People who claim evolution is false?

Question

Can you explain these?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ambulocetus
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archaeopteryx

for creationists...

actually, the bible explains nothing about these...

Answer 1

interesting reference but just look at the kind of replies you have recieved whew boy I'll hold my tongue ...

Answer 2

I think the answer is right there for everyone to see unless they chose to ignore it and follow their animal instinct to deny the existence of a very intelligent and complex design going from the smallest particle in your body to the massively huge galactic order.

When people chose to ignore the creator it’s chaos everywhere and science can try to answer what it wants it can never explain how the world we live in was initiated in the first place, they ago as far as a big bang but cannot answer the simple question of who caused the big bang to happen in the first place or why ? They can tell you come from a monkey but they cannot explain why monkeys or any other animal for that matter hasn’t evolve into a humanlike creature or even developed the ability to speak, to feel, to have morals and boundaries or the intelligence and arrogance to make up crap about theories that doesn’t make sense about how he came to be !

They tell you a creator is out of question but when they’re stuck in their answers they just say we don’t know how or why !!
Science would be much more productive and would make much more sense it if accepts one and only one concept, the presence of a creator and sustainer of the universe. If only we accept that everything falls into place and suddenly makes sense !!!

I will finish by quoting one of the most imminent scientist of our time, someone who shaped the very core of modern science, Albert Einstein himself, on his death bed he while trying to write the so called “theory of everything” said to his nurse “God is not hiding anything from us, he only wants us to look harder…” take the hint…

PS: God does not equal church, I will not dictate which faith should be followed or which God is the true God but it’s you duty to search and find out for yourself, just don’t take the easiest option… your parents or your society does not necessarily hold the ultimate truth…

Peace !

Answer 3

God is testing you and you are failing.
How many creationists do you think you have converted today? The basic fact is that facts do not matter when you have an opinion supported by a mythical being who can play any games that he likes with the historic record. Creationists have been tampering with their own minds for too long to be swayed by reality so why try? I am not even sure any more if there is any benefit from saving them from ignorance. Much better to leave them happy and deluded.

Answer 4

At a broad level, a Creationist is someone who believes
in a god who is absolute creator of heaven and earth,
out of nothing, by an act of free will. Such a deity is
generally thought to be constantly involved or
‘immanent’ in the creation, ready to intervene as
necessary, and without whose constant concern the
creation would cease or disappear. Ancient Greek and
Roman philosophers wrote about divine Elements of
nature, and did not write any thing to support
evolution of humans from monkey. The major religious
people like the Hindus, Buddhists, Christians, Jews,
and Muslims supported creationism. Even the religions
of the remote tribes and aborigins never speak of
evolution of humans from monkeys. Many French and
German philosophers of 18th cebtury believed in
creationism.

The French naturalist Chevalier de Lamarck proposed a
theory of evolution in 1809. Because it included the
inheritance of 'acquired characteristics' as the
operative force of evolution, his whole theory was
ridiculed and discredited for many years. Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe also presented some ideas on
evolution. His ideas on evolution framed the question
which Darwin and Wallace approached within the
scientific paradigm. But the spiritual implications
of his writings were left out.

Intelligent design is the idea that, because of the
complexity of certain features found in nature, an
"intelligent designer", or Almighty, must have played a
role in the development of life. Intelligent design
contradicts the scientific theory of evolution. Nearly
all scientists consider evolution to be a scientific
fact. Supporters of intelligent design argue
that living beings are too complex to have developed
through purely natural processes.
http://www.worldbook.com/wb/Article?id=ar752402&st=creationism

Throughout history, philosophers, religious thinkers,
and scientists have attempted to explain the history
and variety of life on Earth. During the rise of modern
science in western Europe in the 17th and 18th
centuries, a predominant view held that God created
every organism on Earth more or less as it now exists.
But in that time of burgeoning interest in the study of
fossils and natural history, the beginnings of a modern
evolutionary theory began to take shape. Early
evolutionary theorists proposed that all of life on
Earth evolved gradually from simple organisms. Their
knowledge of science was incomplete, however, and their
theories left too many questions unanswered. Most
prominent scientists of the day remained convinced that
the variety of life on Earth could only result from an
act of divine creation.
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761554675/Evolution.html

