For those who like to disprove Religious beliefs by the "fact" of evolution.?

Question

A simple question I guess. That is if you would have the answer.
If in fact we humans were evolved from apes or any other organism here on planet earth. Why is it that these creatures and or organisms are not still producing humans. As you believe there are flaws in Fatih there are many flaws in your scientific explanation for human life. Seeing how life had to originate from somewhere I will propose another question. If life had to orginate from a living organism, where did that very first living organism come from? Then of course how did the Universe, and planets come about for this living organism to survive? Seeing how there is no solid proof explaining how these things came about proves that your basing your ideas on what you assume happened, so in conclusion I believe your ideas of the creation of life based on science are about as far fetched as you think religious beliefs are.
But you wouldnt agree would you?

Answer 1

Very hard to read, if you really expect anyone to take you seriously perhaps you should try some paragraphs and perhaps only one or 2 questions at a time instead of 15.

Answer 2

Did any of you folks actually attent a school at some time. Evoluation is the largest load of pure crap that has ever been presented in the science community. The fact it that no life could becreated with out divine intervention the reason for this is the pure complexity of life itself. So you can get this in your skulls think of the empire state building. Could it be created by loading all the material in a aircraft and then flying to 10000 feet and then opening the doors and allowing the materials to all fall to the earth and the building just happen. No indeed it will not work. No more then DNA coming togeither with out guidence to form life. The example that i gave is a fraction of what ti takes for real life to exist. And the problem is that cells are programmed. They have a designed function in them and actually all dna contains the whole creatures function code and that did not just happen per chance. But what it does prove beyond a shadow of a dought is that if there is a program running in a cell there is a programmer. That is just one reason that there is a creator of life on this planet. There are millions of other reasons. These are proven by just plain common since be observaton. You do not have to look at a chimp to understand why man can't come from a chimp or his cousin. Humans and Chimps have different mass structures as well as different hindge structures and they both have different DNA and RNA. More over a alpha male will destory any veration in offspring from the primates which really is a large problem for evoluation promoters.
Is all the science does not point to the single conclusion then you are barking up the wrong tree. And in the science fields most people are calling the theory of evoluation a fraud. Because it is. The complexity of a planet is vastly more complex then a person and this planet did not just happen either. It is a entergy system that is closed and contained and produces its on entergy internallly and yeat it also recieves light from the Sun and the entergy is balanced. I guess it might be that the odds of life being on this planet is 87K to the 10 power due to location alone. being in the only region of space were we are protected. You folkd may want to ask for you money back from your schools.

Answer 3

This never needs to be about proving anyone wrong. The Religious mind is seeking the truth by searching wherever it can to find the ultimate "meaning." Those in science are also looking to discover. They are searching Gods Creation to understand the revelation in the Nature "He" Created. If they don't use the same terminology as you, they are still looking for meaning in the same place. Neither one need be threatened by the other, unless one wishes to stop or harm the other. If I see something Sacred in a rose, and a scientist does not call it Sacred, we are both looking at the same rose. If we all claim to be open to the Truth, then it is possible we may learn from each other. I happen to have learned to appreciate Nature from scientists work even more than I did before. When I can see the eye of a fly under an electron microscope, there is such beauty in the detail as to make one teary eyed. To see Saturn, or the picture of the "baby universe" only affirms the religious mind. The religious mind is filled with wonder, and so are most scientists I have known, so why all the bickering over the words. We are all looking for the Truth, so why not allow everyone room to do it in the way that most appeals to them. I have found that we all can definitely learn from each others discoveries.

Answer 4

Lots of stuff wrong here... let me try to speak plainly, because it sounds like you're young.

Animals never produce animals of a different species in one generation. If you ever saw that happening, take a picture and send it to a science journal. You would DISprove evolution and probably win a Nobel prize.

Evolution doesn't deal with the origins of life -- that concept is called Abiogeneis. No one really knows yet how it happened exactly, but that doesn't mean we should give up! No one knew what Polio was for many years before scientists finally figured it out and cured it. Sooner or later they'll figure it out. Don't be scared of saying "I don't know" -- it's more honest than "God did it with magic"

Your next question is really confusing: "Then of course how did the Universe, and planets come about for this living organism to survive?" All of that would already exist when the first super-simple bit of life came about.

There's not much difference between complex geology and simple life -- have you ever grown crystals with a string and sugar? They act almost like weeds or vines, but they are not alive. It doesn't take a lot of imagination to see how that could transition to simple life, given the right conditions.

