Poll/Survey: Creationists, please...?

Question

Please detail here exactly how much of Darwin's work, or related evolutionary scientific literature, you have read. I don't care whether it's The Origin of Species, The Descent of Man, The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals or his work on barnacles. You might have read Dawkins's The Selfish Gene, Gould's Ontogeny & Phylogeny, or Bowler's The Non-Darwinian Revolution. I don't care if it's only one page (though I think it should be more), I'm really curious to know how much any of you have read to be so certain there is no truth in evolution. Sermons by non-scientists don't count. If you have read nothing, or very little, please explain how this works for you. Let's make this an interesting one.

Oh, and so I don't have to add it in as Additional Details in ten minutes, I've read the Bible cover to cover, obviously. And all of the above. And some. Thanks.

So your answer would be Nothing, then, Blaze?

Answer 1

I love this question.

I'm blessed to have been raised by parents who were from different religions. They taught us that religion is an accident of birth and that no religious decisions should be made until you've spent your "40 days and 40 nights in the desert". We were encouraged to read the bible, attend interfaith services, explore Darwin as well as the bible. I learned that the only faith that didn't interest me was one afraid of questions.

The Origin of Species has a prominent place on my desk along with my father's bible from childhood and I've taught my children that their faith and beliefs are a great responsibility but it's their responsibility. I'm a small "c" Christian who believes in evolution, my husband is an Anglican, one of my sons is currently an atheist but he's still searching and my other son is researching Buddhism. So far, both of my sons also believe in evolution as does my husband. I just don't see why Christianity and evolution have to be mutually exclusive.

I loved The Selfish Gene... fascinating reading.

Answer 2

IF I tell you that I have read an exhaustive list of works pertaining to evolution, will it change the fact that you will still think that I'm wrong?

Does your claim that you have read the Bible change the fact that I think that you are wrong.

Your assertion is incorrect. Most thinking Christians have never refuted evolution. No one that I know has ever said that there is no truth in evolution.

The evolutionary theory as it is applied to the common ancestry is flawed. No one has ever proven it, hence it is still a theoretical model.

It's interesting to note that you disclaim sermons by non-scientists as "not counting".... would it then be fair for me to not include works by non Christian scientists in my evaluation or research? Why would any one make a thoughtful decision without weighing the entire body of evidence.

In my mind, it takes as much if not more faith to believe the evolutionary model, on it's own, answers the questions of the origin of man. Let's not forget that the laws of probabilities make it an extreme long shot for life to begin in the way that most evolutionist describe.

If you apply an intelligence behind the science... it makes more sense.

I won't bore you with my reading list or my credentials. Most likely they'll be discounted if not by you then by others, but suffice it to say that I have not only read but studied the Bible in the original text. I have read and studied most scientific literature regarding biology, chemistry, physics, physiology, genetics etc....

Answer 3

I have read Origin of Species, though it has been a while. I have also read a lot of the works of more modern evolutionist theorists. I have read arguments both for and against and carefully weighed both before I came to the conclusion that classical Darwinian macro evolution is not possible. However, micro evolution is a proven fact and the possibility exists, at least in theory, of a punctuated evolutionary process.

Answer 4

you've a good point. People should undertand things they discuss. I believe in creationism and I haven't read any books about darwin, I just watched the 2 hours documetary and his theory of evolution.
I'd like to make a suggestion to you. Before people get into discussions, I think they should consider all information bible, qoran, torah, evolution/athiesm before starting a discussion.
2. I'm muslim but when U say U read the bible, did U understand everything that bible had to say? even theologians have hard time understanding it the first time? have many times have u read? I believe as of right now, U re most knowledgable about evolution therefore U can not consider all facts on the table. U & US need to know them all and then discuss.

Answer 5

i do no longer ought to study any of his paintings. it rather is obvious once you go searching you in any respect the magnificent creations, that they simply ought to no longer ensue with the help of twist of fate. do you comprehend the intricacies of a human cellular? have you ever learn them? have you ever learn the way magnificient the universe is, and how precise it operates? Do you no longer see that lots of mans innovations have come from copying issues that God has created? each abode has a maker however the maker of all issues is God. If it takes a individual to construct a incredibly hassle-free element like a house, how ought to a minimum of a few thing so mind-blowing as people basically evolve? while you're taking a collection of stuff and placed it in a bag and shake it up, could you have an eye fixed fixed or a clock?

Answer 6

All I know of Darwin was what I learned in school which about a thousand years ago. And don't be confused; I only disagree with the theory of evolution with regard to creation. I don't think we evolved from something which crawled out of a primordial soup onto land. I do believe in evolution within a species, but only after God created them. I'm a bible believing Christian, so I believe Genesis.

