before you say they are just in it for the research funding, remember that the creationist "think tanks" are probably paying more and that "Dr. Dino" Kent Hovind made millions before going to jail (albeit not paying taxes helped)
2007-02-21 00:37:17 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
the Berean: LMAO! If by just as many you mean 1.2%, then OK
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_publi.htm#earth
2007-02-21 00:45:06 · update #1
celtic warrior: you might want to look at this link to Mayo Clinic - last I heard one of the most respected medical establishments in the world. If you're too lazy to read it all, just do word find for "fetal tail"
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/prenatal-care/PR00112
2007-02-21 00:49:04 · update #2
sorry, search for "embroyonic tail"
2007-02-21 00:50:04 · update #3
cc guy: did you read the article you pointed to? It implied nothing of the sort. Whether Neanderthal was an ancestor of modern humans or not has been in dispute for decades. All this says is that one study believes they interbred. DNA says otherwise. It is still being debated, but whether it turns out to be true or not has no bearing on the validity of Evolution.
2007-02-21 00:54:27 · update #4
TG: Did you really say that "just a few decades ago scientists were convinced the world was flat"? LMAO. Perhaps a few HUNDRED decades ago. Is that what you learned in your homeschooled lessons?
2007-02-21 00:56:06 · update #5
There are just as many scientists that dont believe it. And not all of them are Christians or Theoists....theBerean Note back at you NO KILL 1 : Laugh all you want, the truth is, there are just as many scientists that dont believe it. Just like Michael Denton (?) one of the worlds leading evoultionists wrote a Book called, "Evoulouton, A Theory in Crisis" in which he frankly admitted that there was no evidence for the theory. .....theBerean
2007-02-21 00:41:11 · answer #1 · answered by theBerean 5 · 3⤊ 5⤋
I think it has been a very good theory that has helped advance many fields of study. The heart of the problem is that you are trying to answer a why question with a how answer. Thus it becomes a belief system argument, and beliefs on either side do not have to be supported by fact to be believed, sometimes they just are. Neither theory from a purely scientific standpoint has proved anything. Things are they way they are, and both theories try to explain what we see around us.
I think there are stupid scientists on either side of the argument. I think there are brilliant ones too, and by trying to prove both theories and at that time advancing science. If we were to eliminate either theory totally, I think the cause of science would be hurt.
2007-02-21 08:58:39 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Evolution is a theory in and of its self. There are many scientists besides this Kent Hovind you mentioned that actually say that evolution is a fraud. I guess you still buy into the crap about humans having a tail while a fetus? That was taught in evolutionary theory a few decades ago even though it was known to be a lie. There are way too many examples to list, but it takes more religius faith to believe in evolution than it does to believe that God created the Earth and all there in.
Aside from your attempt at being insulting, i will try to ignor your proving my point of the far left being idiots. If you notice, they use drawings and not actual ultra sound 3d images. Do you realize those drawings are borrowed from the 19th century from an idiot German scientist who had no clue and did the drawings to try to prove evolution. If you look at real time ultra sound you will see that those drawings are a fraud. Why an agency such as the Mayo Clinic would still use those drawings is not something I can answer, but it is absurd. It was exposed as a fraud by the medical community years ago and only an idiot would still buy into this garbage from over 100 years ago. By your trying to basically call me stupid you have exposed your own self to be just another far left idiot. Maybe you need to learn to read. And while you are at it, go research and find real photos and not comic strip drawings. If you knew how to read and not just look at pictures, you would be able to do research and find out where those drawings first originated over 100 years ago.
Reliable science does not say that a fetus has a tail any more. The legs develope without any semblence of a tail between them.
And when you go trying to be a smart a s s next time have your facts straight. Most of the medical community do not support what you have said. You are so full of it. Pretty much ALL of the medical community call those drawings a FRAUD. That is fact.
2007-02-21 08:44:10 · answer #3 · answered by celticwarrior7758 4 · 2⤊ 4⤋
The theory of evolution is in essence a huge house of cards. Why is that? Because it takes one guess about what might have happened...
1. inorganic matter self organized by random chance and somehow came alive
...and then builds upon it with guess after guess about what possibly COULD have happened.
2. radiation added massive amounts of useful information to the DNA structure of simple organisms via the vehicle of random mutations....
