Can anyone provide a serious rebuttal to evolution?

Question

Please, keep your responses specific and make sure that you use proper grammar and spelling, otherwise your answer will be ignored.

If anyone posts a good rebuttal that I can't properly refute (I'll be emailing you, so be prepared), then I'll award them best answer. I promise that I'll be sincere in my judging, as far as "properly refuting" goes. Also, please no logical fallacies, those make me slightly perturbed.

Oh yeah, about the emails thing, mine is [e-mail], please include yours.

I am referring to the theory of evolution by natural selection as it exists today and was presented by Charles Darwin. Please try to actually poke holes in the theory itself instead of saying that the bible says the opposite, it means nothing seeing as the bible isn't verified.

Here's an article on the "two sexes" thing, bambino:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB350.html

dear Monterey:

"Look at the word evolution itself. If evolution were a fact, then man would have evolved from apes, correct? But there are still apes today, so how can one explain that man evolved from them when apes still exist?"

Because we didn't evolve FROM them, we both evolved from a common ancestor.


" If evolution was a fact, why would evolution stop when man so called, 'evolved?' Would not man continue evolving?"

Man is still evolving. http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB928_2.html

"Thanks, but no thanks on your judging my answer, it's not necessary, as I am not amused at overly arrogant people. Have a nice day. :)"

Thanks for being a cowar

Suzy B:

Your argument ends with a pathetic Appeal to Personal Incredulity. I said no logical fallacies. Try again.

Answer 1

It's a nice try, but if the fundies could seriously rebutt evolution, they would have done so... including scientific research and mass media drama...

Answer 2

Amazingly, the "Rev. Einstein" posted a rather lengthy response to evolution for another question where there was very little chance of an intelligent rebuttal. Suddenly, when faced with a challenge, he reverts to his true self and hides behind the Bible. So much for critical thinking.

BTW, I'm quite certain most of his other response to evolution came directly (via cut and paste, I'd imagine) from Lee Strobel, whose arguments against evolution have been thoroughly refuted.


"Get A Grip", you start with a straw man and fallacious basis for your argument, then you go downhill form there.

"Suzy", the answer to your first question is NO, therefore everything else you said is completely irrelevant.

Answer 3

What is the basis for the human evolution thesis put forward by evolutionists? It is the existence of plenty of fossils on which evolutionists are able to build imaginary interpretations. Throughout history, more than 6,000 species of ape have lived, and most of them have become extinct. Today, only 120 species live on the earth. These 6,000 or so species of ape, most of which are extinct, constitute a rich resource for the evolutionists.
There is no evidence to show that the fossils called hominid by evolutionary paleontologists do not actually belong to different species of ape or to vanished races of humans. To put it another way, no example of a transitional form between mankind and apes has been found.

The dates that are used jump way too far in between to have any credible references.

Species today have vastly different characteristics,humanoid, that can be portrayed as a scale on an evolutionary ladder.
Depends on the story/thesis you want to make.
They did exist, but the evolution process is still behind 700 million years to this day using modern dating methods and perfect genome changes every generation.
Do the math.

Get A Grip

Answer 4

Look at the word evolution itself. If evolution were a fact, then man would have evolved from apes, correct? But there are still apes today, so how can one explain that man evolved from them when apes still exist? Archaeologists have found skulls of apes, and claimed they were early man. How did they prove those were early man? If evolution was a fact, why would evolution stop when man so called, 'evolved?' Would not man continue evolving?

An ape is an ape. A man is a man. Always has always will be until the end of time.

Thanks, but no thanks on your judging my answer, it's not necessary, as I am not amused at overly arrogant people. Have a nice day. :)

Answer 5

Yes: the dying THEORY of evolution, while supported with uncountable facts and observations, has debatable points that deal with how it works, therefore, it must be false altogether.
Also, I dont want to come from monkeys, eventhough evolution doesnt say that, therefore evoution is false.

Answer 6

Natural selection is observed. Nobody can rebut that. Genetic drift and random mutations are observed, nobody can rebut them.

Things get more interesting when we speak of the origins of life. Abiogenesis has not been observed or duplicated in the lab but that doesn't prove it didn't happen.

Answer 7

Nothing can be created from nothing--this is the evolutionary theory, right?
Then where did the stuff come from to bang together in your "big bang" theory?
You say dust or whatever? What made that dust or whatever?
Dust does not appear from nothing. Most household dust is comprised of dead skin cells.
I know you can say "then how did God appear?"
But, this is where faith comes in.
I would rather put my faith in God than in dust.

Answer 8

Don't really care about your response, but how did things evolve into two different sexes? Happy Labor Day.
Sorry, I don't share my email.

Answer 9

I warn you that no one will answer with anything better than "God did it".

Answer 10

Are you talking about evolution general, which we know that happens..or about the evolution theory which is a theory?

I believe in the Bible record.