What would you choose to believe?

Question

Tell me if you believe in creation, evolution or neither of the two that started life on this planet. And plz try to convince me as persuasive as possible with as much facts and opinions as possible. And if neither then what is your theory of the origin of life and convince me to your theory also.

Answer 1

Life is more than just physics and chemistry; life is built on information. Tightly coiled up inside the center of every cell, this information is contained in that molecule of heredity, called “DNA” which has a digital code inscribed alone its spine.

Now, information is something different from matter and energy. For example, a book contains information, but the paper and ink are not the information—they can only transmit it.

Life is an information-based process in which the DNA contained within each cell is based on a genetic language using four nucleotide bases. It has been said that if transcribed into English, the DNA in the human genome would fill a 300-volume set of encyclopedias of approximately 2,000 pages each.

It has also been said that if the amount of information in just a pinhead volume of DNA was written into paperback books, it would make a pile 500 times the distance from here to the moon. The knowledge currently stored in all of the libraries of the world would only take up about 1% of that. DNA is by far the densest information storage mechanism in the known universe.

And we know from experience: If you have a computer program, you need a computer programer. Any time we find information, whether it is in the form of a hieroglyphic inscription or a newspaper article, there was invariably an intelligent agent behind that information.

Evolutionists have not been able to explain the origin of information in cells; information has not been shown to spontaneously arise from matter and energy. The existence of the information can only be explained through a pre-existing intelligence that put it there.

Dr. Werner Gitt, Professor at the German Federal Institute of Physics and Technology, said, “A code system is always the result of a mental process (it requires an intelligent origin or inventor) … It should be emphasized that matter as such is unable to generate any code. All experiences indicate that a thinking being voluntarily exercising his own free will, cognition, and creativity, is required ...There is no known natural law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical process or material phenomenon known that can do this.”

I think we can therefore deduce that the huge amount of information in living things must have originally come from an intelligence, which had to have been far superior to ours, as scientists are revealing every day.

Scientists have also found that within a cell, there are thousands of what are often called “biochemical machines.” Lester and Hefley said, “We once thought that the cell, the basic unit of life, was a simple bag of protoplasm. Then we learned that each cell in any life form is a teeming micro-universe of compartments, structures, and chemical agents...”

Dr. Stephen Meyer said, “Over the last 25 years, scientists have discovered an exquisite world of nanotechnology within living cells. Inside these tiny labyrinthine enclosures, scientists have found functioning turbines, miniature pumps, sliding clamps, complex circuits, rotary engines, and machines for copying, reading and editing digital information—hardly the simple "globules of plasm" envisioned by Darwin's contemporaries.”

As Dr. Michael Behe has said, “Cells swim using machines, copy themselves with machinery, ingest food with machinery. . . highly sophisticated molecular machines control every cellular process.”

And these elegant machines are of greater sophistication than we are capable of making. Dr. Michael Denton (a non-Christian molecular biologist) said, “Alongside the level of ingenuity and complexity exhibited by the molecular machinery of life, even our most advanced artifacts appear clumsy. We feel humbled, as neolithic man would in the presence of twentieth-century technology.”

In trying to understand these biological systems, molecular biologists actually need to “reverse engineer” them. Is that not strong evidence that they were engineered to begin with? But they can’t or won’t see it. That just blows my mind.

And speaking of mind, there is so much about the brain and the brain-mind relationship that we don’t understand; it is far too complex for us. In the words of Isaac Asimov (the anti-creationist), “In man is a three-pound brain, which as far as we know, is the most complex and orderly arrangement of matter in the universe.”

It has been estimated that the human brain processes more than a million messages a second, with all that is going on in our bodies. It has also been estimated that if we learned something new every second of our lives, it would take three million years to exhaust the capacity of our brain.

Ornstein and Thompson speaking about the human brain said, “After thousands of scientists have studied it for centuries, the only word to describe it remains amazing.”

It makes the complex computer look like a child’s toy in comparison to complexity. If you were walking along a deserted Island and just so happen to come across a computer, the first thing you would think is, “Look what nature made,” right? Is it logical to believe that the brain designed the computer, but the brain is a product of time and chance?