"Our two minds .... One is an act of the emotional
mind, the other of the rational mind. In a very real
sense we have two minds, one that thinks and one that
feels" (Daniel Goleman, Emotional Intelligence,
Bloomsbury Publishing, London, 1996, page 8). This
rational mind is also called the faculty of logic and
reason. The emotional mind is connected with religion
and the rational mind is connected with science. The
Upanishads say that these two minds are opposite
in nature. Moreover, logic has its own limitation:

In the 1930s, Austrian mathematician Godel proved a
theorem which became the "Godel theorem" in cognition
theory. It states that any formalized 'logical' system
in principle cannot be complete in itself. It means
that a statement can always be found that can be
neither disproved nor proved using the means of that
particular system. To discuss about such a statement,
one must go beyond that very logic system; otherwise
nothing but a vicious circle will result. Psychologist
say that any experience is contingent - it's opposite
is logically possible and hence should not be treated
as contradictory.

An example for this may be found in the scientific 'proof'
which some interpret that there will be golbal warming
in the decades to come, and others showing their own
scientific data to prove the coming of ice age in the
near future.
http://www.iceagenow.com/Pacemaker.htm
http://www.whoi.edu/institutes/occi/viewArticle.do?id=10046
http://muller.lbl.gov/pages/IceAgeBook/IceAgeTheories.html
http://www.iceagenow.com/QandA.htm
http://www.junkscience.com/mar06/Time_AnotherIceAge_June241974.pdf
http://www.longbets.org/218
http://www.ourcivilisation.com/aginatur/iceage.htm
http://www.peter-thomson.co.uk/ice-ages/Ice_age_theories.html
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2002/12/08/1038950270355.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/4081541.stm

What was known by wise persons of the yore by access to
higher knowledge will never be understood by science.
Religion is the characteristic feature of humans -
other living beings do not have it. It is present since
the begining of the creation itself. The Almighty does
not play games with humans. Will a father mislead his
children? More than 95% humans believe in religion. Can
the 5% question the faith of 95%? Then they will be
questioning the very humanity in the name of a nascent
subject called science!

Answer 5

This was published as an article on Gather.com by Joseph R. I thought you'd appreciate it.

Intelligent Designer On Crack
By: Joseph R. (Gather.com)
March 03, 2007

"What are you doing here Uncle Rico?"
"Grandma took a little spill down at the sand dunes. Broke her coccyx."
"What? Since when does she go to the dunes?"
"Looks like there's a lot you don't know about."

Despite being belittled by Uncle Rico, young Napoleon Dynamite seems aware of what a coccyx is. However, he might not know its significance in evolutionary theory. The coccyx, or tailbone, is an example of a vestigial structure.

A vestigial structure is a body part that has lost its original function and now either performs a different function or no function at all. You can think of them as evolutionary "leftovers" as a species evolves to adapt to its local environment.

People wondered why, in a world designed so perfectly and intelligently, would the designer construct humans with a tailbone. It didn't make sense. The design didn't seem very intelligent. Along came Darwin (and Wallace) to put this into perspective.

Our tailbones are what remain of the tails our ancestors had. To this day somewhere on Earth humans are occasionally born with a tail. It was the unlucky mother living in the Middle Ages if her child was born with a tail. Both surely would have been burned as witches.

Sometimes humans are called "the naked ape." But that's not really true. Humans are covered with a fine (or not so fine in some cases) coat of fur. What? You say it's hair and not fur? Whatever helps you sleep at night. Actually, our body hair and the hair on our heads is different. The hair on our head doesn't stop growing. Our fur does stop growing at a certain length. What's that? Your fur keeps you warm? When was the last time you relied on body hair to keep you warm? Early humans didn't either. They "borrowed" fur from other animals.