3. Natural selection culled the harmful mutations (reasonable enough as natural selection is at least verifiable.)
4. And a single celled creature became a multi-celled creature which went on to become every plant, fish, bird, reptile, amphibian, insect, and mammal in existence today all by random chance adding so much information to DNA that species literally became completely and totally different species....
...not like a dog like creature becoming a coyote and a wolf and a beagle and a husky, but ...
5. A fish became an amphibian and an amphibian became a reptile and a reptile became a bird or a mammal...
Can any of this be proved besides the fact that radiation can cause mutations and that natural selection can cause variations WITHIN a species?
Like I said, it's a whole house of cards based upon presuppositions where a scientist is using their imagination to find ways to take evidence and come up with an explanation of how the evidence could in some hypothetical way be used to support a theory.
Many scientists who are not Creationists now admit that the theory of evolution has been allowed to continue outside of the strict rules of scientific peer reveiw that demands that the scientific method be applied to each and every step of a theoretical argument.
Check out The Evolution Cruncher on the Free Stuff page @ http://web.express56.com/~bromar/ and you will find card after card being knocked out of the foundations of this theory of imagination.
2007-02-21 09:10:23 · answer #4 · answered by Martin S 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Evolution explains the progression of life but can not explain how, what or which existence came first. Keep asking what came before that (chicken or egg) and it becomes clear evolution is another theory among many. Evolution theories are still inconclusive and some seem as far-fetched to creationists as creation seems illogical to evolutionists. Can any provide conclusive proof? I think not....yet. I make a habit of arguing arguable things without assertions unless there is proof beyond reasonable doubt. The field of medicine is one science beginning to recognize that there is more to man than body and there are indeed miracles. Who knows what tomorrow might shed light upon?
2007-02-21 09:02:21 · answer #5 · answered by kahahius 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Scientists are not fool proof. Just a few decades ago, every scientist on the planet insisted the world was flat. They insisted the sun revolved around the Earth. They also insisted that you would never be able to map out the human DNA.
It only took a few scientists to disprove all of the the rest.
Eventually, those scientists who believe in creationism will find enough faults with evolution to change many people minds. In the end, the 100s of thousands of scientists that believe in evolution will be proven wrong.
We as humans make the mistake of thinking that we know everything and are in control. We put our trust in the media, scientists and anyone else who is in authority blindly. We have lost the ability to think for ourselves.
2007-02-21 08:51:13 · answer #6 · answered by TG 4 · 1⤊ 4⤋
No, I do not think that evolution is a conspiracy. I do not think that hundreds of thousands of scientists are just stupid. Neither do I think that the creation account as found in Genesis is a conspiracy, nor that millions of people who believe that Genesis account are just stupid.
I do not judge the validity of a teaching - scientific or religious - by how many people believe it or disbelieve it. The starting point of weighing a teaching ought to be its merits, don't you think?
Hannah J Paul
2007-02-21 08:47:06 · answer #7 · answered by Hannah J Paul 7 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Evolution is not a conspiracy and scientists and not all scientists are stupid.
The problem is each sides starting point. One side is starting with a supernatural explanation of life while the other side is starting with a naturalist explanation of life.
Same evidence, but it is interpreted differently through each presupposition.
2007-02-21 08:43:37 · answer #8 · answered by Solafide55 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I don't think that the scientist are stupid. I think it is stupid of people to believe the THEORY of evolution over the CREATION of God. One mishap with most scientists is that they feel a need to put what they consider a logical explanation to everything. Some things aren't meant to be understood by people. I sympathize with scientist, who really wants to waste their life trying to figure out the past. Isn't that kind of like living in the past but it is worse because they didn't even live then. Go figure. I much rather live my life for today and this moment than to watch it go by while I try to prove things that aren't going to matter when I am gone.
2007-02-21 08:46:00 · answer #9 · answered by t2ensie 3 · 1⤊ 3⤋
No, it's just that scientists and religious people are unable to see beyond black and white, if they focused on the grey area they would see that God created us through a process of evolution, why is that so hard to believe?
2007-02-21 08:47:28 · answer #10 · answered by F R 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Evolution is a theory. With pointers that you might interpret one way and I another. What makes you right and me wrong? Nothing. Either way you have to choose to believe something.
As for millions of scientists.. you get what you teach. Teach creation and you wil have millions of creatinists.. and your question would be in reverse.
None of us were around 6000 years ago so neither of us really know what it was like back then.
2007-02-21 08:49:23 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