The logical response, is to say as the Psalmist did, “I give thanks to Thee, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made” (Ps. 139:14).

Reliable methods for detecting design exist and are employed in forensics, archeology, and data fraud analysis. These methods can easily be employed to detect design in biological systems. When being interviewed by Tavis Smiley, Dr. Stephen Meyer said, “There are developments in some technical fields, complexity and information sciences, that actually enable us to distinguish the results of intelligence as a cause from natural processes. When we run those modes of analysis on the information in DNA, they kick out the answer, ‘Yeah, this was intelligently designed’ . . . There is actually a science of design detection and when you analyze life through the filters of that science, it shows that life was intelligently designed.”

So here is my question: What is more absurd? To believe God designed all of this, or given enough time, hydrogen turns into humans, molecules to man, particles to people, microbes to microbiologists, protozoa to ponies, pelicans and politicians? If a frog turns into a prince in an instant—well, that’s a fairy tale. But if a frog turns into a prince over millions of year—well, that’s evolution. But I still say it’s a fairy tale.

Answer 2

Creation has no evidence that it started anything and abiogenisis deals with the beginnings of life; not evolution. It is not a matter of what I chose to " believe ", as evolution, the change in allele frequencies over time in a population of organisms, is a fact. I suppose you mean, the theory of evolution by natural selection, though. You need to be more precise.The evidence for this theory, from geographic, fossil, molecular and genetic evidence is overwhelming. You need to get a new flu shot every year, because the virus has been " naturally selected " into what could loosely be called, " a transmuted form " ( bit of old history there ) You may be lucky enough to get secretsauce to type one of his well formed answers, but I do not have that amount of patience or typing skills. So, I send you to this site, which was made for people like you.

http://www.talkorigins.org

Answer 3

Evolution

Answer 4

Did you ever wonder why lions and a pet cat look very similar to each other? Or why the Dodo bird was flightless, seemingly just waiting for man to come to their island and hunt them to extinction?
It is ignorance to accept that these things were just put there.
Evolution is the only theory which explains the differences and similarities between all species of life on Earth. It is one of the most robust, yet elegant, theories to be put forward.
It is supported by many branches of science, in fact, I cannot think of a branch of science which can be used to reject it. The main objections to it are faith based and are not scientific. People seem to be insulted that they can be related to other forms of life. Why? Because then it would challenge their beliefs that they were created in God's image, rather than having an ape-like ancestor as a template for humankind. It is this arrogance which keeps some people from accepting evidence.

Science may not be able to explain every step of every stage of every animal, and this is seen by creationists as proof that evolution is incorrect. Darwin never claimed to have all the answers, neither do scientists today make that claim, but the theory of evolution is too compelling and logical to be simply dismissed just because it carries the tag of "Theory". There are many current examples of the theory at work, including bacterial resistance to medication, locust resistance to pesticides etc.

There are several instances of amino acids being manufactured within a laboratory. It's not life, but it is the building blocks of life. This was previously thought to be impossible. Clearly it is not.
In the primordial soup of the early Earth, there were many hot springs where the components of life existed in abundance. That they should combine after billions of years into organic molecules seems, to me, to be inevitable. Remember, it only had to happen once for all of life on Earth to have followed.
With regard to creation of larger molecules such as proteins, etc, - combining with molecules of the same kind is a normal chemical phenomenon, crystals in solution do it all the time, organic molecules are not excluded, or special in this respect. In this way, it is not unbelievable that amino acids crystallised in supersaturated solutions to form peptides, proteins, etc

Answer 5

Believing is not the right question. You should not believe things for which there is no evidence.

If you are serious about this question, I would recommend you read one or more books by Richard Dawkins. Start with "Climbing Mount Improbable". It is a very good explanation of evolution and is written so we can all understand it without being evolutionary biologists.

Are you serious about this question??

Answer 6

I believe in the Holy Bible which is God's Word. He created the heavens, the earth and everything in between.

Answer 7

Do your own homework! ;)