How about goose bumps? Why would an intelligent designer give us goose bumps? What purpose do they serve? None, in us. However, in our ancestors and other living species (like your pet dog) they serve a critical function.
Technically they are called erector pilli and they are weird little muscles that cause your dog's "hackles" to go up. Lots of mammals use these to communicate the largeness of themselves to a rival or predator. They are also used in conjunction with fur to increase their insulation properties. That's why yours activate when you get a rush of adrenaline or get chilly. But still they are just weird, useless "leftovers", ghosts of our evolutionary past.

Did you ever wonder why men have nipples? They serve no purpose in males. Why would a designer give me nipples? Look at the picture! I'm not attracting a mate with my nipples. The answer, of course, is that a designer wouldn't, and didn't.
Why do I have them then? Very early in our development when we were in our mother's womb we were neither male nor female. As we developed genes and hormones did their work on us. Evolutionarily speaking, it's much easier to work with what you have than it is to redesign a new gender. Evolution didn't make males from scratch but rather worked with the same basic human structure and made essential male parts.

Have you ever had your wisdom teeth removed? If you had then you might have concluded that our designer had no wisdom at all. Of course there was no designer, because why would a designer give us more teeth than a mouth could hold?
Wisdom teeth are an additional set of molars that are still embedded in our gums. Sometimes in early adulthood they try to join the other teeth. The problem is, there's no room. Evolution can explain this bad design. Early hominids had larger jaws and ate lots of tough plants. As modern humans evolved our faces got less prognathic, our jaws got smaller and our diet switched to omnivore status.

So maybe all this talk about the useless parts of humans is freaking you out. Let's look at a different organism. The common dandelion has some great examples of vestigial structures, namely its pistil and its stamen. Think back to high school. The pistil and the stamen are the "female" and "male" reproductive parts of flowering plants. The thing is, dandelions evolved internal fertilization. They don't need the bee to pass pollen from the stamen to the pistil. Yet dandelions still produce external pollen and still have pistils and stamens. Again, “ghosts” of their evolutionary ancestors.
I could go on and on (we haven’t even mentioned wings on flightless birds and pelvises on whales) but I think the point has been made. I bring up the topic because in a recent poll of believers the question “why do you believe in God” was asked. The number one response was “the good design/natural beauty/perfection/complexity of the world or universe.” with 28.6%.

You may not believe me, but I truly don’t care if you believe in God or not. I’m not trying to disprove God or talk anyone out of their belief in God. But science is not based on belief, it’s based on evidence from natural phenomena. The existence of God is not testable. However, some of the assertions made by advocates of intelligent design are wrong scientifically. The scientific claims for intelligent design have been debunked by a consensus of the world’s skilled, dedicated scientists, a large class of people that are smarter than I am. What you are left with is the supernatural, which does not belong in the science classroom.

Earth’s living inhabitants are not perfect and not generally well designed. Living things are susceptible to disease, breaking and dying for lack of energy. Over 99% of all species that have ever inhabited Earth have gone extinct. I thank my ancient ancestors every day for providing me with just enough genes so I can eke out a living, find a mate and avoid getting eaten by wolves.

Answer 6

A lot of info. Perhaps science will explain all this someday.
I Cr 13;8a

Answer 7

anybody can right a book and make up stuff there is no book police anybody can write anything they want true or false who cares what that person says other writers say something totally different use some com man sense just because its written doesn't make it fact its opinion

Answer 8

Yes I can; they are yet a further attempt in the support for the THEORY of evolution.
They cannot prove evolution...it is a man-man THEORY. More and more scientists are distancing themselves from this farce.

The day will come when teachers of this lie will be held accountable to our Heavenly Father Himself for misleading young ones away from the truth of in Genesis.

Answer 9

thanks for the interesting info.

Those who have intentionally closed their minds to anything beyond a 'Book' (rationality/rationalism is the only casualty) you cannot make the self-blinded see

Answer 10

That's why I only use Conservapedia.

http://www.conservapedia.com/Main_Page