how can people belive in the THEORY of evolution when everything points to a creator?

Question

it is unbelievable how the US is using american tax dollars to pay teachers to teach evolution is truth when everything points to a creator. also how can people take the carbon 14 dating system for truth. scientists watched a seal die once. let it sit for 30 days and then preformed a carbon 14 test and it said it was thousands of years old. people use ur brains.

Answer 1

First of all, the definition of the word "theory" in science, as it is with many words, is a lot different than its general definition. In science, a theory is not just a random idea; it is an explanation that is based on meticulous observation and experimentation. So the THEORY of evolution, as you put it, has been proven extremely plausible. Secondly, radiocarbon dating is used to date things like rocks and artifacts that are thousands of years old, not recently deceased animals. Thirdly, why would you bring up the fact that scientists have watched seals die in the first place? If you want to play that card, religious leaders, who preach the idea of a creator, have molested children. So why should anyone believe them? There are corrupt people in both science and religion. And one final thing, any one who has claimed that a mammal lived to be thousands of years old, is certainly not a creditable scientist, not matter what method they used to determine it. Don't base any more of your beliefs on creation on their research...

Answer 2

What is sad about this question and questions like this is that you believe all of this as true. Let me give you something to think about.

Who is more likely to know how the world works, a pastor who has read a very old book and talks about it and uses it as the way to understand how the world works, or tens of thousands of scientists who observe the world daily. Given all the advances in technology that you use everyday, why would you believe the pastor when you can see and touch the things of science.

Scientists have watched species come into existence as they form, about a hundred times. Carbon dating is a specific tool, your story sounds very spurious but even if it is true and either the technician was incompetent or the data collection was improper, that does not mean carbon dating does not work anymore than a person who has an EKG and is told they are well and immediately has a heart attack means EKG results are invalid.

Also, your carbon dating story has the sound of an urban myth, I would back track that if I were you. I think you are being made a fool of.

Further, as a note, none of the data point to a creator. Most biologists in the United States start out as Christians. It is the data and not indoctrination that push people away from fundamentalist Christianity.

Galileo was prosecuted for disproving about 50 verses in the bible as false, why would you use the bible for biology when it does not work for physics, chemistry or geography?

Answer 3

I'm afraid your molecular biology class wasn't up to much! Evolution does not state that life evolved from chimpanzees; it implies (and this has been verified beyond doubt by genetic analysis) that Humans (Homo Sapiens) and Chimpanzees (Pan Troglodytes) share a common ancestry. Evolution is not a theory - although a lot of fundie Xtians love to call it such - it is an observed fact. There are various theories of evolution, explaining the mechanism by which the observed fact operates, just as there are theories to explain how gravity works (which doesn't make gravity itself a theory, it is an observed fact, like evolution) The widely accepted theory of evolution is natural selection. The fuss arises in that this, together with modern cosmology, gives a naturalistic explanation of life that does not require a creator myth, and credophiles and theists, especially of Xtian persuasion, are really scared of facing up to that, so they prefer to deny reality. BTW, the Catholic church accepted Big Bang some time ago.

Answer 4

There is plenty of private money being spent to teach biology and evolutionl. The reason is that is is good sound solid science. Just what is truth in religion?

If you want to teach about a Creator then we will have to teach about 100 different classes. One for each God. Now which one are you gonna prefer to be taught, Allah is the Supreme Creator or God?

The are many methods of back dating. Carbon 14 has been standarize, passed all the test. You'll just have to except the truth that science is based of accurately measuring phenomia. Are you aware that your comments are disrepestful to a large number of intelligent people, some of which are good chruch going folks?

We, the people of science, do use our brains. That is why you are able to sit on your fanny and complain on the Internet. The same intelligent people you are bashing made all this possible.

You used all caps for theory. You are probably not aware of the scientific definetion of theory. It is very different than the lay term.
Science defintion: A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
Lay defintion: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/theory

A fellow name Laurence Moran has taken upon himself the job af explaining all this in terms anyone could understand. You might enlighten yourself. Would help if you could clear the bias out of your mind and your loving Christan soul.

Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html

Answer 5

obviously not everything points to a creator, and not everyone can blindly accept old fairy tales as truth.

