why are people skeptical of evolution but not skeptical of God?

Question

Putting the arguments for or against the existence of evolution and God

It strikes me as interesting that some people can say there is no tangible proof of evolution while at the same time not being disturbed by the fact that there is no tangible proof for God.

Is it possible that these people are not objective?

Answer 1

the complexity of many aspects of life and obects are too great to be by random chance, i believe it is a logical solution that there is intelligence behind the creation of things. i don't think you have looked deep enough. nothing cannot become something.

Answer 2

"No tangible proof of God?!?!" This is not what your Tanakh really says, Gratvol. Psalm 19:2 reads: "The heavens declare the glory of G-d, and the firmament showeth His handiwork."

Is there a painting in existance that doesn't have a painter? Or a house that doesn't have a builder? Then why wouldn't all of creation imply that there is a Creator?

A person needs no other proof that God exists than to look all around him. Those who refuse to see this are fooling themselves.

Scepticism about evolution is supported by the Tanakh, also. Genesis 2:7 tells us humans were created by God from the dust; it doesn't say He formed us from evolved sea creatures or monkeys! "Then HaShem G-d formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." Objectivity has nothing to do with it; trust in God's word does.

Answer 3

Yup, we do question each and everything. yet, while information is on condition that helps an argument, the argument is universal and there is not any ingredient in questioning it furhter. you are able to not learn something extra. Evolution hasn't been "shown" - no universal scinetific sort (called a theory - a theory isn't basically some wild concept with as little fee as the different wild concept, it incredibly is an universal working sort that explains some thing) is shown. A theory is examined, called experiments, and if the predictions of the theory tournament the consequence of the experiements the tehory is accpeted. Evolution has met the factors of prediction and verification by utilising ability of assessments. lots of the verification is in fossil checklist, a number of it incredibly is in experiments with common animals - fruit flies, bacteria. sure a god would have created each and everything to look like evolution occurred. yet this is somewhat incredibly convoluted good judgment and that isn't the least confusing clarification for what we see around us. it incredibly is an argument strengthen by utilising human beings like your self to safeguard incredibly literature which you're feeling ought to be the literal tale of ways we got here to be somewhat than quite a number of oral traditions that have been at last dedicated to writing. so which you are able to use the god did it argument - it would not tutor a element, there is not any information of god or perhaps that the international merely popped into life by way of fact the bible woud have you ever suspect - in spite of the undeniable fact that it's not technological expertise.

Answer 4

Those that say there is no tangible proof of evolution are either ignorant or lying. When somebody says there is not tangible proof of god, that is 100% correct.

Of course the evolution deniers are not being objective. I suspect that objectivity is switched off during the brainwashing.

Answer 5

Regarding Kent Hovind's $250,000 offer, he requires proof that no one would be able to provide. He wants proof of, among other things, that the big bang is the only possible explanation for the creation of the universe.

Plus he's in prison and owes the government a rather large amount of money for the whole not-paying-taxes thing, so I don't think anyone is trying particularly hard. Even Pensacola Christian has distanced itself from him.

Answer 6

I don't think it's fair to call them 'sceptical of evolution'. From their remarks on here it's clear they don't have a clue what evolution is.

They seem to think evolution's some kind of magic trick where monkeys spontaneously turn into people. And dogs into cats, and fish into cheese.

They also believe that evolution encompasses abiogenesis and the Big Bang.

If I thought that evolution involved all the stuff mentioned above, I'd be sceptical.

CD

Answer 7

We really need to get someone to write evolution into the Bible.

Wait, that might not be the best idea. Yes, we'll finally be able to teach evolution uncontested in schools, but won't that just make them more stubborn on other issues?

Answer 8

Perhaps we should be skeptical of both. There is no concrete proof for evolution. If there is could someone tell me what it is and pick up your check for $250,000 from the website below because that's what they are offering for proof. No one has collected yet. If you are skeptical of God then ask Him to prove Himself. That's what I did and I am now a born again Christian.

Answer 9

Who's not skeptical? You've obviously not spent much time in this category. Hang around. You'll see more skepticism per question here than just about any other, I'd venture to say (and did).

Answer 10

hey that's not right, there's been PLENTY of truth on evolution well i think anyway. what about fossils? there has not been ANY proof at ALL about the existence of god. People who deny evolution are either religious or neutral people.