To people who don't believe in evolution, explain something to me?

Question

Why do some of you people (creationists) talk down to evolution as though it were impossible, saying its "just a theory"? Have you really looked into evolution and compared it with creationism?

Lets get this cleared up:

Evolution - Theory = 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

Creationism - Hypothesis = Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption

I'm not trying to talk down to some of you, I just want to know why you believe what you believe. I would like to learn someone else's viewpoint. Does creating the universe in 6 days and making man from dirt, etc. really compare to hundreds of millions of years of speciation/mutations via evolution?

pickles: I just did compare them.

Answer 1

Ok, I will present an arguement for Creationism, against Evolution.

You may, of course, pass it off as ridiculous, but the main reason why creationism has not been studied widely, is because many have a favorable bias for Evolution, regardless of the fact's credibility.



Lets get some other things straightened out first:



Evolution - Theory = 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

Creationism - Hypothesis = Something taken to be true for the purpose of argument or investigation; an assumption

"""I'm not trying to talk down to some of you, I just want to know why you believe what you believe. I would like to learn someone else's viewpoint. Does creating the universe in 6 days and making man from dirt, etc. really compare to hundreds of millions of years of speciation/mutations via evolution? """


Evolution is widely accepted for several reasons. It assumes that God had no hand in the creation and adaption of Humans and Animals, and other life. Many people like this idea, so for those who deny the existance of God, they choose to believe in Evolution without examining the flaws and other issues regarding the Theory.

Every Evolution textbook usually regards the Theory as Fact, or Law... when the Theory cannot be prooven. Evolution(Macro) cannot be observed, tested or prooven... therefore... it can never be a law.

Gravity, can be observed and tested... it is a prooven fact, a law of science.


Probably the most used excuse which Evolutionist use is the Carbon Dating factor. Most say that this prooves Evolution to be true.
However, Carbon Dating is not effective after a certain time period. However, Evolutionist use this to test the age of almost everything - the old ages fall in line with Evolution's most important factor - large amounts of time.

http://www.scienceagainstevolution.org/v10i10f.htm

Evolution doesn't claim that humans evolved from apes; it says we came from sub-humanoids.

However there is one problem, it's another assumption. Creatures such as Neanderthal are either human or ape skelital remains, or combos.

This is not a claim. Neanderthal man has been argued to be the same as modern man. Neanderthal has some bone features which are similar to that of Native Americans.

http://www.biblestudy.org/basicart/neander.html

http://nwcreation.net/evolutionfraud.html

As for the other sub-humaniods...

The Piltdown man - fraud

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown.html

Java man - fully human

http://www.csm.org.uk/expo3.php?PHPSESSID=e0b9f4806a4c731e5d0ba84ae1436443

And all others can be clasified as frauds, humans, or apes here:

http://www.allaboutcreation.org/human-evolution.htm


Now that we have presented the clear facts about human "evolution," it is clear that there has not been any real sub human fossils discovered.

So, if you believe that man evolved... you assume this... you take this by faith alone, and not by factual evidence.

More cases against the Theory:

http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/

http://www.creationevidence.org/scientific_evid/problems_macro/prob_macro.html

http://people.cs.uu.nl/hansb/religion/evolution.html

Not enough? Here are some anti-evolutionist who aren't Creationist....

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/locke.html

Of course, I cannot proove anything to anyone, but the evidence and articles are out there.

In my opinion, Evolution is a Hypothesis only...

There is more faith required in believing in Evolution and in the Big Bang Theory, than in believing in God.



Now, can I show you evidence of the Earth's creation in only 6 days? no...

but, thats a small act of faith, compared to the vast sea of inconsistancies and circular reasoning involved with evolution.


However, most people will just call me a "Neanderthal" for not believing in the unquestionable "Fact" of Evolution.


