Is there such a thing as a non-biased site that disproves evolution?

Question

Some times when I answer a question or as a question that relates to evolution, I use info from several different web sites that show evolution is incorrect.

Often I get a response that says they do not believe the info because it came from a biased site (against evolution).

I am quite sure they say this just because they do not want to admit that evolution is wrong (and God is right).

So my question is - what non-biased sites disprove evolution?

Answer 1

The thing about what you are looking for is there would have to be a site that showed both sides of the argument and made no comments about either side. Even if there is such a site people could say that the person who put it together had a bias either towards or against evolution because they didn't put the best arguments forward or they chose replies to arguments that made one side look more reasonable than the other side.

Answer 2

A website doesn't prove or disprove anything as internet content is not monitored or checked.

Valid evidence MUST be peer-reviewed in scientific journals or published as reviewed papers.

You do not show that evolution is incorrect as, if you could, then it would no longer be a valid scientific theory and you would have a Nobel Prize (by the way, 47 of the last 50 in biology/medicine have been for discoveries in fields utilising the theory of evolution). Without evidence from the correct sources, the scientific community regards creationists as a joke.

You can't disprove evolution just using your bible, in order to stand a chance of disproving it, you need a degree in evolutionary biology and some experience in scientific research (probably a phD).

Answer 3

Well, if something is being proved or disproved, it is usually biased. People are stating an opinion on whether or not something is true. If all that is on those sites is against evolution, then it is biased. If those sites have pros and cons regarding evolution then it would be balanced. So, to answer your question, yes, I think they would be biased.

Answer 4

There probably isn't a non-biased site that disproves evolution. I have heard of sites that have done "blind" experiments that disproves some of the methods used in evolution.

When I say blind I mean they hire experimenters through a third agency so that the experimenter has no affilliation with the site... I'll have to do some searching for it though...

Answer 5

Non biased sources are peer reviewed scientific journals. Biased sites are written by Christians that have reached the conclusion and try to make the evidence match.

The answer is that there is not a single paper that has passed peer review in the last 100 years or so. There is NO debate about it in scientific circles at all. There are a few squabbles about bits and pieces of the mechanism, but not the big idea.

Answer 6

For the sites to be truely unbiased they would have to look at both sides of the argumnet. They would have to post the arguments for and against evolution and creationism side by side. I've never come across a christian website that does that. They like to pick and choose what they attack. Also the arguments they have are very weak. For example many of them are in this format. If a=b, and b=c,then a=c. That sounds good but you can make anything true using that format. For example:A. If Dogs have 4 legs. B. And cats have four legs.
C. And Horses have four legs. With that you could argue that all dogs are horses.

Answer 7

Now listen very carefully.

Evolution is a FACT. It is not hypothesis, speculation, conjecture or whatever word you may choose to use.

When referring to the "Theory" of evolution, scientists mean "the analysis of a set of facts in their relation to one another", this is the dictionary definition of the word when applied in this context. Feel free to look it up.

By the way, did you know that there is a Theory of Gravity. Do you believe that gravity exists?

No non-biased sites will ever disprove evolution, but if you really feel like reading, check this out:

http://www.mala.bc.ca/~johnstoi/essays/courtenay2.htm

Answer 8

Sorry, there aren't any. Since evolution is probably the best-supported scientific theory, no one bothers attempting to prove it wrong without an ulterior motive - like then saying, since I have now proved evolution wrong, god did it. They don't offer an alternative theory (and believe me, god did it is not a theory), and their proofs are, unfortunately, wrong.

Probaby the same thing is happening with you. You're going out of your way to find sites to prove it wrong - why? The sites are wrong, evolution is a theory and a fact, with many practical applications. I think the thing to ask yourself is, why do I have a problem with evolution?

Answer 9

No ..... but there are definitely non-biased site that disproves the Bible ;P......

No one is saying evolution is right or wrong. In fact there can be no right or wrong answers for evolution as there are too many possiblity to be proven right or wrong.

Maybe you can provide the sites' address and we take a look :D.

Answer 10

Most of the anti-evolution sites that I have seen are either directly or indirectly associated with a religious organization. When I look for an opinion on something I tend to go to the experts in that field. I wouldn't take my car to a minister to get his opinion on what was wrong with it. I don't go to religious people for scientific analysis. Certain religious denominations have an absolute vested interest in denying evolution.

In the actual relevant fields of earth and life sciences, there are about 480,000 scientists, but only about 700 believe in "creation-science" or consider it a valid theory (Robinson 1995). This means that less than 0.15 percent of relevant scientists believe in creationism. And that is just in the United States, which has more creationists than any other industrialized country. In other countries, the number of relevant scientists who accept creationism drops to less than one tenth of 1 percent.

Additionally, many scientific organizations believe the evidence so strongly that they have issued public statements to that effect (NCSE n.d.). The National Academy of Sciences, one of the most prestigious science organizations, devotes a Web site to the topic (NAS 1999). A panel of seventy-two Nobel Laureates, seventeen state academies of science, and seven other scientific organizations created an amicus curiae brief which they submitted to the Supreme Court (Edwards v. Aguillard 1986). This report clarified what makes science different from religion and why creationism is not science.