Answer 5

To answer your question let me begin with saying we have no reason to believe that evolution is no longer occuring. In fact we have only reason to believe that it still is occuring. It does not occure in all species equally though and certainly not at the same rates. Some things on Earth today will not only die out, but die out without having decendants which have evolved into something else.

Some things that die out will die out simply because their decendants have evolved into something else...and possibly more than one things.

Each species on the Earth today is here because certain conditions were present at certain times, and if you could press a reset button and have the whole process run through again, you might end up with different species. It's a bit like taking a handful of sand and tossing it. If you do that multiple times, what are the odds of all the grains of sand landing in the exact same place twice?

If you threw the sand as close to the same way each time as you could get, you might have a chance even if it's one in a trillion, , but what if you throw a different way each time? Perhaps there is a 1 in a googillion chance.

The things on Earth today, aside from humans, will probably never produce other humans. It is like the sand scenario. Other primates possibly carry the potential to give rise to more human like beings but we have caused their numbers and habitates to dwindle so much that it will probably never happen.

The very first living organism came from something that was not living of course. Things have to meet specific criteria for the scientific community to consider it living. Many things do not meet this criteria but are still organic in nature and harbor the potential to give rise to more interesting things.

A virus, for example, is not considered living. Nevertheless, they get around and evolve.

The Universe and planets did not come about for living things to survive, the universe and planets came about. The living thing formed after and that which cannot survive here does not exists or will cease to exist very soon.

It's true that science makes a lot of assumptions to base theories on, but the nature of these assumptions are not as you might think. They are typically not arbitrarily pulled out of a hat. They are speculated about from other situations, arrived at backwards, or deduced from simplifications. Believe it or not science knows more about the universe than how your computer works, but your computer does work nevertheless.

Science cannot prove or disprove a God, nor does it try to. But you ask where the universe came from and if you believe it came from God then I ask, where did God come from? If God can just be then can't the universe just be? I'm not an atheist but your argument is unsound.

Answer 6

Human beings are not descended from any living organism. We could call those organisms our "parents". Other species are our cousins and siblings.

Complex life has to come from life. There's no law saying that incredibly primitive cells can't come from extremely complex non-living matter.

The common explanation for the universe is the Big Bang. The Big Bang was caused by (the current idea) gases in a vacuum in existence prior the the Big Bang. The universe was initially so hot that only energy could exist. As the universe began to cool, some of that energy converted into matter, as hydrogen and helium, the first two elements.

Of course, creationists will make up blatant lies about everything I've just said.

Answer 7

Well, most of your questions could be answered by theories in biology you should have studied. 1. Like begets like, and subtle evolutionary nuances along with natural selection brough forth the modern day diversity in species, and this is an ongoing process. 2. Some (if flawed) experiments have hypothesised that organic compounds could arise from inorganic compounds in the conditions on the early earth (See Miller 1954)
Of course, the petty thing to do would be to ask you to offer proof for your theory. We are far closer to explaining origins of life through biological and evolutionary theory. Religious theory begins, and ends with faith

Answer 8

Evolution, geology and cosmology have all demonstrated that Creation as literally written in the Bible did not occur. This is not an attack on faith -- this is an honest evaluation of the universe. It's a pity that Biblical Literalists have shallow faith, and value a book over Creation itself.

The fact that you mix cosmology, abiogenesis and evolution into one shows that you have no interest in the truth. Science says it does not know to the questions you asked. It seeks the answers and constructs hypotheses to test the origins. It does not bash, unlike this question.

Answer 9

Because said creatures no longer exist. The species evolved into other species, which split off from each other. Read a biology textbook, will you?

It has been proven that a living organism can be created from non-living material. Do some research.

Evolution does not rule out the existence of a supreme being. It simply rules out the religious accounts of creation.

Answer 10

Evolution is a theory. Get a grant and prove/disprove it. If you do, then you will be right.

That is how science works.

If you like, you can attribute the creation of life to whomever you choose. Science cannot prove/disprove God as we cannot test for God. Believe what you like. But if you don't like a Scientific theory, get a Doctorate in biology and make your mark.

Answer 11

Actually, the Bible says that God created the world in 6 days and rested on the 7th. Who is to say how long God's days are.....? God could have created evolution. Why is that so hard to believe?
(I am pagan by the way and am open to any versions of the beginning because we have no idea really how any of it happened being that none of us were there...)
Why are you looking for an argument? And don't say you aren't. It's obvious by your condescending tone. Can't we all just get along?