Creationists: What is your reasoning for discounting evolution?

Question

I am interested to see your 'scientific' reasoning, and to see if there are still people out there who claim 'irreducible complexity', or quote The Second Law of Thermodynamics.

I am talking to the people who believe in the idea of 'Special Creation'.

Poohcat1: Darwin's theory of evolution has been disproven??? Please, do tell. I am sure that all the scientists in the world would love to know how this is possible.

The evidence against irreducible complexity was shown by Kenneth Miller's testimony in the Dover Penn. case about Intelligent Design. Richard Dawkins critique's Behe's theory quite well in many of his books.

About the 2nd Law. Creationists say that 'order can not come from disorder, meaning that it is impossible to 'higher organisms' to evolve. What they fail to realize is that the earth is not a close system (which is a requisite for this theory). Energy from the sun (and other energy sources on earth) are constantly inputing the energy needed for 'higher order'. Think of a baby in a mother's womb. It becomes 'more ordered' because the mother's body is giving it the nourishment it needs. This does not violate the second law, neither does evolution.

Answer 1

Thank God for evolution.

Answer 2

To many to list but here are a few scientific facts that make evolution the biggest lie believed by the largest number of people ever.
1. The earths rotation around the sun slows at arate of 1 second per 10 months. Go back just 1 million years ( Far less than evolution sugests ) and the earth rotates around the sun so fast that it would most likely spin out of orbit and if it didn't the seasons would only be a few hours long. no way to have vegitation grow in that environment. Now multiply by the billions of years evolutionists claim.
2. The moon moves away from the earth at a rate of 1/8 of an inch per year. Go back just 1 million years ( again far less than evolution claims) the moon is so close to earth that every day we have tidal waves so big that they cover all the land masses. No possable way to support any life form. Now go back the billions of years the evolutionists claim and the moon is acctually in our atmosfere.
3. Chromosones all animals have different chromsone numbers. thats why you can't breed a dog to a cat. (One of Gods great designs ) No primate has the same chromosone number as a human.
I could do this all day. But the truth is you wont believe the facts anyway. Not because you believe the science, but because you don't want to believe there is a God. because you believe He will interfere with your life. Even though there is more science to prove He exsists than not. Read Jack Hamm, He's also a scientist.

Answer 3

It's too much of a "shoot now, draw the bullseye later" proposition. But why is it always only evolution that gets talked about? In other words, chemistry, physics, engineering, meterorology, etc- these are ares of scientific knowledge that you hardly, if ever, hear any dabate over. It's beginning to seem more and more that there's something of a belief system driving evolution. Something like humanism, maybe? Moral relativism? Social and ethical ralativism? If not, is it all too convenient that dawkins is also an ethologist? The study of human belief systems? I can tell you now that alot of atheist words and phrases used in here are straight out of the "God delusion" and The HUmanist Manifesto, so please don't insult my intelligence or integrity when I say it's becoming more and more obvious that alot of R&S regulars must be young people who, not being able to think for themselves, ARE taking their cues from the aforementioned sources. The whole picture is quite gruesome in its long range implications, but that's what happens when people's minds are so open their brain falls out.
This response obviously is not a "scientific" response, which is cool. We are, after all, in the R&S section, so my response is just as relevant. I'm not a "science" person, but alot of these arrogant asses who are really need to get it straight in their "minds" that science and the scientific method DO NOT validate and decide all that's meaningful and not. That kind of ignorant presumption only highlights the stupidity and concealed agenda of those who think the world would'nt survive without them.

Answer 4

Actually, my main reason other than the words of the Bible is that I do not trust science to be totally unbiased in their theories. It has already been shown by other scientists that the theory of evolution as written by Darwin is not possible. Men of science see things and interpret things from their own standpoint. Yes, it may appear that something means this or something means that, but the judgement is always subjective based on that persons own interpretations of the data involved. It is my educated guess that a knowledgable scientist can prove anything he or she wants to prove.

Science is not perfect and it changes as the data or the interpretation of the data changes. History proves that without a doubt. So, I will continue to believe in the creative abilities of my God. For some scientific data from the creationists side, you might want to check out the creation network.org...or one of the many other creation science places. They, just like the evolutionary scientists state unequivocally that their data proves that it was not just a random accident. The two examples you mentioned are proof of God to one...and proof that their is no God to another...so who can say which one (if either) is correct. I frankly don't think we humans have the ability to discern the absolute truth at this point.

Answer 5

Both creation and evolution deal with past events that have no witnesses...So, we are dealing with postulations to prove hypothesis..So, what exactly are provable postulations regarding evolution, without using examples of 'micro-evolution' and 'punctuated equalibrium'? What, exactly, discounts 'irreducible complexity' and the 2nd law? Do 'symbiotic relationships' count as 'irreducible complexity'?
The 2nd law applies to both open and closed systems..Are you saying that the simple flow through of energy can create greater complexity in an organism or a system?

Answer 6

Considering these folks outnumber us 2 to 1 on this forum, I'd be really interested in their answers, but I think I know already.

Answer 7

(Not understanding it; that's it, really)

Is there any other scientific theory accepted by over 99% of scientists in the field that christians with no scientific background just "know" is wrong?

Answer 8

The Facts. Science proves to me that there is no proof of evolution.

Answer 9

Here are some reasons.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Ar_CraD4f4Ph_ZE7NN0c1m_sy6IX?qid=20070502115433AAdAL4f