True Scientist are speculative, they don't use preconceptions... to explain data

Assuming Evolution did something, and then trying to hypothesize how it did it.... this is not scientific at all.


http://www.konig.org/wc216.htm

Evolution produced good mutations which made organisms more inteligent and adaptave?

http://www.gennet.org/facts/metro09.html


Therefore, I have concluded that MacroEvolution is part Hypothesis, part religion, and part faith.



I'm currently taking a Evolutionary Biology class. Im not ignorant. Im not blind.

However, I don't swallo down... jello hard facts of Evolution...


Can you blame me?


And to think... I never even said, "Because the Bible says so."

I didn't have to.


What you believe is your choice.

Here's to faith


-Mr. Aggapae

Answer 2

seahock: "Creationists" are not the only ones in opposition to the evolution theory. There are many scientists from some of the world's most prestigious universities and colleges, who do discount the theory with good reason. Check-out the site: CSC (Center for Science and Culture) - for a real eye-opener ! www.dissentfromdarwin.org - here, you will find the evidence and facts from a scientific perspective. On the contrary, there IS evidence of God's existence out there. I have personally, found it in physics (U 232 re: "half-life" -after a few thousand years, Uranium [U 232] decays into Pb [Lead]. If the earth's surface is millions of years old, why hasn't ALL the U 232 broken down -decayed into Pb, by now? Also; there is the Cambrian layer of the phyla [division] of the fossil record. Yes; the evidence IS out there - provided you both, know how and where to look for it !!! You make a indirect reference to the Creation of the earth. You are referring to Genesis in the early chapters of the Bible - am I not correct ? Anyways; these chapters are NOT dealing with creation, as most people (Christians and non- believers alike), assume !!! What the purpose for Genesis is/was penned for by Moses, written to present the Creation account as a cosmogony - which purpose was to counter the well-known cosmogonies of the pagans. A "cosmogony" is a story of the genesis or development of the universe and the creation of the world (in a "nut shell"). There is no clash between science and the Bible when understood from this perspective. Again; as usual, it is the misunderstanding of the Bible which lends itself to discreprancies in the understanding of its readers !!!

Answer 3

I'm not a "science" person myself, but I'm also not someone who lacks common-sense or good intuition. I've been reading websites on both positions concerning evolution (the one I just read several hours ago was a little over my head, but I got the overall gist of it, and it only helps to confirm my original thoughts on the matter-- evolution is driven by adherents of philosophical materialism and thus, not to be taken serious at all), and one fact that does not escape me concerning it is that very deceptive people have a powerfully vested interest in propogating this agenda.
The war of attrition against traditional and time-proven values is under attack and has been for a very long time. That evolution and social and ethical relativism have "grown-up" side-by-side is a fact and observation not lost on this silent observer. There's an undeniable and insidious purpose behind all of this debate, and "freethinking" and scientific advancement are only capable puppets, and nothing else. But that is a subject too involved and complex for this forum, because it involves a willingness to be objective, unbiased, and honest desire for open communication. All three are, judging by the mind-set of most participants in this place, anathema.

Answer 4

in case you do no longer understand what the "protazoa thingy" is then how do you already know that evolution could no longer account for it? Researchers are very on the component of making the 1st synthetic existence interior the lab. that's a serious first step in information the way it could have got here approximately clearly, how the 1st photocells on the primordial earth got here to be. Evolution explains what got here about after that first cellular got here into being. Philosophically we are able to disagree over what guided a technique, i.e evolution, yet that would not substitute the reality that the approach got here approximately.

Answer 5

I do not think evolution is a theory, there is more than enough facts to show it is true. I do not believe creationism is a theory. the two are both right. A artist dose not start with a finished picture, it grows and evolves as did the earth. Think of god as the top artist and our world as a work of art.

Answer 6

Creationists - Get their information from the Bible - God's Word.

Evolutionists - Theories and Hypotheses.

I don't want to "put anyone down". I was an A student in biology, chemist, and other "maths and sciences". I, at one, believed in evolution myself, until I started learning about the information in the Bible. Now I think evolution can explain some things, but our origination is in the Bible.

If you are accusing others about "putting people down", be careful you're not doing the same thing.

