Is it time to clear up what creationists say about scientific disagreement again..?

Question

Evolutionary biologists passionately debate diverse topics: how speciation happens, the rates of evolutionary change, the ancestral relationships of birds and dinosaurs, whether Neandertals were a species apart from modern humans, and much more. These disputes are like those found in all other branches of science. Acceptance of evolution as a factual occurrence and a guiding principle is nonetheless universal in biology.
Unfortunately, dishonest creationists have shown a willingness to take scientists' comments out of context to exaggerate and distort the disagreements. Anyone acquainted with the works of paleontologist Stephen Jay Gould of Harvard University knows that in addition to co-authoring the punctuated-equilibrium model, Gould was one of the most eloquent defenders and articulators of evolution.

(Punctuated equilibrium explains patterns in the fossil record by suggesting that most evolutionary changes occur within geologically brief intervals--which may nonetheless amount to hundreds of generations.) Yet creationists delight in dissecting out phrases from Gould's voluminous prose to make him sound as though he had doubted evolution, and they present punctuated equilibrium as though it allows new species to materialize overnight or birds to be born from reptile eggs.
When confronted with a quotation from a scientific authority that seems to question evolution, insist on seeing the statement in context. Almost invariably, the attack on evolution will prove illusory.

Is it all a bit clearer now..?

Answer 1

What the question? You rambling statement has a number of erroneous comments, and merely makes accusations against people without proof.

Answer 2

Hi LetsTorque. Actually the Bible tells us the earth is a little more than 13,000 years old. Defiantly not billions of years old.

We need to remember that that written history only goes back to about 5,200 years ago. There is no proof of anything older than that.

Some people try to rely on carbon 14 dating, the problem is, if you are using carbon 14 dating, you have to assume that the carbon reservoir remained constant all the way back through history. This cannot be proven. Their conclusion will be a guess at best.

Carbon 14 dating is very accurate up to about 13,000 years. After that it varies, and it varies wildly.

I was at a museum a while back and there was a display of dinosaur bones. The sign said the bones were between 60,000 and 100,000 years old. That's a margin of 40,000 years for mistake. That is not science my friend, that's guess work.

For those who say that days or nights were thousands of hours long, that would be impossible. In Genesis 1:11-13 God tells us He created plants and fruits on the third day:

"Then God said, “Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb that yields seed, and the fruit tree that yields fruit according to its kind, whose seed is in itself, on the earth”; and it was so...13 So the evening and the morning were the third day."

On the forth day He created day and night. In Genesis 1:14-19 God tells us:

"Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and year...16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth,18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day."

Now, if the days were thousands of hours long all of the vegetation on the earth would have burned up because of all the sunlight. If the nights were thousands of hours long all of the vegetation on the earth would have died because vegetation needs light to grow, but too much sun or too much darkness will kill the vegetation. God created 4 seasons and He created 24 hour days, just like it is now.

Answer 3

So what is your opinion about Darwin's Theory of Evolution regarding the premise that single cell (which is actually very complex) exists by chance?

LetsTorque,

What is your opinion regarding the opinion of Francis Crick? Francis Crick is a Nobel-prize laureate who is a believer in the theory of evolution that had admitted that DNA molecule is such a complex molecule that could not have spontaneously exist by chance, as the result of an evolutionary process.

Have you read the writing of Hower Jacobson, a Professor Emeritus of Chemistry that had admitted how impossible it is for life to come about by chance?

Have you read the critics by Philip Johnson, a professor at the University of Carlifornia at Berkeley?

Hope to hear from you soon.

I like the way you present your idea. It sounds academic.

Answer 4

Unfortunately, they don't understand that it's not pick and choose then disreguard the rest in science, like they do with quoting their book.
The origins of our Universe and mankind are much like the foundation of our fields of science. They want to embrace the comforts of science and technology and deny (or change) the foundation that it is built on.

It is ironic how these few, who are on the side of "the moral majority" will say anything for the $$$$.

Answer 5

Taking issues out of context is a mythical means between atheists. whilst coupled to the fact that the procedures of evidence utilized in criminal/historic Apologetics is obviously no longer the comparable because of the fact the medical approach, whether the technological awareness "geeks" won't be able to look to wrap their minds around that theory, that is not any ask your self that radical technological awareness experts could seek for to choose for Christianity between each and every of the international's theory structures to attack especially. however, it fairly is to be expected from people who won't be able to look to stop or avert blending apples and oranges.

Answer 6

Creationists are 'tards who don't want to study a subject that's harder than wood work and metal work.
It's so much easier to believe literally in The Goat Herders' Guide to the Galaxy and the spin their thinkers (they can't think for themselves - it's far too hard and it takes practice) give them in return for allowing the parasites to suck them dry.

Maybe I'm a little harsh.
'tards don't like to think. They'd rather believe that GODDIDIT.
It's a universal answer that can be given at any time to answer any question.
'tards are lazy *ckers.

Answer 7

please quote you expertize in the field
you talk of real knowledge or book theories?
evolution is a theory dude
replicate [ie prove it live time or go away]
you can replicate [you are blinded by science ]
get a phd [do the science
then present your own science

please tell [explain why the ancestoral types mainly survived [yet the improved intermediates died out

Answer 8

I have to consult Dr. Francis Collins on that.

Answer 9

My goodness man! If you want Christians to read that you are going to have to simplify the language a bit.

Answer 10

I think many of those words you used have too many syllables for the proles here....

I enjoyed it, though.