Christians/creationists..?

Question

Why did your god leave so much unambigious and overwhelming evidence for biological evolution and a 4.6 billion year old Earth..?

Yet you claim so many contradictory things against "his" work..?

Answer 1

So that we might seek after and search for Him
The answers are there, keep looking

Answer 2

Dude, your sadly mistaken. God left evidence for creation.

If the universe began with a "big bang" all the planets would spin in the same direction.
Venus and Uranus are rotating "backwards" 6 of the Solar System's 63 moons rotate backwards. Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune have moons orbiting in both directions.

Jupiter Saturn and Neptune are still hot planets. Evidence they have not existed long enough to cool off.

The rings on Saturn are rapidly being destroyed by meteoroids and should have been pulverized in just a few thousand years.

Earth's moon has a hot interior. This is evidence of a young origin.

Last of all, the rate of Earth's spin is slowing. If billions of years old, Earth would spin much slower today. The distance between the Earth and its moon is gradually widening. Over billions of years the moon would be much farther away from the Earth.

There are so much more evidence but Im not going to waste my time because your too ignorant.

HA TAKE THAT!

Answer 3

sigh...you will never get it but I post none the less:

In The Origin of Species Darwin stated:
If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.



Since natural selection requires a function to select, an irreducibly complex biological system, if there is such a thing, would have to arise as an integrated unit for natural selection to have anything to act on. It is almost universally conceded that such a sudden event would be irreconcilable with the gradualism Darwin envisioned. At this point, however, "irreducibly complex" is just a term, whose power resides mostly in its definition. We must now ask if any real thing is in fact irreducibly complex, and, if so, then are any irreducibly complex things also biological systems?


With Molecular Machines Darwin's theory does break down.

It turns out there are biochemical systems that are irreducibly complex?

Earlier we discussed proteins. In many biological structures proteins are simply components of larger molecular machines. Like the picture tube, wires, metal bolts and screws that comprise a television set, many proteins are part of structures that only function when virtually all of the components have been assembled.

A good example of this is a cilium. Cilia are hairlike organelles on the surfaces of many animal and lower plant cells that serve to move fluid over the cell's surface or to "row" single cells through a fluid. In humans, for example, epithelial cells lining the respiratory tract each have about 200 cilia that beat in synchrony to sweep mucus towards the throat for elimination.

But since the complexity of the cilium is irreducible, then it can not have functional precursors. Since the irreducibly complex cilium can not have functional precursors it can not be produced by natural selection, which requires a continuum of function to work. Natural selection is powerless when there is no function to select. We can go further and say that, if the cilium can not be produced by natural selection, then the cilium was designed.

Answer 4

There is no such biological evidence. The evidence for creation ( The flood) is overwhelming. Dont scoff! Dont be willingly ignorant. Hear some absolute truth ...

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts, And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 2 peter 3:3-6

Willingly ignorant means stupid on purpose!!!

Answer 5

"Unambiguous and overwhelming evidence for biological evolution?"

Evolutionists claim that all life on Earth began with a single cell that mutated, etc. Answer me this: Where did the demarcation between plant life and animal life happen? You cannot have both in the same organism. Where are the "transitional lifeforms" linking one mutation to another? What are the odds of complex amino acids all being created from molecules requiring a left-hand twist to make the amino acids function? If one right-hand molecule makes the entire chain useless, what are the odds that millions of molecules can build a chain of only left-handed molecules by random chance? Most calculators don't have the capacity to figure those odds. And that is for only ONE amino acid!

As far as the 4.6 billion year old Earth, evolution postulates that the geological record formed over time, layers of sediment and igneous rock being laid down over billions of years, and timelines and ages can be established by reading the record.

Now, think about the Flood. That event would have made the entire geological record meaningless, for you had the entire planet covered with water, tectonic and volcanic activity on a scale never seen before, continents skidding to their present locations, all within the period of about 1.5 years.

Mountain climbers have found loose bones of animals on the tops of mountains which paleontologists say could only have been deposited there by water. They have also found bones of wolves, deer, rabbits and so on in high caves on mountains. The bones were mixed together, and the bones of the deer and rabbits were not gnawed. It is well known that when faced with a catastrophe, predatory animals lose their predatory instinct and will flee with animals they usually hunt for prey. Paleontogists say that the animals were fleeing rising water and drowned together in those caves.

The geological record of the Earth is far too YOUNG to be the 4.6 billion year mark that secular geologists propose. Mountains are too sharp, plate tectonics is too active, the magnetic field of the planet is too strong, etc.

Besides, all of the dating techniques (carbon 14, potassium-argon, radioactive decay, etc) have been proven inaccurate for measurements. Carbon 14 has shown living shellfish to be millions of years old, potassium-argon taken from erupting magma has shown the magma to be billions of years old, and radioactive decay rates are affected by heat.

I could fill many pages with more proofs, but I'll stop here.

More and more astrophysicists are reluctantly stating that the order they see in the universe could have only been caused by a guiding intelligence.

To me, it takes more faith to believe in evolution, than it does to believe in a divine Creator.

Answer 6

What?

You are aware that some Christians see things like Evolution, and Science as a greater insight to the truth, i.e. God.


The Chatholic Church has offically accepted evolution for many years.

As to the people who do not believe in Evolution, regardless of their faith, it is usually fear of a universe too complex for them to understand. They want Santa Claus as God, someone nice, and easy to understand.

Whenever science discovers something that makes them uncomfortable, they need to claim it's God you're upsetting, because they are afraid, and know that normal people won't be interested in their fear, but will rally to claims of a religious nature.

Answer 7

It does not matter what the claim of man is, in creation, in science, in evolutuion, it is the claim of God that matters.
He gives all the millions, thousands and hundreds needed in time, all that the bible does not tell, the earth does tell.
Where is the man that can get the begats [ a son is born when the father is a certain age ], correct. If all men get a different account of this, how can they get creation, science or evolution correct.
The sun is 4.5 bil with 4.5 to go, and the earth is 4.6 or 15 billion or 150 billion?

Answer 8

Science does not claim a 4.6 billion year history of the world. Such a claim is beyond its scope. It only claims that, if we assume that the present laws of nature were always in force, then the world is that old.

Evolution is not a science. Evolution defies mathematical probability. Evolution defies laws of physics (second law of thermodynamics.)

Evolution claims, random change & natural selection make simple things spontaneously transform into more complex things without recourse to intelligent design. Chance and random changes simply do not produce higher levels of organization & complexity.

Answer 9

Where are your facts?
The earth is only 6 thousand years old. My God gave proof in the Bible.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
This leaves no room for evolution!!

Answer 10

because God created evolution, I'm a Christian