I'm sorry, but I just can't understand how fundamentalists can say they have evidence evolution is wrong

Question

They keep on saying it's full of holes, yet I find it amazing just how full our understanding of it is.

Fossilisation is rare, yet the fossil record already uncovered is so vast and detailed.

Do they have ANY evidence to match our fossils?

Answer 1

You cannot understand it because you are not a fundamentalist

Answer 2

No. They have some things that seem like strong arguments to me, but the arguments of evolution usually seem like they're substantially stronger. They exist, but they're flimsy (and I'm not going into them). Then there's the fact that we have trees older than they say the age of the earth is...

Their counter-arguments seem, more often than not, to be full of holes. I simply can't stand the "Oh, it's just a theory" nonsense. That's no argument. Germs causing disease, a heliocentric solar system, and gravity are also all theories. Saying that is just disingenuous.

For my part, I'm somewhat attached to the ID movement, which can admit theistic evolution. I've never really settled on it. I know that our knowledge is incomplete and subject to revision, so I'm remiss to try and reevaluate traditional views, but at the same time, I refuse to be anti-science. The evidence is the evidence. It's not always easy for us :(

Answer 3

Fundamentalists are not allowed to think. Therefore, when they say that they have evidence, they are parroting the words of other fundies without actually checking to see if the words are true. Also, they would have no ability to evaluate the evidence presented to them. If they were told that a dead chicken is evidence against evolution, they would have no choice but to accept it as such and claim that they too now have strong evidence against evolution. That is the nature of fundamentalism.

Answer 4

First, let me say that I'm not a religious fundamentalist. The reason people don't beleive in evolution is not always religious. The reason people don't beleive in it, is that it's just bad science. There is plenty of proof behind natural selection, but that is very different from evolution. You can breed a species to get different attributes, but it remains the same species. You cannot breed different species together. Think about it for a second. They have found fossils of people, and fossils of apes, but where do they change over? If this is a slow process that took millions of years, then there shouldn't be a "missing link", there should be subhuman fossils all over the place. In reality there isn't. I don't beleive in evolution because I think it doesn't hold up to the scientific method, not because I believe that God made everything. People are still looking for the answers, and they should. Breeding a bird to have larger talons doesn't change that it's still bird DNA. It doesn't just magically become a dog. In your so called "vast and detailed" fossil records, where does it document one species DNA in the transition point to another species? Think about how long this is supposed to take, and then ask yourself if you are just blindly accepting theories based on bad science (just like fundamentalists accept things on faith). Read a book called Darwin on Trial to delve into this a little further.

Answer 5

It's really easy to grasp once you understand that Fundamentalism = Religion.

Religion has always been against evolution. The reason why is that the theory of evolution varies from biblical teachings. For any religious group (including Fundamentalists), agreeing with the theory of evolution is agreeing that Religion is wrong.

Answer 6

As I have stated before in answer to volumes of similar questions here. Darwin’s Theory of Evolution is very accurately backed up by fossil records WITHIN species. Where it breaks down is that there is NO fossil evidence of cross species evolution, the proverbial “missing link.”

It is because of this that the THEORY of evolution is deemed wrong when applied to the Creation of Man.

Answer 7

because they haven't studied it for themselves probably, they've picked out lines from various sites that debunk evolution and use that to form their conclusions.

Sorry if this is offensive, but I've seen many answers on here that show a clear lack of knowledge on the subject


Edit:

to sisterzeal, carbon14 is not the only element used for dating methods, other isotopes with very long half-lives that are used in radiometric dating include uranium, rubidium, potassium

also, don't just assume that because fish etc are found on top of mountains due to a global flood, do some research on plate tectonics and understand how mountains are formed

respect


also, just generally adding that we do not need fossils to complete evidence of our evolutionary history, we have plenty of evidence in the way of DNA!

Answer 8

The fossil record is vast and detailed?

Let's have a quiz. Answer this question: all the fossil evidence for human evolution between ten and five million years ago (thousands of generations of living creatures) can fit into:

a) an 8-story apartment building
b) a 2000 sq. foot house
c) a large bedroom
d) a small box

The answer is "d."

Our fossible record is vast and detailed? Not when it comes to human evolution. And not when it comes to macroevolution in general! The fossil record hardly supports our evolution from a single organism!

Here's another hole - explain how the Cambrian explosion fits into Darwin's theory of gradual evolution?

Lots of questions, lots of holes. Macroevolution does not have the scientific backup that many think. Its a faith as much as Christianity.

Answer 9

Gee, I am just as sorry, but I can't understand how some scientists and others can believe in the

THEORY

of evolution, even though it is full of holes and the record of fossilization actually supports the

BIBLE.

In fact, it takes

MORE

faith to believe in the theory of Evolution, than it does to believe what the Bible has to say.

Answer 10

The Word of God says we were created with Human bodies that are designed to live forever. Science has recently proven that if we were to learn something new every second, we would take well over 3 millions years to exhaust the memory capacity of our "post flood" brains. (Pre-flood brains were 3 times larger) On the other hand... Evolutionists say things evolve after there is a need for change.

Question... How is it possible for us to have a brain that could hold enough info to last over 3 millions years, when all we can live up to is 90 years?


Were you aware that it has been proven by the Creation Evidence Museum that T-Rex was NOT a meat eater? That's right! They proved it in TWO WAYS...

The roots of T-Rex were only 2 inches deep. Had he bit into the hide of another dinosaur he would have lost teeth
They cut a tooth in half og a unearthed T-Rex and found in deeply impureated with CHLOROPHYLL! That's right, Chlorophyll is the main substance found in PLANTS not meat!
By the way, this discovery validates the Bible once again! How so? See this passage...

Genesis 1:30, "And to every beast of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to every thing that creepeth upon the earth, wherein there is life, I have given every green herb for meat: and it was so."
Now.. before proclaiming you MUST eat meat because the proteins in meat will help you to gain weight, look around on planet earth for a moment. Look at all the HUGE animals like cows... horses.. hippos.. elephants... rhinos... etc. What do THEY eat? That's right. PLANTS!

Evolutionists have constructed the Geologic Column in order to illustrate the supposed progression of "primitive" life forms to "more complex" systems we observe today. Yet, "since only a small percentage of the earth's surface obeys even a … portion of the geologic column…the claim of their having taken place to form a continuum of rock/life/time…over the earth is therefore a fantastic and imaginative contrivance.1" "The lack of transitional series cannot be explained as being due to the scarcity of material. The deficiencies are real, they will never be filled."2 This supposed column is actually saturated with "polystrate fossils" (fossils extending from one geologic layer to another) that tie all the layers to one time-frame. "To the unprejudiced, the fossil record of plants is in favor of special creation."

Astronomical estimates of the distance to various galaxies gives conflicting data. 13The Biblical Record refers to the expansion of space by the Creator14. Astrophysicist Russell Humphries demonstrates that such space expansion would dilate time in distant space.15 This could explain a recent creation with great distances to the stars.

Answer 11

It's not evolution that's full of holes, but their misrepresentation of evolution that is. After about 3 minutes of talking to them, their lack of understanding about what evolution even IS comes through pretty violently.