I'd like to make a comment and ask a question.?

Question

I've been ridiculed here for making statements about evolution by atheists who say I don't know what I'm talking about. They say science has proved evolution. Whenever I mention a scientist, the atheists here belittle him, and say he's not a major scientist. Evolution is founded by well educated scientists.

I would like to point out one thing. Can we take the king of evolution, Charles Darwin. This is the man that started the evolutionary fairy tale. Do people here realize that Charles Darwin, "The King of Evolution", wasn't even a scientist? His education in college was in Theology.

So who's more influential in science? A Ph. d. in a scientific field, or someone who has no scientific degree?

Charles Darwin, the leader of the evolutionary movement, had 0 degrees in science. If he was a Creationist, we Christians would never hear the end of that.

Atheist............I didn't realize, it's only the scientists that Christians mention that are uninformed and lie. Thankyou for clearing that up.

snout..........ok, Darwin went to a "university", but he didn't go for science. But all the atheists hold him up as the Great Evolutionary Scientist.

Anniked.............You're not 100% right with your statement. Darwin said that "all" living things are related. That means, according to Darwin, that you and I are related to bananas.

Libra for balance.........There's a big difference between genetic mutations and evolution. With genetic mutations, there's a change in the genetic information, information that has to be there. Genetic mutation leads to a loss in the information pool.

With evolution, new information is somehow created. No one knows how this new information is created, or where it comes from. Their best theories, wait a few million years, and a lizard will get the information to grow feathers. They don't know how, but that's called science.

Notfooled...........You're right, the Bible has withstood the test of time. The problem is, the Atheists don't want to believe in a Creator.

Answer 1

My pet peeve is who considers a theory to be a fact
and since when has a theory had the same definition as a fact

Edit:
Yep Mr. Darwin wanted very much to become a Doctor, but could not make the grades, says alot, but hey, give the man some due, he did after all have his name carry throughout history thus far...;)

Answer 2

That's an interesting point, thank you very much for sharing that!

But please also consider why someone who had a degree in theology would eventually become convinced that another explanation for life as we know it worked better than the bible.

Yes, I can see how this looks like a question of who's authority to trust - you have a divinely inspired work that you believe in your heart is true, and some sincere and intelligent people who back it up - I don't blame you for being critical. However, it isn't necessarily the source of the argument that makes it persuasive - it's the SUPPORT. After all, science is built around peer review and having your results replicated by other scientists. If the people who followed up on Darwin's work are Ph.D's and Nobel Prize winners, then that means something - also, in Darwin's time there were a lot of scientists that would have loved to prove him wrong - there still are - the fact is his point of view won out in a scientific community that can be very critical (Einstein wasn't without his detractors until events actually confirmed his theories) makes it a pretty robust theory. Also keep in mind that our notion of evolution has, well, evolved since Darwin's time (based on fossil and archaeological findings).

I'm sorry if you've been ridiculed - a lot of people who question deism and theology have been the victims of tremendous hostility and misunderstanding over the years, and as a result many of them are rather prickly because of it. I'm hoping you recognize this as an attempt to help you understand our point of view, not an attack or an attempt to change your feelings.

Honestly, having not been around at the beginning of time, any answer is going to be a guess - whether its a creation story from the bible, the hindu vedas, greek mythology, or anything else. However, while there is a lot of evidence that contradicts these traditional views of creation, there isn't anything that contradicts the evolutionary viewpoint. As it stands, it's the best scientific theory we've got.

If our radioactive dating techniques are wrong, then our nuclear reactors wouldn't work. If our analysis of genetics were wrong, none of the dog breeds we have now would exist . If our archeology were wrong, why would everything else match up with historical data from various sources? If our CSI teams can analyze bones and come to amazingly accurate conclusions, doesn't it stand to reason that our ability to analyze fossils is also accurate? Theres just too many things connected to this theory that WORK - and work in multiple labs in multiple ways with continually reconfirmed and matching bits of data. As a result of this, many of us have more faith in science because we see it working all around us. Once you bring up faith in a supernatural force, we have to become critical because there are so many different notions of the supernatural and so many of them have been used to inculcate superstitions and restrictions on human behavior that aren't healthy (believe me, you wouldn't want to be a Sumerian or an Ancient Egyptian). If I remember correctly even the apostle Paul preaches against superstition - but how are we supposed to know what is superstition and what isn't without testing it? Shouldn't that apply to the bible too?

If you have an experience of God, that's great, I can never completely prove you wrong. However, I can say that I was baptized, I've prayed the salvation prayer, I've sought God in every way I know how and over years and years never had the same experience. I still like to say, hey, if you're there, just let me know, I'm listening - but in the meantime I have to go with the evidence. I can't just talk to empty air or myself as if I'm talking to a deity and think that because I have feelings and intuitions I'm being guided by something else - anyone and everyone of any belief system can do that. I personally need my faith to be confirmed - maybe I'm a doubting Thomas, but he still got to feel the wounds of Christ. With religion and spirituality, I search and find nothing that actually works.

