What do Creationists think about evolution? Extinction?

Question

If you attempt to refute evolutionary theory at least have some evidence (no religious texts, please) to back up your disbelief. I'm really curious about other theories about life and its course on earth... and I'd like to think that there are a few intelligent Creationists out there.

Answer 1

Many religious people believe the Earth is only a few thousand years old, because that's what the bible tells them. Evolution doesn't work when squeezed into a few days in Carl Sagan's Cosmic Calendar: http://web.singnet.com.sg/~teohanch/t1CosmicCalendar.html

Answer 2

Adaptation clearly happens, but the animal to which it happens still stays within it's species. An example of this would be with pedigree dogs, and how they are changed by human intervention. Evolutionist would simply say that over millions of years species would jump species, however bearing the planet earth is only 4.55 billion years old, and although that seems a long time to us, it's not so long when your talking about going from some algae becoming a human.

Another thing is regarding spontanious life. If we went to another planet and found a empty coke bottle, we would refuse to believe that it just happened by chance. And yet the simplest of life forms is vastly more complicated, so much so that we can't actually create life with all our knowledge. The first life form would also have to have the ability to create energy without the ability of respiration(as the world initially would be without oxygen), and all life uses oxygen, even plants and sea creatures.

When the idea of evolution was first concieved we didn't know as much as we do now. We thought that cells consisted of a cell membrane, nucleus, and fluid. Now we know that there's alot more to it, and to me evolution doesn't add up. Why is it so stupid to think that there is a vastily Superior being, intelligence wise, that doesn't have the physical constrants that we do?

Answer 3

The Bombardier Beetle is and example that this beetle was created and did not evolve.

Dinosaurs

I am a creationist and I would venture to say their are a few intelligent creationists out there . . . . I believe that the earth was created, that man was created, that animals were CREATED.

There are too many examples of species that if evolved would have had "parts" that would be of no use, waiting for other "parts" to make that specific function work the way it was "meant" to. ie: the beetle previously mentioned.

Also look at the "proof" evolution has and where that theory came from.

Answer 4

the element that bothers the main approximately evolution is that it continues to be only an thought. and you will no longer enable the possibility that there is yet another concept obtainable which you additionally must seem at. the thought of evolution does no longer paintings, seem on the international we've as we talk, issues do no longer recreate themselves into something extra useful, issues and animals strengthen previous. If the thought of evolution did paintings we could constantly be seeing many new animal varieties. the element which you, the evolutionist, could be worried the main approximately is extinction, extinction itself proves that evolution does no longer take place. considering this manner of super sort of animals are transforming into extinct, why are they no longer being re-progressed as one would think of if evolution replaced into in certainty occurring. I have not any issue with evolution being taught interior the faculties, why do you refuse to permit the thought of clever layout to learn alongside with with evolution? only what are you afraid of?

Answer 5

I have personally looked into evolution. What bothers me about it is its lack of evidence. The missing links between one jump to the next. The impartial skeletons, some of wich have over time been dismissed, bothers me too. It seems, sometimes, they are too quick to try to make it work for their favor. That is the big issue I have with it. Also, why evolution? We dont feel the need to discover how dogs, rabbits, birds, whatever else evolved, but they focus on man. Backing all the way up,and explaining all life, and how each connects, or doesnt connect would go a long way for me.

Extinction neither proves nor disproves evolution or creation.

I believe things evolve to their surrondings, and man as evolved to a smarter creature, but that we were always man. Just as a dog is always a dog, but dog breeds have evolved.

Answer 6

I'm not going to argue the substance of that. However it must be pointed out...
The question is utterly insane. You know how one person would see the other's viewpoint. An evolutionist rolls his eyes at the creationist and vice versa. If you need to ask that, you need to spend more time reading and less time screwing around on Y/A.

Answer 7

Continuing from the first answer here, scientists who believe in evolution roll their eyes at scientists who believe in creation and vice versa. You seem to believe that creation cannot be proven logically. Some scientists believe that evolution can't be proven logically. Are you implying that creation cannot be a fact based on the authority of scientists. You can't do this when there are scientists on both sides of the argument.

Answer 8

You'd like to think that there are a few intelligent creationists out here? Not too biased are you.

Answer 9

i have done a research about my reality,what i see,touch,taste,smell,hear,comprehend and think.Scientist have no god and religions are a fantasy.I wrote 57 pages,made a CD and 5 years of work, all for personnel knowledge.It would take too long to explain,the truth is floating out there for us to find but no one puts the puzzle together.I found FRUG=foundation,reality,universes,god.There is no start nor end,just the law of existence=birth,growth,recycling,next life.Over and over for ever.I could go on but this is what i believe now.Good day and keep on searching.

Answer 10

Evolution is a science and not everyone believes what scientists are allowed to tell us, governed by a society few knows exists. Scientific research is funded, by politicians and therefore is as corrupt as politics are.

The so called proofs could all be fabricated just as they tell us the proof of ufo's are all fabricated, and bigfoot and so on. It has very little to do with actual fact, they dedeuce, they come to a decison, they reevaluate in view of another discovery and so on. It is ongoing, nothign has been proven, you either believe in God's creation of the world and universe or you don't. period