It is hard to take those who believe in evolution serious when they have only?

Question

study one side.....In order to be a fair judge of the matter you have to study the science field of creation to compare. I don't know of any on this forum who has study both fields of the science debate.

So what makes you qualified to speak on the matter? You only have 1/2 the information

there are many in science who dedicate their lives to the study and proof of no evolution and work on the study of creation being valid.
so what say you now?

Answer 1

There is no science that shows creationism. there is quasi-science that disproves evolution and supports creationism. But it is not real science or real evidence. Its kind of like the why are there still apes around. On the surface it seems like a fair question about evolution. But in reality, since we didn't evolve from apes, the question is fundamentally not correct. I know this is a very rudimentary example, but it is how most of the science you are talking about works. If YOU truly researched all the evidence, you would see this.

Answer 2

The main problem with creationism, (other than having no proof and is not just taking the bible literally but taking a few misunderstood scientific concept and twisting them around) - is that it fails to accept any other views of creation. Perhaps the Australian Aboriginal creation story is closer, or the Native American one. Do the Creationist scientists test their studies against any of those? Personally I like the one that the natives of Madagascar think Lemurs are the spirits of their ancestors. They are soooo close.

Evolution is just a basic scientific view. It has been proven again and again. It is not atheistic, but more just without religion. If someone wants they can believe that something was behind what drives evolution. That doesn not make it any less true.

Most people do realize evolution is real, it is just a regional extremely vocal minority that don't. They also tend not to recognize any other religion or belief as well. They make up fallacies about those other religions as well, besides the weird stuff they come up with about evolution. So really they do a pretty good job of discrediting themselves.

Answer 3

Having been raised Catholic, becoming an Evangelical in my twenties and studying to become a minister when I found out that I was being lied to by the current church, the past church, and many who claimed to represent the truth, I embarked on an independent, through study of the origins of Christianity, the history of religion, and the current crop of the 'representatives of Christ' I came to the hard cold conclusion that it was all a fraud, a very painful and gut renching admission that everything that I had believed in to that point was wrong. I then studied, examined, compared all major religions, philosophies, and beliefs. The only conclusion that a really honest examination of all the facts, from both sides of the argument, can be, is that the planet is 4.5 billion years old, that life began nearly 4 billion years ago, and we are the result of the evolution of life from a simple beginning to the present forms. I have all the information. You don't. Get a life, go to a real university that teaches real scientific methods, go on field trips to digs, examine all the evidence, and I'll meet you in the skeptics hall.

Answer 4

Anyone that thinks, I mean honestly thinks, the world is only a few thousand years old is obviously living in a fantasy world! There is hard scientific evidance that proves this planet is far old then a few thousand years. It's more like a few Billion years old!

I understand the bible thumpers are desperate to say evolution is wrong. However even their own creation account has the first life coming from water.
Genesis 1:20: And God said, "Let the water teem with living creatures."
Also if you look at it the last thing to be created was man. The last stage of evolution was our evolution from primative man to modern man. This evolution is marked by the knowledge of good and evil. Self awareness a quality that no other animal on this planet has! Yet the bible God called this knowledge forbidden!

The bible God must have wanted a lap dog not a thinking, freewilled human.

Answer 5

Most of us have read the Bible. You can see that from our answers. I have also read the "science" that you claim doesn't support evolution. What I see is nit-picking a few details.

That would be fine, if you didn't do it with a pre-conceived agenda. Finding that science doesn't have all the answers doesn't completely negate the entire idea. There are certainly details like how evolution happens so fast at times that we don't get. But the thing that I find funny about the criticism is that you have to accept the vast majority of it as fact to even be able to get to that discussion.

Any valid theory must explain the fossil record that unquestionably starts with simple life forms and gets more complex over a long period of time. If it does not (and your side never does) it is not a valid theory because it is inconsistent with the facts. I can't be expected to spend too much time worrying about it.

Answer 6

Science; accepting what is said on the physical PROOF that it is true.

Faith; accepting what is said on the BELIEF it is true


Quit deluding yourself, the planet is billions of years old, the dinosaurs existed as did Cro-Magnon and Neanderthal man. The stars are only so old and will eventually die out and when our star "flames out" this entire solar system will cease to be. Those are the facts and there is nothing in the multi-colored book you clutch so tightly that 'proves' otherwise.

Oh and yes, I have actually watched the video of the "Scientific proof of God". The part about the 'fracturing pink glass dome" over the planet that caused the "rapid acceleration of all mankind so we cannot live as long as Moses did....."

Come on.... I've heard better stories on MSNBC.

Moses lived as long as he did (800 years by some accounts) because the measuring system was not translated right. It seems what the Bible refers to as "years" were actually lunar cycles.... which the ancient Hebrews tracked more closely than any other measure of time. Yes, that makes Moses 66 years old.... pretty old back then...... but nothing astronomical.


Knowledge;
So easily attained
So easily abused
So easily forgotten

Answer 7

Evolution is a theoretical science based on observable and repeatble facts. Creationism is a school of thought based on faith with no observable or repeatable facts. Man from monkey is not what evolution is about. Evolution is about organisms adapting to their environment and is provable science. Creationism is about faith and what you believe, and not about what you can prove. You can prove that an organism will adapt to environmental changes, and that is evolution.

And as far as science is concerned, half the information in this debate is all there is. The other side of the argument (Creationism) is almost entirely hearsay and speculation.

Answer 8

I've studied both sides. Evolution is a detailed science that critically analyzes evidence and asks hard questions. When a piece of data doesn't fit the model well, scientists note the fact, while Creationists pounce on it calling it disproof. The data, of course, disproves nothing. It fits no more than it doesn't fit. Creationism is just a collection of quotes out of context, cherry-picked data, pseudoscientific jargon, baseless mathemathical models, and outright lies. It is rare that I need more than an hour's research to dismiss Creationist claims.

Answer 9

I actually have studied some of the creationist arguments. I read Behe's Darwin's Black Box. The best that creationists have come up with is the idea of irreducible complexity. Basically, that there are structures (particularly on molecular level) that we don't understand how evolved and with our current understanding seem too complex to have evolved. Thus, that is adequate proof of intelligent design. This is flawed because 1) there were plenty of things we didn't understand how evolved in past that we now do so it is reasonable to assume that we will continue to unravel the puzzle 2) this is not a scientific premise: because we don't understand then it must be God did it.

The court hearings on the teaching of ID in PA had hours of testimony and presented evidence from both sides. In the end the creationists/IDists were unable to present a convincing case that their side had scientific merit.

Many of the other arguments creationists present on websites that I have read are widely debunked but continued to get presented as though they are credible arguments.

Answer 10

You're simply wrong. It is the creationists who have only studied one side of the question.

You will find that believers in evolution understand creationism fairly well, while you creationists routinely demonstrate astounding ignorance about evolution.

Evidence? There's a creationist question up here right now asking "according to evolution which race is most evolved?". There's also the constant flow of "if we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys around?" responses.

Since creationists have far less than 1/2 of the information, they are completely unqualified to talk about the issue.

Furthermore, if the creationists were really interested in fair discussion of the origins question, why are they so eager to censor talk about evolution? Creationism is freely taught all over the place, yet when we try to teach evolution creationists jump all over it, build propaganda organizations to try to shut it down, and overall, demonstrate a complete unwillingness to have any teaching that challenges their beliefs.