Creationists, please tell me something.?

Question

What part of evolution is hard for you to understand? Do you say micro evolution is okay, but macro is not?

If you do not like micro evolution, how do you justify influenza?

Also, would it be a hard step for you to imagine a mammal born with oddly shaped reproductive organs finding a member of the same species with the oddly shaped reproductive organs, and then mating only with that creature [as it couldn't with anything else] and as the genes move along, the oddly shaped bit from those two animals become chemically unable to breed with members of the old species [thus making it fully impossible, including preventing sterile offspring from forming. [And to the others who understand that, I realize t is a weak idea., but plausible in a simple sense. And improbable too, but let's run with it.]

Thanks, and please do not quote the bible.

I posted this earlier, but no creationists replied.

Could you guys answer the material asked? I did not ask for a reply of "I know what it is," or, "I trust God."

Answer 1

creationist reply here......

because people get the flu, you call that evidence of evolution????????????? come now, even darwin did better than that and he was a nut case.

What part of creation don't you understand? is it truly easier for you to believe that we are the result of an accident, rather than an intelligent plan by a much higher power?

Should I believe that the Golden Gate Bridge just fell into place without a plan and someone to execute the plan??????

sorry, but even though I have had the flu many times, I still don't believe that it is evidence of evolution. I had my flu shot, maybe that's why I don't accept it.

Answer 2

I have a simple ans were if what u are saying is true then which came first the chicken or the egg, and if u believe in natural selection then explain this ? every thing has a genetic make-up code and and inside that code are a set of instruction that tells every cell what to do and how to make certain things so with that being said how can something be made with out a a set of instructions to make it. like a computer can only do what it is program to do cells can do what they are programmed to do, so how can a cell on its own decide to make a arm,leg, heart, eye, its impossible it has to be programmed to do that, now with natural selection or evolution witch states that through a series of attempts certain body parts where formed and that's how we evolved, well if that is true then who told the body that the leg it made was good or the eye that it was good and needed to be kept for the long run, it does not make any sense the body can only reproduce what it is programmed to reproduce , the body can not reproduce apples or oranges can it? no and why not because it not programmed that way

Answer 3

My only real problem with evolution is abiogenesis. I also have a major problem with the premise that the universe was not created. No matter how far you go back, you still come to "something," whether cosmic dust or quantum essence or whatever was "always there," there's always a something. Why? Microevolution isn't problematic for most creationists, but most of us believe that new species don't come from other species. I'm not dogmatic about that.
The origin of the universe that denies a Creator and abiogenesis are my objections.

Answer 4

You have read their answers, now try this on for size.

A sodium chloride pattern of life, or germ plasm of organized life was placed in shallow and sheltered bays: favorable to the stimulation's of protoplasmic reactions. Approximately 550 million years ago.

Sunlight ( Which can penetrate 600 ft. deep) and a high degree of carbon in the atmosphere, plus the vitamin rich ultra-violet rays to feed; and the ozone for absorption of harmful radiation along with the blanketing effect of the night for temperature control and the electromagnetic field for added protection.... Means.. we have a fertile garden here; Earth. Notice I said "placed" in the waters? So how did this biological unit of material life ( the protoplasmic cell.) begin?

Scientist will never know. The Chemist can elucidate the chemistry of dead protoplasm, but he cannot discern either the physical "organization" or the dynamic performance of living protoplasm. Ever will the scientist come nearer and nearer the secrets of life, but never will he find them and for no other reason than that he must kill protoplasm in order to analyze it. Dead protoplasm weighs the same as live, but it is not the same.

The big question is accident? or; by design?
Evolution by design. That would be an interesting concept.
Evolutionist get what they want, and Creationist can maintain what they need. If by "Accident or random chance"; we all lose!

Science speculates that there is life out there and that Earth might just be one of billions of Evolutionary planets.

The fact that the bible says God is in the Heaven of Heaven,s or the Universe of Universe,s or Galaxy of Galaxies- supports the scientist in that regard.

Well.......forever onward. I hope this adds something new to an old question.

Peace..........

Answer 5

I am not sure Creationists don't believe in micro evolution. This simply says things evolve or change. If you are a vegetarian, over a period of time your incisor teeth may not be as sharp. Most won't quibble this this.

Evolution that says a horse became a moose would be a problem. Apes becoming humans is a problem. It is a theory.

Answer 6

Read Stephen Hawking's book, A Brief History Of Time, and you'll begin to understand.

I find it amazing that bible thumpers can actually have the audacity to actually believe that God could not orchestrate something as intricate as the evolutionary process. Are these the same people who claim God is all powerfull? Please people, wake up and truly understand your own claims.

Answer 7

A creationist is one who believes that everything was made from an intelligent designer. That designer is God.

Evolution can also fall into the category of having intelligent design to begin with.

Answer 8

"What part of evolution is hard for you to understand?"

The part that is hardest for me to understand, is the part where we flopped out of the water, grew legs, struck two rocks together by accident and said, "Uhg uhg...me make fire. Tomorrow, me reproduce with that other froggy legged thingy that just popped out of water, then together, we build computer, create wi-fi, and fly to moon." Other than that, I think I completely understand the "theory."

What about animals, though? Say wolves, for instance. Are those the other humans that just got tired during the process and said, "Ah, phooey on it. I'm furry, I have teeth, and I walk. That's good enough for me. I'm going to the woods to eat stuff. Ooo! Human-squirrels! Yum!"

(And look! I obeyed all your rules of the question, too! :D )

Answer 9

Normally, evolutionists have to be educated by Creationists (at least in my experience).

Evolution has both genetic elements and geographic elements for natural selection to work.

Micro-evolution is a minute genetic change within a species (this happens all the time).

Macro-evolution refers to the geographic isolation of members of the same species, causing them (theoretically) to follow different paths of genetic change. (This also happens all the time. In fact, it's hard to avoid.)

Mega-evolution is the resulting change of a species into a totally new species over time (something that doesn't happen).

Speciation is always pointed to as proof of mega-evolution, but we're not talking about a change from homo-erectus to homo-sapiens. We're talking about a change from reptiles to mammals, something never observed or proven.

There are far too many stumbling blocks along this path for evolution to be a rational explanation of nature.

Answer 10

I understand Evolution. I just think that it would be impossible to happen without any outside influence. No I am not talking about things like the flue.