I find it funny that you say "people, use your brains" after throwing out a statement based completely on beliefs taught to you. It's a good thing human brains have evolved to think outside the box, or else we'd be stuck in the dark ages, where 'god' said it was a sin to bathe.

Read Carl Sagans "The demon-haunted World - Science as a Candle in the Dark."

[edit]I am a geologist, and the concepts of carbon dating are well understood, but I know the tests aren't completely refined - there's a margin of error, so the best you get is a ballpark estimate. I've never heard about this seal experiment you speak of... but you obviously don't understand the premise of carbon dating since carbon dating works on a scale of 5700 years.

Answer 6

Hello narrow minded person that believes everything that is in the bible/your precher tells you to believe. MyNameAShandi. What points to a creator??? The arrow on my mouse??? Now to find out what points to evolution.
D-N-A. These three capitalized letters prove evolution more than anything. We all share the same DNA. ATCG. We have tracked the evolution of olfactory genes (you smelling ones). We have seen how the eye has come about. That points to evolution. Weve even documented how man has come about WITH fossils. Experiments have pointed to evolution. We know how species come about (sympatric and allopatric). We are more closely related to a sea star than a squid and we have proven this. This isnt a waste of tax payer money, we are teaching our students about the greatest theory in the field of biology, the most unifying theory there is (hurry up physics i want one from you). A waste of tax payer money would be instilling a debate like this into science class. What creators would the state deem allowable. What about hindu creator? we need to talk about that, it has just has much wieght and as facts supporting it. And this is all coming from a person who loves the words "under God" and loves the Ten Commandments on state buildings.

Answer 7

I guess you're a perfect example showing (or PROVING) that the US is NOT spending enough money on proper science education. If it did, you wouldn't contest evolution, or at least would provide some evidence against it (I haven't even seen a SINGLE piece of convincing evidence against evolution). As for C-14 labeling - do you even know what the basis behind is to understand it? Do you even know that organic materials oxidize and the carbon may be lost? Before you start throwing such ideas, make sure that you understand chemistry and biology.

Answer 8

No direct evidence of that creator. Creationism isn't good science, it's speculation or faith. The only source for Biblical Creationism is in the writings of Moses, and he exaggerated the story of the Great Flood, so he's not a good reliable source.

Recommendation to Creationists: stop trying to refute Evolution. Find irrefutable and unmistakable evidence of G-d instead.

Edit:
Looks like no one has explained that carbon dating cannot be used for objects that are younger than, approximately, 1700. The reason for this is that the burning of fossil fuels has put a lot of "old" carbon into the air. You can google around to read about how carbon dating works -- that it's based on atmospheric conversion of nitrogen to c-14, and subsequent decay of that.

Answer 9

Even Darwin said that Evolution would be proven true in the future by the billions of yet undiscovered intermediate species (missing links) that would have to exist for evolution to work.
Update 2007: Theres a guy in China with a dremmel tool etching feathers on a lizard fossil and claiming to find the missing link from dinos to birds.
Evolution "Scientists" have committed so many frauds trying to prove evolution. (Piltdown Man, Nebraska Man ect.)They have no credibility with me and I am not all that religious.
For evolution to be true the missing links would have to be the overwhelming majority of the fossil record but instead they are either extremely rare or non existent.

Answer 10

Here's a question for you: How can people believe that there was a creator? It is unbelievable churches get tax breaks to teach this sort of stuff in the US. How could people take the word of an unknown writer (who wasn't even there himself) about how and in what order everything in the universe was created?

Your question has 2 serious flawed assumption. If you assume everything points to a creator, then you obviously haven't seen all the evidence. I am one of those public school teachers that teaches biology, and I haven't seen *all* of the evidence--a good portion of it, but not all of it. I have no problem teaching it because all of the evidence I have seen supports the theory of evolution. I have yet to see any EVIDENCE that supports the theory of creation.

The second flawed assumption is that you're equating the theory of evolution with some religious dogma. The theory of evolution does not require "belief"--it has been supported by evidence countless numbers of time. Evolution has happened, continues to happen, and is going to continue to happen until the end of everything. The process occurred before there were humans here to worry about whether it occurred or not, and will continue to occur after all humans are gone. Belief has no part in it.