Much Love and God Bless

Marianne

Answer 7

I went to school. I learned about Darwin's THEORY of evolution. (That's exactly what it is, a theory.) It never impressed me.
Now, here's the thing. I believe in God. I believe in the sacrifice that Christ made for me on the cross. I believe that what the Bible says is true. That is my choice. That is my right. I have faith in it.
You choose to believe in a different idea of your origin. That is fine with me. I could care less what you believe.
I can testify to what God has done in my life. How He has changed me. How my life has gotten better since I began to serve Him.
What has your belief in evolution done for you in your life? Given you acceptance in the atheist circle of friends? I can't imagine anything else that it might have done for you.

You see, you can take information from different sources and make any type of argument that you want to. I have read reports from scientists that are Christian, and their argument for God is very persuasive. Ther are arguments on the opposing side that sound persuasive, too. It's really a matter of what you want to believe.

It is interesting how in your comparison above, you make the evolution side sound so factual and concise, while making creation sound like no more than a fairy tale for children. Could it be that we are atheist? That would be such a surprise.

Believe what you will. You want to believe that DNA changes, go right on believing it. It means nothing to me. But as for me and my house, we will believe in and serve the Lord our God. You have a nice day.

Answer 8

Honestly, creating the universe in 6 days does seem more realistic to me that randomly evolving. As complex as creation is, it had to have been designed specifically for designated functions. For example, the human body. The human body is simply to perfect and complex to have randomly evolved to what it is. Just doesn't make sense.

Then when we look at, for example, other scientific theory, "Big Bang", again, the world is also complex and perfect in its functions. Also, my unanswered question remains, if the big bang occured from expansion in the universe, how did the universe originate? Fireball....how did the components of the fireball get there? How did the galaxies that gave off light get there? The plasma, how did it get there? While the Bible describes creation of the world, God has always existed and he created the universe in which he placed earth in as well. He designed the entire universe to function as it does to accomodate earth. I am sure there is more in the universe that relates to earth that science just hasn't figured out. The mystery presence in the universe, now what do you thing that could possibly be?

Here is the theory
The Big Bang is the cosmological model of the universe whose primary assertion is that the universe has expanded into its current state from a primordial condition of enormous density and temperature. The term is also used in a narrower sense to describe the fundamental "fireball" that erupted at or close to an initial timepoint in the history of our observed spacetime.[1]

Theoretical support for the Big Bang comes from mathematical models, called Friedmann models. These models show that a Big Bang is consistent with general relativity and with the cosmological principle, which states that the properties of the universe should be independent of position or orientation.

Observational evidence for the Big Bang includes the analysis of the spectrum of light from galaxies, which reveal a shift towards longer wavelengths proportional to each galaxy's distance in a relationship described by Hubble's law. Combined with the assumption that observers located anywhere in the universe would make similar observations (the Copernican principle), this suggests that space itself is expanding. The next most important observational evidence was the discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation in 1964. This had been predicted as a relic from when hot ionized plasma of the early universe first cooled sufficiently to form neutral hyrogen and allow space to become transparent to light, and its discovery led to general acceptance among physicists that the Big Bang is the best model for the origin and evolution of the universe. A third important line of evidence is the relative proportion of light elements in the universe, which is a close match to predictions for the formation of light elements in the first minutes of the universe, according to Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

Answer 9

Although I am responding to this question, I am not a creationist. The universe was created in 6 creative eras of an indeterminate length of time. (Genesis 5:2) I have expounded upon this before with no response from either evolutionists or creationists.

Answer 10

Kudos for a well formed question and not making broad generalizations!

I'm Christian, and I'll admit I honestly don't know much about evolution, but I'm going to start researching it so that I know how to answer questions like this. I might have even put my beliefs in it had I not experienced the things I have in my life.

But I've experienced quite a bit from God, that shows me that He exists, and He cares. Too much to explain here, but if you're interested in the full answer, you could e-mail me and I'd be more than happy to explain in more detail.