evolution a fraud?

Question

Genetics today is supporting biological evolution far greater than anything we ever seen in the past. If creation is true how come there is so much support of evolution and nothing disproving it?

If there is something disproving evolution what is it? Don't just say evolution is a fraud, give proof that is cannot be true. Also don't just give a link state the reasons why.

And for those that think we have not found the missing link we have found many transition fossils leading from ape to modern man.

There are still apes because of specation.

A theory is a model that sets forth an idea that has been proven time and time again by thousands of different scientists and supported by tons of evidence while having nothing disproving it. The key part is that it has nothing disproving it. A theory is the closest one can get to a fact in science. Nothing is higher. A law which many believe is the absolute in science is a theory that has been observed in the past and can predict future events. So all laws are theories.

wow don't people listen. I said not to just say it is a fraud but show proof of why it cannot be true.

the sun is not shrinking. a forty year study shows it pulsates like a soft ball. many think it is shrinking because that is what the first two years of the studied showed but after such a long time we now know it is not true. I love when people who believe in creation use half truths.

The moon is covered in tons of space dust and so is the earth. Most of the dust settles near the poles.

we have found thousand upon thousand of transition fossils for many species of today that were not hoaxes.

all dinos that have been dated today have been estimated to be millions of years old. rock layers of 10 to 30 feet show a few million year diffrence beteewn dinos and other species. Dinosaurs where around for 250 million years so of course they will be found in different rock layers.

Come on people that believe in creation make this a challenge. Wait you cannot since evolution is true.

modern man has been around for about 100 thousand years. you forget until recently most humans only lived until there twenties at best and few children survived. With this in mind it would take a long time for our population to grow in numbers. Even if you take we are only five thousand years old, that mean it took 4900 years to reach 1 billion yet in 100 years we reached 6.2 billion. Why did our numbers suddenly rise? We have a much higher standard of living today. Next!!!! Please challenge me.

all math proves evolution is possable.

proof for evolution is from DNA of all types from chromasomal DNA to mtDNA, RNA, genes of many types, chemistry, geology such as rock layers and dating, fossil record, seeing micro evolution happening today, vestigel structures, and so much more.

the moon moves about 1cm every year. In the billions of years it has been orbiting the Earth it has moved about 120 thousand miles away. That is very little in cosmic terms. Next!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111

I need to find smarter people that can challenge me. Wait if you believe in creation then you cannot be that smart.

Answer 1

Evolution is true. Creation is written in literal terms but meant to be a metaphore - no one knew about evolution when they needed an explaination so many years ago. So, you have a popular myth and reality. You are free to choose.

There are still Apes because it only takes a mutation of one generation to cause an evolution event. The apes would continue living as they did, the mutant would survive if his mutation gave him survival instincts. Obviously the mutant would need to breed - so, an Ape would be the choice. They would wonder off, and a hundred years later be different for the mutation. Evolution does not happen over night.

Answer 2

Yup. There's a lot of solid evidence to support Evolution. The theory of evolution is only a theory though. This means that although we can find all kinds of evidence to support it, nothing can actually prove it. It's like the theory of gravity. We believe that the mass of things pull other things towards them, but we cannot PROVE that this is why they happen to come together. With Evolution, we can find a lot of fossils that look very similar, as if the living things were related, and changed over time, but we cannot PROVE this.

Intelligent design is also a theory... there's no way to PROVE that some sort of Intelligence put things together the way they are... but there's a difference here. Evolution is a scientific theory. We can prove that it doesn't happen by keeping records of different species for millions of years in the future, and if there's no changes, then Evolution is a fraud. Intelligent design is not a scientific theory, because there's no way to prove that it is false.

No matter what scientific evidence we gather together there's nothing to say that God didn't intelligently design the creature in every fossil to perfectly fill a niche in the environment of the time. Sure, Science might prove that it didn't take exactly seven days as we reckon time now. Sure, Science might prove that the order of things created was a little different (So far, Science has found that the order is pretty close to correct!) but Science cannot prove that there was not a creator behind the apparent actions of Evolution.

The question boils down to how tightly you define the biblical story.

Is a Day always 24 hours long? Why? To God, a Day is as a thousand years, and a Thousand years is as a Day... which is also as a thousand years, which contains a whole lot of days... How is a Day counted before the existence of the sun anyway?

Did god create each creature according to it's kind? Well sure. I'm not the same kind of creature as an amoeba, but what is a kind? Is a kind a species? Does God's creating creatures according to kind contradict the possibility of the evolution of new species? Why? Aren't all things possible with God? Who invented the term species anyway? God or man? What kind of arrogance must a human have to believe that we can hit upon the exact meaning of a kind with one particular scientific term? Species isn't even a well understood term in Science. For years, scientists have invented new species only to find out that one species is the male, and another speceis is the female of the same species... or that two apparently identical creatures, previously thought to be of the same species, cannot breed with each other, thus proving that they are indeed different species.

