i am doin a skool proj. about evolution and creation and would like to know what you beleive and why. thanks.?

Question

it would help a lot so i can show my clas how many people i asked and what they beleive in. thank you so much for you help

Answer 1

Fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation" (Gary Parker, Ph.D., biologist/paleontologist and former evolutionist).
"most people assume that fossils provide a very important part of the general argument in favor of Darwinian interpretations of the history of life. Unfortunately, this is not strictly true" (Dr. David Raup, curator of geology, Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago).
"As is well known, most fossil species appear instantaneously in the fossil record" (Tom Kemp, Oxford University).
"The fossil record pertaining to man is still so sparsely known that those who insist on positive declarations can do nothing more than jump from one hazardous surmise to another and hope that the next dramatic discovery does not make them utter fools.Clearly some refuse to learn from this. As we have seen, there are numerous scientists and popularizers today who have the temerity to tell us that there is 'no doubt' how man originated: if only they had the evidence..." (William R. Fix, The Bone Pedlars, New York: Macmillan Publishing Company, 1984, p. 150).
"The curious thing is that there is a consistency about the fossil gaps; the fossils are missing in all the important places" (Francis Hitching, archaeologist).
"The intelligent layman has long suspected circular reasoning in the use of rocks to date fossils and fossils to date rocks. The geologist has never bothered to think of a good reply" (J. O'Rourke in the American Journal of Science).
"In most people's minds, fossils and Evolution go hand in hand. In reality, fossils are a great embarrassment to Evolutionary theory and offer strong support for the concept of Creation. If Evolution were true, we should find literally millions of fossils that show how one kind of life slowly and gradually changed to another kind of life. But missing links are the trade secret, in a sense, of paleontology. The point is, the links are still missing. What we really find are gaps that sharpen up the boundaries between kinds. It's those gaps which provide us with the evidence of Creation of separate kinds. As a matter of fact, there are gaps between each of the major kinds of plants and animals. Transition forms are missing by the millions. What we do find are separate and complex kinds, pointing to Creation" (Dr. Gary Parker, biologist/paleontologist and former ardent evolutionist).
"Evolution requires intermediate forms between species and paleontology does not provide them" (David Kitts, paleontologist and evolutionist).
"I still think that, to the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation. Can you imagine how an orchid, a duckweed and a palm tree have come from the same ancestry, and have we any evidence for this assumption? The evolutionist must be prepared with an answer, but I think that most would break down before an inquisition" (Dr. Eldred Corner, professor of botany at Cambridge University, England: Evolution in Contemporary Botanical Thought, Chicago: Quadrangle Books, 1961, p. 97).
"So firmly does the modern geologist believe in evolution up from simple organisms to complex ones over huge time spans, that he is perfectly willing to use the theory of evolution to prove the theory of evolution [p.128]one is applying the theory of evolution to prove the correctness of evolution. For we are assuming that the oldest formations contain only the most primitive and least complex organisms, which is the base assumption of Darwinism [p.127]. If we now assume that only simple organisms will occur in old formations, we are assuming the basic premise of Darwinism to be correct. To use, therefore, for dating purposes, the assumption that only simple organisms will be present in old formations is to thoroughly beg the whole question. It is arguing in a circle [p.128]" Arthur E Wilder-Smith, Man's Origin, Man's Destiny, Harold Shaw Publishers, 1968, pp. 127,128).
"It cannot be denied that from a strictly philosophical standpoint, geologists are here arguing in a circle. The succession of organisms has been determined by the study of their remains imbedded in the rocks, and the relative ages of the rocks are determined by the remains of the organisms they contain" (R. H. Rastall, lecturer in economic geology, Cambridge University: Encyclopedia Britannica, Vol. 10, Chicago: William Benton, Publisher, 1956, p. 168).
"I admit that an awful lot of that [fantasy] has gotten into the textbooks as though it were true. For instance, the most famous example still on exhibit downstairs [in the American Museum of Natural History] is the exhibit on horse evolution prepared fifty years ago. That has been presented as literal truth in textbook after textbook. Now, I think that that is lamentable, particularly because the people who propose these kinds of stories themselves may be aware of the speculative nature of some of the stuff. But by the time it filters down to the textbooks, we've got science as truth and we have a problem" (Dr. Niles Eldredge, paleontologist and evolutionist).

