Creationists, why no evidence to support your ideas?

Question

I would love to see just one shred of evidence that supports creationism or refutes evolution.

Answer 1

lol there is ZERO proof. I often marvel at the fact that millions and millions of people believe SO strongly in something JUST because they read about it. If you really think about it, that's the only supposed 'proof' they have... and that's laughable. The stories of the bible are also ludicrous - it sounds more like a childrens' storybook than a non-fictional work.

Not only that, ANYONE could have written it... a 12 year old boy could have jotted down some stories that he thought up from the top of his head, and that would be what these millions of idiots are following today... I guess people en masse haven't learned to think for themselves and not believe everything they hear and read!!!!

Answer 2

some creationists only can't handle the actuality that people progressed from different animals and that people are scientifically/factually only yet another species of an animal on earth. of direction, many Christians nonetheless help evolution despite in the event that they think there would desire to have been a extra robust skill in the back of it or the introduction of the universe. of direction for the YEC (youthful Earth Creationists) a rabid and fanatical cult of Biblical Literalists their important data is their lack of know-how, delight, arrogance, and direction around good judgment (i.e. the Bible is understand God->Bible is Infalliable and and so on)

Answer 3

To ask the question honestly, remember there are many kinds of evidence: second hand, written witnesses, direct, circumstantial, etc.

So the creationist could easily answer that there is evidence. But you should define what kind you mean, so you can have a good discussion.

Answer 4

All evidence tends to support both conclusions based on your particular bias.

For instance:

Two animals have the same bone structure.

Evolutionist: They must have come from a common ancestor

Creationist: They must have had a common designer

Both are reasonable arguments.

Answer 5

Whenever the worldview of evolution is questioned, this topic always comes up. Let me first explain how carbon dating works and then show you the assumptions it is based on. Radiation from the sun strikes the atmosphere of the earth all day long. This energy converts about 21 pounds of nitrogen into radioactive carbon 14. This radioactive carbon 14 slowly decays back into normal, stable nitrogen. Extensive laboratory testing has shown that about half of the C-14 molecules will decay in 5730 years. This is called the half-life. After another 5730 years half of the remaining C-14 will decay leaving only ¼ of the original C-14. It goes from ½ to ¼ to 1/8, etc. In theory it would never totally disappear, but after about 5 half lives the difference is not measurable with any degree of accuracy. This is why most people say carbon dating is only good for objects less than 40,000 years old. Nothing on earth carbon dates in the millions of years, because the scope of carbon dating only extends a few thousand years. Willard Libby invented the carbon dating technique in the early 1950's. The amount of carbon 14 in the atmosphere today (about .0000765%), is assumed there would be the same amount found in living plants or animals since the plants breath CO2 and animals eat plants. Carbon 14 is the radio-active version of carbon.
Since sunlight causes the formation of C-14 in the atmosphere, and normal radioactive decay takes it out, there must be a point where the formation rate and the decay rate equalizes. This is called the point of equilibrium. Let me illustrate: If you were trying to fill a barrel with water but there were holes drilled up the side of the barrel, as you filled the barrel it would begin leaking out the holes. At some point you would be putting it in and it would be leaking out at the same rate. You will not be able to fill the barrel past this point of equilibrium. In the same way the C-14 is being formed and decaying simultaneously. A freshly created earth would require about 30,000 years for the amount of C-14 in the atmosphere to reach this point of equilibrium because it would leak out as it is being filled. Tests indicate that the earth has still not reached equilibrium. There is more C-14 in the atmosphere now than there was 40 years ago. This would prove the earth is not yet 30,000 years old! This also means that plants and animals that lived in the past had less C-14 in them than do plants and animals today. Just this one fact totally upsets data obtained by C-14 dating.
The carbon in the atmosphere normally combines with oxygen to make carbon dioxide (CO2). Plants breathe CO2 and make it part of their tissue. Animals eat the plants and make it part of their tissues. A very small percentage of the carbon plants take in is radioactive C-14. When a plant or animal dies it stops taking in air and food so it should not be able to get any new C-14. The C-14 in the plant or animal will begin to decay back to normal nitrogen. The older an object is, the less carbon-14 it contains. One gram of carbon from living plant material causes a Geiger counter to click 16 times per minute as the C-14 decays. A sample that causes 8 clicks per minute would be 5,730 years old (the sample has gone through one half life), and so on. Although this technique looks good at first, carbon-14 dating rests on two simple assumptions. They are, obviously, assuming the amount of carbon-14 in the atmosphere has always been constant, and its rate of decay has always been constant. Neither of these assumptions is provable or reasonable.

Answer 6

I would like to see just one shred of evidence that proves evolution. I don't have to defend my views. However, I do respect yours. Just as it takes many beautiful colors to make a rainbow, it also takes many different opinions to keep the world interesting. Take care, and never let anyone tell you what to think.

Believe what's in your heart!

Answer 7

Could be a long wait - although no doubt someone will tell you that every word in the Bible is 100% true (which is why they need FOUR different versions of Jesus' life story - go figure).

Cut-and-paste... I forgot to warn you that you'd get a load of cut and paste as well. That's because these people all think the same - a cut-and-paste religion for people lacking the ability to think for themselves.

Answer 8

That's odd...cause I have yet to see a single credible shred of evidence to support evolution.
And it's called Faith.... That's why you don't need proof. Some things have to be believed to be seen

Answer 9

Religious beliefs are just that, beliefs. You can't possibly prove that you believe something. It's stuck in the back of your mind somewhere, and is darn hard th dislodge.
Don't ever ask a religious person of any religion to prove his God or Gods exist. He cannot prove the unproveable.

Answer 10

Are you blind? the entire expanding universe is the evidence. if that isn't enough for you then study the evidence provided by "EVOLUTION" it proves God not only exists but is still in the process of creation. LOVE