Creationists, prove that you are not ignorant of evolution & I'll prove that I am not ignorant of creationism?

Question

Now according to my interpretation of creationism, God created the world 6000 years and gave birth to Adam and Eve. Their offsprings later had families together and jump-started the human population. Back then interbreeding was not a problem because humans were more pure. However, as generations went by we got sicker, smaller, and less pure so interbreeding developed hazardous flaws during maturation.

Dinosaurs lived with humans as well, and we have proof of this because there are expertly-crafted cave paintings depicting various dinosaurs. Now up until then, the entire human race had the same ethnicities, but in a blasphemous attempt to reach Heaven, the Tower of Babel was created. God was so angry that He created diversity amongst people to prevent the Tower from being finished. That is why we have so many ethnicities, languages, and so many different religions. Adam and Eve died after living for a thousand years, and the human race has gone downhill since.

And don’t say, “I don’t have to prove anything to you,” because you do. You need to prove to me that you have faith in God as well as faith in reality, and trust me, you need BOTH to be a decent human being.

...to say you're a devouted Christian.

Sorry Anonymously...that was a typo. I meant, "to be a devouted Christian," instead of "decent human being."

Answer 1

Well, before I go into evolution, allow me to correct your understanding of creationism.

Yes, God created the world as little as 6000 years ago. We cannot give an exact number because there is no way of knowing for certain. God did not, however, give birth to Adam and Eve. He created them. The Bible says that Adam was formed out of the dust of the ground. Eve was later formed from a rib taken from Adam (this does not mean that men have fewer ribs than women!) Yes, Adam and Eve's children got together and had children of their own. Apparently, genetic degradation had not reached the critical point at which negative mutations were a possibility or perhaps God interviened so that there would be no mutations.

It is true, dinosaurs did live at the same time as humans. We (scientists that is) have fossils that indicate this such as a dinosaur print with a human footprint in it.

The tower of Babel incident is in the Bible. But, the problem was not wanting to build a tower, it was in the next statement of intent, Gen 11:4 And they said, Go to, let us build us a city and a tower, whose top may reach unto heaven; and let us make us a name, lest we be scattered abroad upon the face of the whole earth. You see, God commanded that man fill the earth but man had other ideas; he wanted to make a name (pride) for himself and stay together in one place. God confused their LANGUAGE (not ethnicity or race), thereby forcing them to seperate and spread out into the world.

Here, we might begin to see natural selection. Certain skin variations were more useful in certain regions than in others. As a result, we, some 6000 years later, see the "races" that you speak of. In reality, however, we are all of one race.

Now, lets consider evolution, as I understand it. (There are many theories out there, so this might or might not correspond with your understanding of evolution.) Some unknown billions of years ago, the universe was formed. It might have been formed when a ripple formed in this "homogenous region of nothing" or possibliy there was one mass that exploded and the gravitational forces created by the smaller masses acted upon the other nearby masses to form the universe as we know it today. However it was formed, I don't see this a part of evolution. Perhaps it is necessary to go back that far to explain the acceptance of the theory of evolution rather than the theory of creation, but in a strict sense, it is not part of evolution.

Evolution is the theory that all complex organisms mutated from less complex organisms. One of the challenges of this theory is to explain where that first oganism came from. But, then it must be explained where that first protein came from and then where that first molecule came from and how these things happened to come together under just the right circumstances to produce life. These challenges, in themselves, do not prove that evolution is wrong, but then we must ask, where did that first mass come from?

Newton stated a law: For every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. Can we extrapolate from this say , "for every event, there is a cause"? Observation suggests that this is so.

Another problem is a disproven law (which is now considered only an incorrect theory). The theory was called spontaneous generation. It stated that out of the inanimate comes the animate, or life comes from non-life. This is exactly what evolution, at is simplest level, teaches.

Next, we must look at the laws of physics. One of the known and accepted laws states that "all things tend toward disorder". In other words, everything decays. However, evolution teaches just the opposite; everything is getting better.

I am not saying that natural selection does not occur, but evolution from one simple life form to all that is does not agree with the KNOWN laws.

Answer 2

That's actually pretty good. There's a bit more evidence that dinosaurs have lived with humans... there's skin remnants being found in dinosaur bones, and skin remnants can't survive millions of years, I believe the it's somewhere around 30000 years at the most. I also can't comment on the Tower of Babel story either.

