking this question!

2006-08-02 09:39:31 · answer #1 · answered by lady luck 6 · 0 1

I'm an atheist and I am very skeptical of the big bang theory. I have a hard time believing that "nothing" became "something". I think that's just as illogical as "god did it". I can believe it if we assume that matter has always existed, that nothing did not magically become something, which is a safe assumption because as far as we know, matter cannot be created or destroyed. I guess I believe in the big bang theory except for the very beginning, I believe once the matter is already there.

(It's definitely possible that I would feel differently about it if I knew all the science behind it.)

2006-08-02 09:43:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Believing in one doesn't mean you have to believe in both. I believe that the Big Bang is pretty much indisputable but that doesn't mean evolution is true. They are actually two completely different subjects. If you love science so much I think you would know that. They are connected, that's for sure. The earth is millions of years old, yes. But some Christians believe in the Big Bang but believe God let the earth develop and form in terms of the earth matter (rocks, the earth's core, dirt, etc.) but then brought life about 6,000 years ago (plants, animals, humans, etc.). I know you don't believe that but I just wondered if you had heard that perspective? I used to make the mistake of clumping the Big Bang and evolution together but after talking with professors at college, especially in the physics department, I now don't do that. Not that you were.

2006-08-02 10:39:28 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Do you believe in the Big Bang, that there was a singularity from which the universe came that transcends our physical science laws, that the universe is not eternal, but had a beginning. Cool, so do I. But, Who made that bang? It couldn't exist inside the universe, because the universe didn't exist. Couldn't be explained with laws that function in the universe, it would have to transcend them, because the universe didn't exist. Are you aware that Big Bangers are pointing to design? If not you need to brush up on your research.
And evolution? The Cambrian explosion completely tears down Darwin's Theory. Darwin did not leave room for a sudden onslaught of species, but yet, there they are with no transitional species, Full grown and as one scientist said, just like Athena bursting forth from the forehead of Zeus.
So, kudos on the Big Bang, but evolution? It's falling off, and I did not use the Bible to come up with that, I did my research like anyone that wants to know the truth. Yes, I believe the Bible and I respect science and I believe there is room for both in the life and mind of a normal person.

2006-08-02 11:01:26 · answer #4 · answered by Terri 6 · 0 0

Think about this. The eye is such a complicated organ that it would take MILLIONS of years to go from a minute particle to a full eye. The earth is not even that old!!!

A standard particle is focused on subatomic particles, which have less structure than atoms. These include electrons, protons, and neutrons (protons and neutrons are actually composite particles, made up of quarks) as well as particles produced by radiative and scattering processes, such as photons, neutrinos, and muons, as well as a wide range of exotic particles.

The dynamics of particle physics are governed by quantum mechanics.

Quantum mechanics says that when you search beyond a proton or neutorn what you find is NOTHING..a big VACUM...but wait the vacum is full of energy...

I wonder where the energy comes from and how is transformed? Something much bigger than your small mind is behind creation and it is not a monkey

2006-08-02 09:43:11 · answer #5 · answered by hmc121667 3 · 0 0

Big Bang Theory, Darwin's Theory. Quirky but theories nonetheless. God deals in facts and facts alone. That is the difference. They are reaching for ideas 7 evidence to disprove God so they can continue a life of lawlessness.

2006-08-02 09:40:04 · answer #6 · answered by djone3 2 · 0 0

actually, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that one species evolved into another at any point in history.
I cannot make you believe something that you don't want to believe, but 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

The fact is there is nothing here that was not created, planned with a purpose in mind. Is there anything on this earth- not natural that just came together on its own. You can put pieces of 'stuff' in a box and put whatever conditions you choose and without a purpose and planning for that purpose, you won't get anything useful. I have yet to see anyone show matter being created out of nothing, or one species evolving into another or any proof of that happening. this world works in a clockwork type order , there is precision and purpose to everything you see - you cannot have purpose without a plan and you cannot have a plan without a planner- there is nothing that can disprove intelligent design. Period!

2006-08-03 20:07:03 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Logically, I can't believe a big bang caused all the beauty and wonderful places and things in the world.

2006-08-02 09:36:51 · answer #8 · answered by Grandma Susie 6 · 0 0

According to Gallop poll 70% people in America have rejected and don't believe evolution, Pal.
Get with the program; if you believe evolution theory you are way behind the curve!

2006-08-02 09:42:01 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

just remember that while compelling, both are just theories. Not scientific fact. Look up theory to know the difference. I'm not saying I don't agree that they are more plausible than ID or Creation but they can still be wrong. plausibility doesn't discount possibility. Why does it bother you so much what they believe though. If it truly offends you don't come here.

2006-08-02 09:35:29 · answer #10 · answered by Jake S 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers