Question about creationism vs evolutionism?

Question

Agnostic, not wanting to convert anyone,

so if I understand what I am reading here on yahoo answers, there are people who believe that human was created by God, and that evolution of man from a different species is not what happened.

I can understand a person not believing in Evolution of man from a different species, this is something that is a scientific theory and heh, there might be a totally better theory out there that explains the Origin of the Species.

So, to those who believe in the creation of the human being by God, this is something that I am curious about.

So this leads me to this question, for the creationist,

What empirical evidence exists that is a basis of scientific facts that I could see and study, that would help me believe that the human being was created by God.

Answer 1

I want you to answer mine first...Can you prove that God doesn't exist?

Answer 2

There are a number of pieces of evidence that support creation, but like evolution, they rely completely on circumstantial evidence.

First is the law of irreducible complexity. This states that certain factors in living things may not have at any point evolved due to the type of complexity involved in the making. Laymen's terms that means things like the bombadeer beetle. He's a cute little guy that lives in south america. He has two chemicals, that when they mix, they explode into a firey explosion to fend off predators. This mechanism couldn't have evolved, because the sacs would not have evolved without a purpose, and if the chemicals evolved first, he would have blown up. Not only that, but there is a reinforced part of his rear that can endure the explosion when he lets it out. The eye is another such factor, but not as humorous. The eye has a number of complicated parts to it. If a creature was to develop part of an eye, it would be a vestigal organ for millions of years before being useful. Vestigal organs that provide a severe weak point in a creature don't kick around forever.

Due to irreducible complexity, it is safe to assume that different types of creatures existed side by side, and had similar properties, and yet were not related. Intelligent design theory states that creatures have similar design because hey, God had a good thing and he stuck with it.

The third law of thermodynamics, which I have been told by people for some reason wouldn't apply at the beginning of the universe like every other scientific law, is another reason. Unfortunately for those people, scientific laws don't have "unless" clauses written into them. Intelligent design, however, I will say also thinks that the third law was not always in place. They use the fact that all things are degenerating to support the fall of man, where people sinned and death and destruction entered the world.

Finally, we have the argument of design. All things in the universe seem to work with remarkable harmony. If you take a creature out of a food chain, it severely hampers the rest of the creatures that are in that chain. This has been seen in many cases throughout history. The fact that everything seems to be interdependent would suggest that there was some intelligent design to the matter. Design has a designer, that designer is defined by Creationism as God.

There are plenty more, and many books on the subject which you can read to look at the evidence for creation. I'd encourage you to look some of them up at the library.

Answer 3

The evidence for the Creation of Man is the lack of Evidence for Creation. Since there is no evidence that man evolved from single celled organisms, it seems logical to conclude that someone or something created man. But that probably isn't what you are looking for.

Where does moral values come from? Animals really don't have any sense of moral values, so that means they had to come from somewhere. There is also so much chaos and distruction going on in the world. If man has been evolving for billions of years, you'd think someone would have made an effort to correct the mistake.

Answer 4

I don't have imperical evidence, I just see way way too many holes in evolution. Take the eye for example. It has thousands of processes involved in seeing anything. If you take one of those processes out of order, the eye doesn't work. So how in the world did that evolve? Suddenly thousands of processes lined up in a perfect and unique order and boom you have an eye? Also why would creatures want to reproduce. If it is survival of the fittest, why would you want to create more creatures who will eat the limited food you already have? And if they were origionally asexual why did they descide to have males and females, it was working fine before! And if we did have ape like ancestors, why don't we still have a tail. Do you have any idea how handy that would be when you come to the door with your hands full? Evolution is dumb, and it is being passed off as science. The fact that evolution is so stupid is enough evidence for me!

Answer 5

Of course you know that using scientific testing methods, neither evolution nor creation can be proven. But, we can look at the evidence we have and make our determinations based on the evidence. I give you this example:

The Amazing Cell

Evidence for creation and against evolution!

by Dr. Dudley Eirich

As a microbiologist, the bacterial flagellum has always fascinated me.

The flagellum is a corkscrew-shaped, hair-like appendage attached to the cell surface, which acts like a propeller, allowing the bacterium to swim. The most interesting aspect of the flagellum is that it is attached to—and rotated by—a tiny, electrical motor made of different kinds of protein.

Like an electrical motor, the flagellum contains a rod (drive shaft), a hook (universal joint), L and P rings (bushings/bearings), S and M rings (rotor), and a C ring and stud (stator). The flagellar filament (propeller) is attached to the flagellar motor via the hook. To function completely, the flagellum requires over 40 different proteins. The electrical power for driving the motor is supplied by the voltage difference developed across the cell (plasma) membrane.

In 1996, Dr. Michael J. Behe, a professor of biochemistry at Lehigh University (and an evolutionist), published a challenging book to classical Darwinian evolution entitled “Darwin’s Black Box.” In this book he uses the flagellum to introduce the concept of “irreducible complexity.” If a structure is so complex that all of its parts must initially be present in a suitably functioning manner, it is said to be irreducibly complex. All the parts of a bacterial flagellum must have been present from the start in order to function at all.

According to evolutionary theory, any component which doesn’t offer an advantage to an organism, i.e. doesn’t function, will be lost or discarded. How such a structure could have evolved in a gradual, step-by-step process as required by classical Darwinian evolution is an insurmountable obstacle to evolutionists. How a flagellum is used, however, adds an additional level of complexity to the picture.

Some bacteria have a single flagellum located at the end of a rod-shaped cell. To move in an opposite direction, a bacterium simply changes the direction of rotation of the flagellum. Other bacteria have a flagellum at both ends of the cell and use one flagellum for going in one direction and the other for going in the opposite direction. A third group of bacteria has many flagella surrounding the cell. These flagella wrap themselves together in a helical bundle at one end of the cell and rotate in unison to move the cell in one direction. If the cell wants to change direction, the flagella unwrap themselves, move to the opposite end of the cell, reform the bundle, and again rotate in a coordinated fashion.

The structural complexity and finely tuned coordination of the bacterial flagellum attests to the work of a master engineer who designed and created the flagellum to function in a wonderfully intricate manner.

If you are really interested in examining the evidence without prejudice and presuppostions, then a web sight I would suggest is:
http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/index.html

Answer 6

For starters, you have the ark of Noah. It is located on the mountains, somewhere in Turkey, and it is being held captive by the Turkish govnment and was discovered some 25 years ago..Today it is sealed off and it was to the exact measurements to those written in the Bible.
Second you have the great Mammoths dicovered up in the north, I believe iceland. The only practical proof and many scientists, agreed, that why they were discovered with undigested food in their bellies was explained best with the happening of a great flood. Dr, Kent Hovin, dr.dino.com explains it in more detail.
Or just type in Creation science evangelism, and you will get all the emperical evidence you need.

Answer 7

Your question is problematic for it co-opts inherent dogma.

Creationism is the genesis account, thus this assumes the Christian Bible.

Evolutionism = the fossil record which is true and then co-opts the un-proven hypothesis that new, complex genetic code can occur naturally.

First, lets all of us assume the fossil record and scientific time-line is true, for it is proven.

The question ought to be: How did we get here? Are we created by a creator (evolved), or did we come into existence thru a scientific process that causes natural creation (evolved).

I think you will get a lot of same old, same old answers.

Answer 8

If you think about it, if there was some evidence of creationism, that would mean that there is evidence of the existance of God. I feel pretty confident there will never be any proof of the existance of God, so thats why I believe in evolution. My question is this - if god created every living thing on earth, he would have created the property of creatures to evolve, therefor, evolution was created by god - allowing for all the proof of evolution to stay, while leaving the possibility of God intact.

Answer 9

What the critics of evolution fail to consider is that evolution is not at odds with religion. If you simply look at people over the last 100 years, there continues to be an evolution humanity. People are taller, healthier, and look quite a bit differently from there relatives 100 years ago. People of European decent tend to have less body hair than 100 years ago. It is no longer need. We adapt to our environment.

Evolution is just a path that we have traveled. To be created in God's own image, does not mean that he have a "face" for God. It merely means that this how he intended us to be.

Answer 10

okay i am a christian and you should read the bible for that. See people say we "evolved" but i did major research for a project on how evolving is basically bull crap and i found out that before Darwin died he said that he was wrong and i didn't just look at one thing i got information from people who study that and many websites. Not many people know that though because the person he told never told anyone eltse. My friend used to believe in that and once i told her it really did make sence to her. The stuff they tot her she said did not make sence and Christianity does. Everyone has there own opinion and i have mine. People may not believe me but i got allot of help on that research project and i found out about that. seriously read Revaluation in the christian bible, or go to a christian church and ask the paster trust me he'll help you. i wouldn't lie about something like that. I'm serious that evolving stuff is really stupid, and if you don't wanna listen to me now when Jesus comes if i were you i would pray and ask him in your heart. If you don't i really think you will regret it.

Answer 11

I am an Athiest, but I belive one of the arguments for creationism is that the chances of humans and all the other animals evolving from a single species is so small as to be practically impossible. I know this is not empirical evidence, but this is the only argument I can recall.