Science works, and it works well - so I put my trust in that.

But I will always keep an open mind.

Answer 3

Darwin's studies were scientific and have been backed up by research and testing by actual biologists. Do you think his work was left in a vacuum?

Lay people often misinterpret the language used by scientists. And for that reason, they sometimes draw the wrong conclusions as to what the scientific terms mean.

Three such terms that are often used interchangeably are "scientific law," "hypothesis," and "theory."

In layman�s terms, if something is said to be �just a theory,� it usually means that it is a mere guess, or is unproved. It might even lack credibility. But in scientific terms, a theory implies that something has been proven and is generally accepted as being true.

Here is what each of these terms means to a scientist:

Scientific Law: This is a statement of fact meant to explain, in concise terms, an action or set of actions. It is generally accepted to be true and univseral, and can sometimes be expressed in terms of a single mathematical equation. Scientific laws are similar to mathematical postulates. They don�t really need any complex external proofs; they are accepted at face value based upon the fact that they have always been observed to be true.

Specifically, scientific laws must be simple, true, universal, and absolute. They represent the cornerstone of scientific discovery, because if a law ever did not apply, then all science based upon that law would collapse.

Some scientific laws, or laws of nature, include the law of gravity, Newton's laws of motion, the laws of thermodynamics, Boyle's law of gases, the law of conservation of mass and energy, and Hook�s law of elasticity.

Hypothesis: This is an educated guess based upon observation. It is a rational explanation of a single event or phenomenon based upon what is observed, but which has not been proved. Most hypotheses can be supported or refuted by experimentation or continued observation.

Theory: A theory is more like a scientific law than a hypothesis. A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are accepted to be true by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

atheist

Answer 4

Charles Darwin was a naturalist and theologian. He wanted to explain god's creation. Through his observations of the world as it is, he developed the Theory of Evolution. That Theory has been tested for the past 130 years or so. A lot of what Darwin purposed has been tossed out, but the basic theory has stood the test of time.

The problem with most of the *scientist* Christians cite today is that they are not biologist. They have spent little time actually examining the evidence. And, frankly, they rely on outdated materials and lie.

If you were to bother to read a real biology text, you would understand more. Don't rely on the *science* books you find in Christian books stores. Go to the library and read as many biology books as you can. You might learn something.

Answer 5

You are denouncing a theory supported by FACTS (evolution) and believing in something that is supported by nothing but a BOOK (pick a religion). That is why people are dismissing your opinions.

You didn't list the name of this 'scientist' you admire so I can't research who this person is and am unable to directly refute him/her. I will ask you to look at how many scientist, most especially biologist, USE the theory of evolution in their work successfully as opposed to those who denounce it and are successful in their scientific careers.

I would also ask you to thoroughly check WHAT this person holds a degree in and what school he/she received his/her degree from. If it is a Christian school I hope you see how his/her opinion would automatically become suspect.

The evidence supports evolution.......there is NOT any evidence for a Theist explanation. Once a god enters the equation you loose the ability to prove your opinions because you CANNOT prove or disprove the existence of any god.

Answer 6

I'm not christian nor atheist, but evolution is a theory with archeological facts behind it, as is gravity and a host of other things that are a theory. But people tend to get bogged down in the evolution "quagmire" What does evolution prove? That we came from apes? So what. A more important and compelling question is what was before space and time? Did they both originate from the "singularity"? Is there something outside of time?...... Why is there something rather than nothing?"

Answer 7

It's your generalizations that have earned you any ridicule on these forums.

You seem to be under the impression that Darwin is a contemporary of our times. He isn't. He lived in the 19th century and perceived the world through the vices and trends of that era. Science, obviously, was in it's infancy as we know it.

Theology is the SCIENCE of religion. Isn't it interesting that a theologian would help egocentric mankind see where he lies in the natural scheme of things?

Nice try. But you can never compare apples and oranges and then wonder why there is no applesauce.

Answer 8

Charles Darwin studied medicine, and excelled at chemistry, but did not graduate because the blood was more than he could bear. In addition to his theological studies, he studied natural sciences extensively. He was sufficiently well trained in science to be recommended for the voyage on the Beagle by a leading scientist.

This is in comparison to Creationists who buy diplomas from unaccredited "universities".

As to your assertion that no one knows how information is added to the genome, it has been observed.

Answer 9

Charles Darwin was a naturalist. Scientific degrees didn't exist at the time he was in university and therefore no student could earn one. His theory is supported by more than a century of solid scientific study, evidence and proof and is accepted as fact.

Please show us the academic credentials of the men who made up the theory of creationsims, their proof and evidence.

Answer 10

The truth really is that evolution is considered a theory. But it would probably be considered fact if christians weren't holding it back. It has been proved on a small scale. So why wouldn't that apply to a greater scale?