Answer 3

obviously you haven't done your homework.

first of all, those missing links you refer to have mostly been proven as frauds (you know, head of a modern human and jaw of a monkey put togehter... or that drawing of horses evolving, that's just an "artist's conception"... there's no fossil evidence to support it.)

second, the Cambrian Period causes a huge problem for Darwinists... there is little fossil evidence from that period... then, all of the sudden, there is an explosion in fossils in a brief period of time (5,000 - 10,000 years)... this, of course, goes against Darwins THEORY that evolution happens gradually over time.

third, since Darwin theorized about the survival of the fittest, where are all the not-so-fittest? shouldn't we see evidence of species after species which did not survive?

fourth, i don't think anyone claims there is no such thing as evolution... but you need to be clear of the difference between biological evolution (people grow taller when they have more protein in their diets) and Darwins Theory of Evolution (man evolved from single celled life forms in mud puddles).

fifth, even assuming everything Darwin theorized is true... it does nothing to explain (or even attempt to address) how life began in the first place.

sixth, Darwin didn't have the benefit of cellular biology and genetics... if anything, these things have cast further doubt on his theory because they highlight the complexity of life. for example, how many random mutations (each supposedly being individually beneficial in some way) it would take to form the human eye?

seventh, insisting people disprove evolution (which is a fallacy since, as stated above, few people dispute all evolution), why not prove evolution? where are all your missing links? where is the evidence? why is there no significant fossile evidence from the Cambrian period? where are all the people with eyes on their fingers and mouths nearer their stomachs?

eigth, the real question is why are Darwinists afraid of competing ideas? why are they so close minded? what are they afraid of?

Answer 4

The fact of the matter is, there have been 0 findings that prove evolution, evolutionists just want you to believe that it's fact, even though it's just a theory. Evolution is disproved by the laws of mathematics, and, well, pretty much every other scientific law. Creation is proven, that there must have been a Creator, something does not come out of nothing. Also, the moon gets a little out of orbit every time it revolves around us. If it really took millions or billions of years to evolve the universe, it would have been rolling all over earth, and if that could've happened, what threw it into orbit? The comets that circle around the sun? They would have been long gone because a little ice melts away every time it orbits the sun. Wake up.

Answer 5

Transition fossils will show links between a common ancestor of apes & man, not between apes & men. That stupid illustration showing an ape "becoming" a man is probably responsible for there being so many people too dumb to accept how evident evolution is! Oh well. Evolution is at least as self-evident a phenomenon as gravity, but for some reason we aren't overrun with religious zealots complaining that gravity should not be taught in schools. I'm not sure why not, since the bible "proves" Jesus just "rose" up into the air, and was also able to defy gravity by walking on water.

Answer 6

You wrote: "A law which many believe is the absolute in science is a theory that has been observed in the past and can predict future events. So all laws are theories."

That is incorrect.

'Theories' are explanatory frameworks for observed facts. For example, the theory of Evolution provides an explanatory framework that accounts for the OBSERVED FACTS that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms changes over time.

'Laws' are mathematical relationships that have been observed in dynamic natural systems. For example, the 'Law of Gravitation' is comprised of a set of mathematical equations which allow us to calculate the future state of bodies which are linked gravitationally, or calculate preceeding states of such systems, at certain time intervals. The Law of Gravity HAVE NO EXPLANATORY POWER. This tells what gravity DOES... it does not explain HOW IT DOES IT.

Laws are not theories... theories are not laws.

Answer 7

1. there is no proof that the universe is billions of years old, if it was why was there only a few inches of dust on th moon not five feet like they expected
It is also proven that if it were billions of years old the sun would have burnt up by now because it shrinks like 4 feet a minute or it would have been so big the earth would have been inside it.

2. most of the transitional forms we have found have been disproved as fakes.

3. There are different rocks evolutionists beleive are from different time periods but we have found dinasour bone that were preserved in different levels of rock, meaning that the bones would have been sticking partially out of the ground for millions of years.

there is no true proof for evolution, people only believe it because they don't want to believe God.

Answer 8

The word "theory" has a number of distinct meanings in different fields of knowledge, depending on the context and their methodologies. In common usage, people use the word "theory" to signify "conjecture", "speculation", or "opinion." In this sense, "theories" are opposed to "facts" — parts of the world, or CLAIMS about the world, that are real or true regardless of what people think.

Transition fossils? That's a new one.
Evolution is genetic. DNA does not support biological or otherwise.
Evolution occurs over many generations. Darwin's theory has not been around long enough to document evolutionary changes that are " better" than the original.
The missing link is just that. Missing.

Answer 9

Okay creationists,

All any of you have said on here is that evolution cannot be proved. If you actually try reading a book or two, you would find that there is plenty of evidence in the fossil record.

What you haven't done is presented any evidence to the contrary. I believe if you read the question posed above, it asks for evidence. Why don't you try to find some and present it to the group.

Answer 10

There is NO disproving a fact. And evolution is a fact.
So many of these ill-educated morons who state that "evolution isn't a fact" have NO information to back that inane statement up.
None.
And if they do, it's a discredited website like "Dr." Ken Hovind's (the Dr. is in quotes because he bought his diploma, he's no more a doctor than my cat is) or "answering genesis" which is one of my all time favorite comedy sites.
Face facts creationists, Evolution IS fact. Creationism is fantasy.
Understand the difference?