Answer 2

Well, first off you should know that creationism involves belief, evolution does not.
Since there is no evidence of any kind that there is a creator, a creation, or that any of the references thereof in the bible have any basis in fact, then creationism is strictly a matter of belief (faith).

Evolution, on the other hand, is science. Belief and faith don't come into play. Evidence is examined, experiments are conducted, and theories developed to fit the available data. That theory is then tested over and over again, being modified if needs be to account for new evidence or data, or thrown out if it doesn't fit the evidence at all. Evolution by natural selection, with slight modifications since first proposed by Darwin, fits the available evidence to an extremely high confidence value. Evidence from all of the sciences -- biology, anthropology, geology, cosmology, astronomy, paleontology, etc. -- all provide evidence to support it. No science has provided any data to refute it. There is a high degree of confidence (not faith or belief, but evaluation of how the evidence fits the theory) that evolution by natural selection -- in the timelines currently accepted -- is how life arose on this planet. So much so that it is considered by science as a fact, not a theory.

Answer 3

I believe in creation because of the Bible and observable science back it up. To keep it short, there is no observable way that one kind of animal can change into another. Animals can experiece small changes within the same general kind such as dogs that are large or small or have a lot of fur or hardly any fur. The dogs stay dogs and that is called micro (small) evolution which we can see happen. The belief that large changes can happen to a type of animal to change it into another has never been seen to happen. That is called macro (large) evolution and that is what is also called "Darwinism" and this is the what a lot of people do not believe. Many polls such as the "Gallup" polls tell us that about 70 to 80% of Americans believe that God made man and that we did not evolve from apes.

Answer 4

hI evolution is a theory with no facts to support it that was made up by a man named charles darwin who went to the glaapogus islands to study turtles and came back with a strange theory about monkeys and evolution to this day there is no proof of this thats why it is a theory not a fact where as creation is an indisputable fact that has been proven recently a team of genetics experts conducted an experiment with the human genome project and successfully traced the genetic lineage of the human race back to it two original founders a man and woman called Adam and Eve just as the Bible said also if you look at the complexity of creation in humans and other creation the basic laws of genetics and biology state like produces like people have always given birth to people and monkeys monkeys fish fish I have never see a porcupine give birth to an elephant or a dog give birth to a whale that why there are kinds of animals like canine (dogs) feline (cats) bovine (cows) ursine (bears) porcine ( pigs) equine ( horses) and then there are humans called Homo - sapiens and then look at all of the variety in creation all around you from the very small atoms to the very large universe al signs of an intelligent creator not some random accident most people who are foolish enought to believe in evolution do so because they dont want to be accountable to a higher power namely God even the so called proofs they try to pass off turn out to be frauds if you need any more help you can E-Mail me o.k. best wishes with you project Gorbalizer

Answer 5

Evolution is a made up fantasy that scientists made up for people who don't believe in God. However, Creation was not a stary jjust made up by a person, it really happened. Way back before the idea of evolution, everyone has heard of the Creation but not evolution. So hoh could evolution be the right one? Creation is true, face the truth or don't. God gave us free will and I believe in the Creation!

Answer 6

Personnaly, I believe in creation. The most important reason is because it makes more sense scientifically than evolution. I would highly reccoment that you read the book "The Case for a Creator". It argues specifically for Christianity, but the basic ideas presented in the book are all very scientific, and presented in a logical manner. My biology teacher reccomended it to my whole class.

Answer 7

I think if you accept that we have a genetic code (dna), that is subject to mutations, that organisms can pass those mutations on to their offspring and that there is competition in the environment for things like food there has to be evolution, a genetic code, mutation, reproduction, natural selection will produce an evolutionary process.

ADDED: in response to Tosha's question "How is it that some are humans and the monkeys stayed monkeys .How come they didn't evolve? "

They DID evolve, evolution does not make everything "humanlike", because they didn't not evolve to be like people does not mean they did not evolve, evolution only produces organisms that are more fit/competitive in a particular environment, not "humanlike".

Answer 8

I do not believe in evolution because even though the earth might have been created by a "big bang" I believe it took a spiritual being to create spiritual things such as love, intellect, fear, even hatred. Those are not acts of science, they are acts of God.

Answer 9

How is it that some are humans and the monkeys stayed monkeys .How come they didn't evolve? Also if anyone has experienced the miracle of a baby being born then that says it all. Also look at nature how could all of that have come into being by an accident?

Answer 10

Even if evolution were somehow wrong why does that mean there has to be a creator?