Creation vs. Evolution. The proof is here.?

Question

Creationist claim that God created all living things as they are today. Nothing evolved from something else and nothing changes in responce to its enviroment. Evolutionist claim that everyliving thing is changing to survive. Here is the Proof.
When Christians first stood by the creationist beliefs they were unaware of the vast world of living single cell organisms called Viruses. The problem with proving evolution is that it take millions of generations to see the effects. Viruses reproduce so fast that millions of generations can be seen in weeks or days. Viruses evolve before our eyes to form new species/strains that will resist the medication trying to kill them. Change the meds the Viruses will evolve to become resistant to the new drug. This is impossible under creationism. These new species of viruses did not not exist until today and they are evolving into newer species everyday in order to survive in the face of meds trying to kill them.

Answer 1

guy, its not like theres even an arguement anymore, evolution already won

Answer 2

The evidence is not as limited as you have shown. Bacteria, which is not always parasitic in nature, goes through several thousand generations in a short space of time as well.

The only thing that you need to prove evolution is to bring up the flavobacteria that evolved the ability to produce nylonase - an enzyme that would have had zero effect on anything besides nylon waste materials which didn't exist until 80 years ago - at the cost of losing its ability to produce sugar-effective enzymes.

And as someone said, there is nothing to suggest that minor evolutionary changes ("microevolution") cannot lead to speciation ("macroevolution").

Note: I don't agree with the use of the micro/macro suffixes on evolution, they're just buzz words thrown about by creationists to slander the ideas.

Answer 3

Hmmm.... You make a good point. Too bad there are so few people here who understand it. Which frustrates those who do understand it. Ah, and those viruses aren't evolving into new species, which is why most creationists will argue with you.

First off, Bad Church Lady, there is still an argument here. Some people still do not understand that they have already lost the debate, however.

Fireball226, why do you even bother answering? You never have anything of value to say. In fact you seem intent on proving your ignorance with everything you say. We were never talking about germs. We were talking about viruses. And of course you're going to say that VIRUSES don't apply because they don't fit in with your ideas about how life really is.

Doug, I believe you answered your own question. If they are changing to find new ways to destroy their hosts, then they are adapting. Adaptation is a mechanism of evolution.

Luke W, you are a fool. The only difference in Microevolution and Macroevolution is the scale of evolution itself. The same mechanism are in place and under effect. Why wouldn't it occur on a larger scale as well?

And you, jwpaulk. You. You amaze me. Have you no understanding of what Darwin said? It seems that you don't. He did explain how man fit into his theory. "The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex." Ever heard of it? I suppose not. Too bad. Its a bit boring but very informational. Happens to be all about human evolution. Better luck next time.

Alright, iloveorbitgum. You silly creationist, you. You tried so very hard to understand the scientific process but in the end, you didn't. Evolution is a theory. It has SCIENTIFICALLY irrefutable evidence. That's all that really matters. It doesn't have to fit in with your religious rhetoric to be accepted by the majority of the scientific community.

wannaknow. Please don't try to understand what any of us are saying. You can't. Give me one good reason you can't compare Human life (animal life) to bacteria or even viruses? Don't try to understand Darwin either. You can't. Since when has science not proved evolution?

House Speaker, I'm afraid you aren't making much sense. It would have helped if you had explained what TYPE of creationist you are. Then perhaps I would have a better knowledge of refuting the nonsense you spew. Good effort, though.

Gettin'real. I'm afraid your not "being real." You yourself are being very close minded. Why on earth does there NEED to be an All Powerful being who is controlling creation? Why? That's a bit like the Greeks saying "Well we know what this lightning is. We know what its capable of. Where does it come from? What causes it? I've got an idea. Lets just say Zeus throws it when he's really pissed off."

Your facts are wrong as well. The only difference between microevolution and macroevolution is the time necessary and the scale it is on. Macroevolution doesn't happen spontaneously like you seem to believe (and have said). You see, when you agree there is "microevolution" then it doesn't matter if you believe that there is "macroevolution." You just admitted that there is evolution.

Please, all of you, try to read up more on Evolution. Most of you don't know a damn thing about it. This would certainly make it hard to believe.