Okay, evolution... it's a combination of survival of the fittest, where life that cannot survive will eventually die out, and the best survive, and then they breed and get better and better, more adapted to the environment. If this process is allowed to continue over a very very long time, then species will be able to slowly transform into other species. Since the monkey is the closest to us humans, it's widely believed that we decended from monkeys. As for how all this matter came to be in the first place, this one i'm not sure about. I believe the latest idea is 'abiogenics,' where there's a sea of molecules, and then the molecules eventually formed together to form cells, and then from there, life slowly evolved. While it is highly improbable these steps would happen, if given enough time, the improbable outcome will EVENTUALLY happen.

I believe that's most of evolution. I'm probably missing some things here and there, but... I always do that, lol. ^_^

Answer 3

The problem with explaining evolution is everyone has their own idea where evolution ends and another theory like the big bang theory begins.

I'll give you my understanding of the most common explanation of a creator-less origin of existence.



13.7 Billion years ago all matter was condensed into a singularity or a "hot spot" suddenly it all expanded.

This matter flys around and collects together to make up galaxies and planets and so on. After several billion years earth is formed and then over more time just the right combinations of matter get together and form proteins which then just the right combinations of protein get together and form a living cell. The cells over more billions of years change because of enviormental needs ( natural selection) and possibly mutation caused by other environmental factors.

Several million years ago primates started showing up and then eventually humans.

Answer 4

In my own words, here is how I understand it...

Evolution is based on the theory of slow mutation and natural selection. As a mutation gives rise to an advantage, this advantage carries over to the next incarnation. Natural selection will then weed out via the survival of the fittest. Those that cannot survive are replaced by those that can. Millions of years of such redundancy then leads to a cycle of revisionism in the gene pool.

BTW - Your description of Creationism isn't accurate. You are stating various views of the creation story, but not the core, which includes the term "Intelligent Design" as well as evidences that science is currently struggling with, such as a universe that is winding down (hence an initial "winding up" moment in time). But your disortation was not totally off the mark. You will probably say the same regarding my take on evolution as well.

Answer 5

First of all, we can look at the evidence of science.

The evidence shows a 4.5 billion year old year earth with a 13.7 year old universe.

The big bang is a pretty good theory.

Many different animal fossils exist in many layers of rock, with similar types being close to each other in the layers.

They figure that life has existed on earth for close to 4 billion years with the Cambrian explosion taking place about 500,000,000 years ago (where more complex life-forms than single cell creatures started to appear in abundance).


However .....


There is no evidence of evolution in this.

There is no scientific evidence at all that one thing came from another.

It is all supposition that is treated as fact by scientists.

Some form of evolutionary process could have occurred, but there is no proof either way.


Particularly without proof is that the evolutionary mechanism was by natural selection.

That is pure concoction presented as scientific fact.

There is proof for micro-evolution in that changes *within* species have taken place by natural selection, but there is no proof at all that natural selection has given rise to any new species.

Natural selection for the emergence for new species is based not upon science but a philosophical premise which is a sort of faith.

That philosophical premise states that all that has arisen in earth's history must come from the knowable empirical scientific laws subject to the scientific method.

It is a metaphysical presupposition and not a scientific one.


Intelligent design, on the other hand, *is* scientific.

It looks for the evidence that the life-forms that have arisen must have come about from an intelligent designer (who may or may not have used an evolutionary process).

That is not quite the same as the Judeo-Christian God, for it looks to the evidence of a superior intelligence capable of designing it, without recourse to explaining the nature of this superior intelligence.

Answer 6

Wow, is that tower of Babel story in the bible? Funny! I especially like your interbreeding theory.

Answer 7

"You need to prove to me that you have faith in God as well as faith in reality, and trust me, you need BOTH to be a decent human being."

- I do not have to prove anything, because technically - the only thing you have to do - is die.
- You do NOT need both faith in god and faith in reality to be a decent human being. You can be decent without them, or only one of the two.
- I don't have to trust you, usually I do not trust people on the internet.

Good day to you.

Answer 8

So...um...not one creationist thinks they can give a basic overview of how stuff developed here according to evolution?

Answer 9

people please. Nothing just comes out of nothing. Everything you see was itself a different form before, It will again be something else when its time comes.