I only find ten reasons
... ill be back
EDIT1
Do a search for the Peppered moth. example of evolution observed
Im still reading.....
EDIT 2
"where did all this energy for this Big Bang come from".. thats a good question, maybe you can look into it the science and help this author out.
EDIT 3
He says "What they don't like to discuss is what happened prior to this "singularity" and where the matter and energy came from"
Thats not true, many scientists love discussing this quite often.
EDIT 4
He/she says "That is why Evolution is a religion, I think it is a dumb religion". Now this is a ridiculous thing to now be introducing into his/hers essay. 'Evolution is a religion'!!!! Please clearly the author of this document is delibratly misleading, and has little knowledge of the science involved.
I can find more convincing christian apologetics and evolution attacks than this document.
I dont find it worth my time, but will still read it. I was after a good laugh at the moment.
2006-10-04 02:07:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by CJunk 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
I take it you mean this link? In which case it is all immoral propaganda that preys on a weak understanding of Science by most people who will read it. Each 'reason' has been completely and totally debunked by Science (or is just out right deception), yet creationist propagandists, being nothing more than propagandists, continually restate them anyway.
If you want to believe that evolution is wrong, then believe that evolution is wrong. Have FAITH. It is completely immoral to spread lies about Science. What if creationists achieve their aim and stop all Geology, Biology and Physics? Where will the world be without metals and oil, advances in medicine and agriculture, physics and etc. I have nothing but disgust for evil creationist propagandists.
But to play along:
1-11) Nothing to do with evolution so won't bother (but eg. 7 - It's not a closed system, obviously. Deception.).
12) ridiculous immoral fraud
13) Quote-mining is a form of lying.
14) What???!!! Where is the logic???
15) straw-man deception
16) It's not a closed system obviously. Deception.
17) No, this is just head-in-the-sand lies.
18) more evil fraud
19) No. outright deception.
20) What!! ridiculous!! geology is all about changing climates and environments over millions of years - it is no fukcing 'problem' but central to our science you evil immoral propagandists!!!`
had enough now, you get the picture of what I think. I'm not going to write 100,000 words showing how the authors are lying for each point. In summary, you ask what I think about the man, I think he is a sociopath, playing you and others for fools. Or else he has been conned himself and has sourced the 'reasons' from somewhere else, in which case he is just a closed-minded bigot who obviously hasn't taken the time to look in to what he is quoting.
2006-10-04 03:25:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
We know for an absolute fact that new species have replaced earlier species, ever since life appeared on Earth. If your in depth investigation has led to the conclusion that evolution is the wrong theory to explain this known fact, then please, present your alternative theory. But if you have no alternative theory to offer that explains the known facts as well as the current theory explains them, then by definition the current theory is still the best theory and therefore remains in place. Just saying "it isn't so" doesn't change a thing. And saying "it isnt't so because it conflicts with my interpretations of the Bible" simply calls into question the validity of your biblical interpretations.
2006-10-04 02:32:50
·
answer #3
·
answered by PaulCyp 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's called refutability. The reason why you can theorize 40 reasons why evolution is "wrong" is because it stands up to scientific scrutiny and testing. It BEGS to be proven wrong, and no one who be proud of your precious website than Darwin himself.
Now, since this guy's "disproven" evolution apparently, what theory does he offer in its place? Please tell me it's not that same tired story from that old book with a guy named Adam. It has nothing to stand on--pro or con. You can't prove it. You can't disprove it. It's worthless. Disproving evolution gets creationists no closer to where they want to be. Bring me a theory that we can test and scutinize scientifically and then we'll talk.
2006-10-04 02:18:56
·
answer #4
·
answered by Mark M 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Ok hold on.
-I also only see 10 reasons
-I see 50 reason why to stay with science
-I'm not seeing 40 why evolution is wrong. Is it because I'm using Google?
2006-10-04 02:07:28
·
answer #5
·
answered by Southpaw 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
That is just more Christian spouting by an ill-informed person. I don't particulary follow the "Big Bang" thing, but not because I think some supernatural being thought, "hey I should create a universe to play with". People need to realize that the human brain is finite, so it's really hard to comprehend infinity.
2006-10-04 03:50:28
·
answer #6
·
answered by Dognose0 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
You speak of the Evan Wiggs article?
The problem with him is that he is using one source as his documentation, Professor Leviton, a professor of Ecology and Evolution at the State University.
I do not know the background of Leviton, is he credible? The other sources he named in the parts that I read were all creationist type articles. He sounded intelligent, but lacked the back-up sources to make him credible in my opinion.
2006-10-04 02:15:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by arewethereyet 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Evolution is sensible, a person within the sky making a girl out of a mans ribs does not! A speaking snake telling persons to consume an apple, immaculate notion, emerging from the lifeless, yeah proper, whilst you are lifeless that is it, your ghost does not move anyplace coz there's no ghost! DERP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
2016-08-29 08:07:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
I want you to hear 40 reasons the theory of planetary motion is wrong. You can SEE that the sun moves around the earth, despite what the scientists say. Please write to me. The Truth NEEDS to be heard !!!!!!!!
2006-10-05 16:55:44
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Obviously the writer of this paper has never expanded his brain through drugs. So no, I dont think this is valid. I wont even talk to you unless youve broke on through to the other side yet
2006-10-04 02:39:49
·
answer #10
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
1⤋