Answer 4

Viruses? That is illness, which entered the world after the first human couple disobeyed God. You cannot compare human and animal life to viruses or bacteria or whatever! Get real, for real...however, I believe in creation, but I never doubt for a minute that there have been small adaptations in living things...that is not what Darwin was talking about with his theory of evolution. He was talking about one species changing into an entirely different species, which has never happened, it was a theory, but it has never been scientifically proven, and of course never will be. Microevolution...adaptations within species has been proven and therefore has happened...learn, gain accurate information and then offer proof.

Answer 5

A creationist who claims that things are the same now as at the time of creation is naive. The fact that organisms can and do evolve to a changing environment is indisputable. This fact however does not provide indisputable evidence as to how and when life began.

Answer 6

You are not asking a question, rather you are on a rant. That lack of integrity speaks to your character as clearly as the words you wield...
Speaking as someone who has studied BOTH theories, your argument looks good until you you remember the following...
You fail to differentiate between demonstrable evolution (micro-evolution, readily observable all around us), and non repeatable, non observable theorizing of grand scale macro- evolution ,spontaneously evolving us from primordial ooze to apes to humans.
No thinking Christian rejects micro-evolution, which is what Darwin saw & is readily observed & easily duplicated, ie. creatures in nature gradually changing from darker to lighter coats/colorings generationally to adapt to new/changing environments .
Classic example is a type of moth that showed these color changes within each suceeding moth generation when introduced to a remote island as a new species.
This is part of what I learned in my evolutionary based college biology class.
Viruses do NOT evolve, they mutate-same class.
An intelligently thought out ability is being demonstrated in viral mutations, and the thought is not originating within the virus.
That begs the question"How is it viruses are set up to respond that way?"

A close minded evolutionist is no better than an unthinking Christian in terms of intelligently arguing their case
In the end, either way it comes down to placing your faith in a system for interpreting the observed data.

One example is that my instuctor agreed with the evolutionary theory that the "useless appendage" at the base of a human spinal column speaks for the transition from apes-hence the term for it- a tailbone.
This forced me, as an open minded student, to ask, how then does this apparantly useless thing get interpreted according to the theory of a loving Creator?
What came to mind is how many times each of us has fallen onto our backsides, especially as children. If not for that tailbone, we would be landing on the last vertebrae of our spinal column, meaning most of us would suffer paralysis at a very young age.
For me, the closer I look at both sides, the more sense Creationism makes.

Answer 7

I have a question for you. Why is it that man is the only creature that adapts his environment to suit him and not the other way around? Could it be that when God created him, he gave man control of the beasts of the earth and the air? Evolution is not based solely on one creature but the observance of many creatures, except man. I wonder why that is. Darwin could not, and he tried, explain why man could not fit into his theory. It sounds like you need to do some more study on this subject before you make rash comparisons.

Answer 8

Bad Church Lady, Evolution already won? How? Did they gave real proof that the Ape have soul? You are an Idiot?

Creation vs. Evolution? The writers of Genesis who wrote about the creation of the world in 7 days knew nothing about the process of creation and that is a fact.

Genesis was not written to explain the process of creation of which these writers knew nothing. It was written to help explain the purpose of creation. Genesis was written to help us grasp a spiritual truth not a scientific or historical fact.

This "Spiritual Truth" is something the writers of Genesis did know about.

Darwin's works were catastrophic for biblical literalists because evolution reduced us human race to the status of a species.

Answer 9

Your education leaves me speechless. However there is one thing that I must correct you on. There are no new Viruses out there, only those that man has not found yet.

Answer 10

Ah, my friend, but the true semi-educated christian will contend that viruses are not truly "life" as we know it and they will have a point.

Of course, people denying evolution in this day and age might as well contend the earth is flat: and how would you reason with the delusional?

Answer 11

Creationists (like myself) do not believe in MACRO evolution or the changing of one species to another. BUT when you say that creationists do not believe that species "change in response to their environment" you are wrong. This is called MICRO evolution or the adaptation of a species in order to survive. God created species so they would be able to adapt. This does not go against creationism.