Theres plenty of evidence against evolution? Part 2.?

Question

O.K. here is a challege for all you fundies, others who don't think evolution is a reality.
List 5 pieces of evidence against evolution...just 5.
Oh, and it must be current evidence, from a scientific scource that has been peer reviewed, so information for the Discovery Institute, or any other creationism web-sites don't count.
And please don't quote Behe.
Halo's or chilarity.
again if you want to disprove a scientific theory you need to use peer reviewed scientific data.

Hello...we didn't evolve from apes and monkey's..we share a COMMON ancestor. Why don't you people understand this very basic concept.

Sorry, the second law of thermodynamics argument is dead and buried. Also it is heat "death" not deterioration..get your facts straight.

Answer 1

LOL, Behe is a joke. He was thoroughly thrashed in the Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District case. You should read the entire ruling... it talks about him having his butt handed to him on several occasions.

Irreducible complexity? Debunked. Same with specified complexity and the crux of the "theory", the intelligent designer.

Answer 2

Evidence 1: they say prehistoric half dinosaur half bird creatures turned into bird. What about the things in the middle? bother finding any?

Evidence 2: according to evolution, people are supposed to turn smarter over time, right? u might say, well we can use computers but ancient ppl cant. But thats just cuz we process more knowledge, not intelligence. I'D LIKE U TO FIND ME ANOTHER: einstein, mozart, confucious, Li bai, jesus.
current doctors cant do anything without technology and anti biotics, look at the doctors without technologies. dont they heal patients the same, or even better? Who has more intelligence?

3: evolution states the simplest animal becomes more complex. Well where did the first simplest animal come from then? a plant? no way!

4: Darwin became christian at his deathbed. he said he would have taken back his theory if it was possible.

5: true story: a christian believer dentist got an immature tooth from a sick patient, buried it in soil for 30 days, submitted it to a paleontologist organization. They wrote back in a few months saying, " congrats, u found a homo habilis tooth that dates back million years ago."

Answer 3

Well lets consider some remarks from some evolutionists. George galord Simpson in his book the major features of evolution admitted "it remains true, as every paleontoligist knows, that most new species, genera, and families and that nearly all new categories above the level of families appear in the record suddenly and are not led up by known, gradual, completely continuous transitional sequences. Professor E.J. Corner of the Botany department of cambridge univercity, although he believed in evolution stated "I still think that to the unpredjudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favour of special creation". About the evolution of reptiles univercity of California paleontologist R. A. Stirton says " there is no direct proof from the fossil records"... Boston Univercity biologist Paul B. Weiss said " The first and most important steps of animal evolution remain even more obscure than those of plant evolution. Dr. Pierre P. Grasse dean of French zoologists says "we are in the dark concerning the origin of insects. E. White who was an authority on lungfishes.."the lungfish , like every other major group of fish that I know have their origins firmly based on nothing. Stephen J. Gould on Darwin's dilemna "new species almost always appeared suddenly in the fossil record with no intermediate links to ancestors in older rocks of the same region. he then conceded the lack of fossil evidence is the trade secret of paleontology". The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persist as the trade secret of paleontology..."Most species exhibit no directional change during thier tenure on the earth...In any local area, a species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and fully formed". evolutions erratic pace Natural History May 1977 p.12 In future please don't tell people who they can or cannot use as a referance. That would be as foolish as myself suggesting you not use anybody you choose to use from the spectre of references you provide. It's becoming increasingly apparent to me the reason why so many people are so angrily defensive about evolutionary theory is because they feel their atheistic philosophy being threatened which they hold as strongly as any "Fundy".

Answer 4

''The man in the street is for the most part unaware of this fact, and thinks that the claim of human evolution is supported by a great deal of firm evidence. The reason for this incorrect opinion is that the subject is frequently discussed in the media and presented as a proven fact. But real experts on the subject are aware that there is no scientific foundation for the claim of human evolution. David Pilbeam, a Harvard University paleoanthropologist, says:

If you brought in a smart scientist from another discipline and showed him the meagre evidence we've got he'd surely say, "forget it; there isn't enough to go on."181

And William Fix, the author of an important book on the subject of paleoanthropology, makes this comment:

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...182''

Answer 5

I'm just wondering why anyone cares where we came from. We are here. Let's live in the moment and make the best of our experiences by trying to become better human beings.

Finding the answers to "was it a big-bang?" or "did God created us?" is not going to change anything, besides having one party gloat over the other, while chanting "I told you so!" Which, in turn, could create more hatred and wars. Do we really want that???

Answer 6

They won't come up with evidence. Their only evidence will be from other fundies who just cry that evolution is not baseon facts. Let them have their trash book and believe in the spaghetti monster if they want.

Answer 7

God vs. Science

God is sitting in Heaven when a scientist says to Him, "Lord, we don't need You anymore. Science has finally figured out a way to create life out of nothing. In other words, we can now do what you did in the beginning."

"Oh, is that so? Tell me," replies God.

"Well," says the scientist, "We can take dirt and form it into the Likeness of You and breathe life into it, thus creating man."

"Well, that's interesting. Show me."

So the scientist bends down to the Earth and starts to mold the soil.

"Oh no, no, no," interrupts God. "Get your own dirt!"

Answer 8

This should be good to see if they can. They will just quote from the bible. It's very hard to prove an observable fact wrong. Say no to jesus

Answer 9

The truth cannot be denied

Answer 10

here's one. just one.

the law of physics specifically says that over time, matter deteriourates, not grows.

mind you i believe in evolution, i'm just open-minded enough to see both sides of every story.