Why people just can't leave this alone, I don't know. What upsets you so that people believe the bible? If you don't, okay, that's your choice!

Answer 7

Evolution is suppose to be something changing into something else, yet there are NO fossils proving this. It is as the Bible states in Genesis, that kinds will produce it's own kinds, meaning a dog will only ever breed a dog, every breed of dog is still just a dog, creatures can have different various features such as Darwin's finches, but the truth is they are still finches but have adapted to their circumstances but they are still of a kind finches, that is not evolution, just diversity of God's creation. The real truth is non believers can change to believers and visea versa, but non believes have no excuses to God because proof is all around them, they just don't want to be held accountable for their actions so they chose not to believe, but their worst nightmares will come true on God's great and fear inspiring day soon at hand.

Answer 8

Most creationism believing people just jump on the band wagon gang because that's all that they were exposed to. Don't follow religion because they want to do be limited to clean and pure things.
Forget about reading books to reinforce their beliefs, they just repeat what they have heard at one time.

Answer 9

the only knowledge i have of evolution or anything else like that is from what i was taught in school. i live on the bible belt ya see? we all thought evolution was a joke :o}

Answer 10

Let me tell you something: No, I haven't read the writings of Darwin. It has sufficed for me to personally get to know and talk with

- several dozen creationists with Ivy League or similar educations, at least half of whom are scientists, many of them with doctorates in the 'hard sciences' (e.g. chemistry, medicine, human anatomy) and active in scientific research.

- a substantial quantity of people with similar qualifications on the other side of the fence, including most of my immediate family.

But let me cite what one of my creationist friends has to say. While I think of it, he also recommends the following for further reading, and indeed refers to at least some of these items in his statement:

DARWINS BLACK BOX by Michael Behe

EVOLUTION: A THEORY IN CRISIS by Michael Denton

THE NATURAL SCIENCES KNOW NOTHING OF EVOLUTION by A. E. Wilder-Smith

So here's the statement:

'The truth is Darwinism is not a science, it's an ideology, a philosophy, a Faith System. You will find a few rare Darwinists who have enough integrity to admit as much. And then they condemn Christianity for being solely based on blind faith!!! Well, Christianity has more solid evidence to back up its foundational tenets than does Darwinism. The more we delve into molecular biology the more we make discoveries that are at odds with basic Darwinist pre-suppositions. Read Michael Behe and Michael Denton. But you see Darwinism is an ideology and they can't abandon it any more than communists could abandon Marxism despite its glaring deficiencies because the alternative would be too unpalatable. Atheist Jacques Monod made a statement (I'm paraphrasing it) that science was forced to accept Darwinism because the alternative (Creation) was too fantastic to contemplate and therefore unthinkable.So it has to be accepted upon faith. I remember as an undergraduate a Darwinist professor of mine who was challenged and used bizarre evasive answers to dodge the issue. On one occasion he described this tortuous and unbelievable scenario of how the bones of the inner ear evolved. One bright student asked:

'"But professor Carroll, how would the animals eat and swallow their food since these rotating bones would be in the way during the early phase of rotation?"

'The professor's answer was a marvel of self contradiction. "Well these changes accumulated over a very long period of mutations but happened very quickly."

'On another occasion he posited three scenarios for how bird wings evolved. The same Smart Alec in the class chimed in "Well which of the three then is it?"

'Answer: "Well all three are equally valid and equally true.Birds have wings. They have evolved and each theory is equally true so you have to accept them all as true." (even though elements of each theory contradicted elements of the others).

'No Darwinist bothers to answer certain key questions in biochemistry and molecular biology because they don't fit a naturalistic random chance scenario and therefore are the Achilles heel of Darwinism. How do organisms acquire literally MILLIONS of new perfectly coded sequences of DNA, preserve them without the cells editing mechanism deleting them as it does with most mis-synthesized DNA, while preventing them from expressing inappropriate gene products over time, and then suddenly activate them generations later at the RIGHT time to form new complex structures? There has never been demonstrated a way that happens. Most changes in species are minor and involve usually the LOSS of some genetic information in order for a mutation to be expressed. Mind you well that most mutations are lethal, many are detected and edited out by the cells own DNA synthesis regulatory systems. Add something to the genome and it may result in the cell producing some useless product that may accumulate and kill the cell. And how do complex multi-component regulatory systems evolve? That is the central question asked by Michael Behe. Darwinism is in fact a type of theology. I find it easier to believe in the guiding hand of an infinite Divine Intelligence than what I call the cosmic chemical goof in a mud puddle to explain life's origin.'

Obviously this is not an exhaustive statement, but it does pose some pretty serious questions. I think the key thing to remember is that evolution is still a theory, not fact. So it still absolutely is open to question, and it still is misleading to present it as fact - as many would have us do in the public schools (so much for critical thinking...)