Creationists: Did you know that EVOLUTION does not need to be PROVED?

Question

but studied, researched and discussed, since it's a factual process?

What really requires extraordinary evidence is your extraordinary claim of "intelligent design", and, mark me, it must be solid, plausible and test-proof evidence, not a lame banana theory.

Unreadably-long strands of copy/paste scripture don't count as evidence. Words are dirt-cheap. (especially those coming from a lame book like the Bible)

So, we're still waiting for it. TIC TOC TIC TOC.

WARNING: BY saying "look at the ocean, the mountains, a flower or a baby smile", you're just throwing another spadeful of dirt behind your backs, in digging the grave for your baseless belief. Those things can be easily explained by science alone.

Answer 1

I like how people cite all these "facts" about scientists not "believing" evolution and that they dont even think it's true. Where did that info come from! If you dont have a reference then what you are doing is using a straw man arguement - which just shows the lack of intellectual honesty shown by many evolution deniers. It's funny because it doesnt matter what people think about evolution, the only reason it stands as a rock solid thoery (much like gravity is a rock solid theory) is that evolution is backed up by copious evidence and observations - and to say that it isnt is just straight up dishonest and shows a complete ignorance on the subject. My advice to christians and creationists, learn good science before you jump into debates like this because it only hurts your cause and credibility when you engage in fallacious arguements.

Answer 2

Factual?? Any scientific fact must be falsifiable, and evolution is not, disqualifying it from the category of "fact".

Evolution has to contend with a poor fossil record of transistory fossils, an unexplainable Cambrian explosion, the statistic improbability on the molecular level, how it resists the law of increasing entropy, irreducibly complex cells, and so forth.

Evolution is far from vindicated. Did you know that most of the famous icons of evolution taught in old textbooks have been discovered to be embellishments and in some cases out wright fraud? What evolutionary theory does is to try and interpret the evidence we have. Whether is has succeeded in this or not, has little to do with the fact that to be qualified as "scientific fact", a phenomenon must be repeatable and falsifiable. Evolution is neither which is why it is relegated to theory.

Answer 3

Where you there when something popped into existence from nothing and exploded? No, well do you see something pop into existence from nothing today? Were you there when non-living matter gave rise to life? No, well do you see non-living matter giving rise to life today? Where you there when single-celled organisms gave rise to many-celled organisms, when invertebrates gave rise to vertebrates, when ape-like creatures gave rise to man? No, well do you see it happening today? You have to believe that matter came into existence by itself and then arranged itself into information systems by blind chance. That is what goes against real science.

As T. Wallace has said, "A major reason why evolutionist arguments can sound so persuasive is because they often combine assertive dogma with intimidating, dismissive ridicule towards anyone who dares to disagree with them. Evolutionists wrongly believe that their views are validated by persuasive presentations invoking scientific terminology and allusions to a presumed monopoly of scientific knowledge and understanding on their part. But they haven’t come close to demonstrating evolutionism to be more than an ever-changing theory with a highly questionable and unscientific basis. (The situation isn’t helped by poor science education generally. Even advanced college biology students often understand little more than the dogma of evolutionary theory, and few have the time [or the guts] to question its scientific validity.)

Swedish biologist Soren Lovtrup made an interesting statement: “I suppose that nobody will deny that it is a great misfortune if an entire branch of science becomes addicted to a false theory. But this is what has happened in biology...I believe that one day the Darwinian myth will be ranked the greatest deceit in the history of science. When this happens, many people will pose the question: How did this ever happen?”

As Dr. Jonathan Sarfati says, we need to quit calling evolution a theory; that is giving it too much credit. “Goo to you” evolution is an unsubstantiated hypothesis or conjecture, not a theory.

Now, what about ID? 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.”

The brain 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?

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 4

you have made your mind up there is no creation. Ok, now what? Do you honestly believe you can come on here with all that typing and think you are going to make us, faithful believers of God/Creation, change our minds in what we believe?
So, tic tock away with your evolution, it is not going to doubt our God.
One question for you though, If you are so secure in your non belief of creation, why does it bother you that we believe in creation? I'm speaking for all believers on here, we are rock solid with our Lord....

Answer 5

You can repeat this as many times as you like, it still doesn't turn the Fairy Tale of Evolution into a "factual process". No large amounts of new genetic information, no evolution on the scale that the "Theory" of Evolution proposes. You can dress up Darwin's finches, wingless beetles, drug-resistant TB, or any of the other popular "evidences" for Evolution as pretty as you want and you still will only find loss or shuffling of information.

Answer 6

all intelligent design is is an opposition to evolutionary theory. if it weren't for evolution, they'd have nothing to talk about. actually, most of it isn't even about evolution., it's more about abiogenesis.

they'll admit that wolves and coyotes are related, but they have no way to demonstrate it. they'll admit that polar bears are white due to adaptation, but don't know how to explain it. if asked how old a fossil is, the only answer they can provide is "younger than 6,000 years". they have no answers on their own., only refutations.

Answer 7

I believe that's called shifting the burden of proof. I have faith that what I believe is true--I don't require that everything be cut-and-dried. Can you give me the same kind of proof against intelligent design that you demand of us for it?

Answer 8

All your going to get is false arguments and people who don't understand what a scientific theory is. There is an extreme amount of ignorance when it comes to evolution, and you will attract it all.

Answer 9

It's a fact as long as you assume that what you see is reality. If it's not then all bets are off.

Answer 10

What we observe as evolution kicked in after the fall and then after the flood.

If you think about it, evolution requires death. The survival of the fittest. As animals mutate, their environments change, they are able to adapt and the successful ones survive.

There was no death in the world prior to man's sin. The idea of evolution and Creationism, or even God using evolution, is nonsense.

Evolutionists are still studying evolution and they cannot prove it because they are observing only an incomplete picture.