Like a Christian I thought evolution took as much faith to believe in than creation was. Boy, was I wrong. There's many lectures on explaining how evolution works and many other courses in anthropology and microbiology that explain distinct parts of evolution.
Was anyone else surprised that evolution actually has tons of evidence supporting it?
2007-09-20 12:37:18 · 32 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Creationism can't even be tested. So there's no scientific evidence for it. Wake up and smell the rationality!
2007-09-20 12:45:18 · update #1
There is no evidence for evolution.
There are facts which are interpreted as being evidence.
Anyone can start with a theory, and find things that appear to support that theory.
For a balanced approach from Christian astrophysicist Hugh Ross go to:
http://www.reasons.org/
2007-09-20 12:49:50 · answer #1 · answered by wefmeister 7 · 2⤊ 8⤋
Biology was my favourite subject since i was a little child.. and was never suprised by it. I belive in evolution theory 100%. Those who oppose evolution are the ones who don't even know what the theory states.
And all the funny reasons they give for not beliving.... :D.. I had a friend who asked me "If u cut the tail of a rat and its children and grandchildren...for 10 generations, still the new-born will have tail. Why is it so?"
What shud i reply to such stupid questions?? The asker has a masters degree in technology. I hope, if these people so badly want to belive in what bible says then they should try to belive GOD caused evolution or evolution was GODs tool for creation, instead of turning deaf to science.
NB: I respect & love my friend for all other things.
2007-09-21 04:41:45 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
To be honest I have always believed in evolution and I am a Christian. I believe evolution supports the Creation story. How else could primitive man desribe it. Even if God told them in a dream how would it look to them. I really don't care if anyone else agrees but just wanted to throw that in.
2007-09-24 00:10:23 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
no i knew this from the beginning because unlike most people who call themselves Christian, I actually read science texts.
Anyway, God creating the universe and evolution don't really contradict. God in his omnipotence and omniscience obviously created evolution. God knew how it would end up and when humans came he gave them a soul. God always works in subtle ways(he doesn't all of a sudden change something), so evolution makes sense in that God did not all of a sudden make something, he manages to do all that he does in the very physical laws that he himself created.
I don't understand how some Christians could doubt God's omnipotence or omniscience and say that evolution is wrong. Don't they believe God is smart enough to create evolution?
The creation stories need to be looked upon figuratively not literally. Did you know there are two creation stories? One where God creates man first the other when God creates everything in seven days. They contradict each other and so quite obviously the stories are not meant to be taken literally.
Therefore, the perfectly logical conclusion to this (in my opinion stupid) question is that God created evolution and knew what the outcome would be so by changing one small attribute of His universe, he not only managed to create all his wonderful creatures but his greatest creation: humans.
2007-09-20 13:03:00 · answer #4 · answered by iammisc 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually, most of the so-called "evidence" was falsified. Some was so bad that they had to actually retract them, such as the pretend evidence of the "piltdown" man built on the tooth of a boar!
Here are a few facts that evolutionists want to hide from you:
Evolution, as we all know, was formulated by Charles Darwin.
What most people do NOT realize is the so-called science he based his theory on has since long been abandoned as false.
Darwin believed (and wrongly so, I might add) that the cell was the smallest part of a living body.
He referred to the fluid within the cell as an "ambiotic" fluid.
He decided that the cells of the foetus were "undesignated", and as such, could be reformulated by pressures from the external environment, which is why (in his opinion) there are so many different species of animals.
Of course, they don't teach this stuff in school, or you would KNOW how wrong it is.
Anybody who studies logic will tell you that if you start with a false premise, then the conclusion will likewise be wrong.
Now for the facts:
Darwin didn't know anything about the nucleus, the mitochondria, protein and protein synthesis, the method by which raw materials are converted to usable energy within the cell, the RNA, or the 2-stranded helixical DNA.
In order for the cell to multiply, the DNA has to unravel into 2 long strands separated from each other. Then the strands will "collect" and attach mirror-image molecules and protein chains to produce a ful-length mirror image of itself. The 2 strands then recombine and twist themselves back up into the helix once again. In the meantime, the RNA is going out to once again form a mirror image of itself, which would be an exact duplicate of the original DNA, and the 2 DNA strands then combine and wind itself up into a helix in the newly formed cell.
The DNA is like an incredible computer so complicated that even the Cray Supercomputer looks simple by comparison.
Nobody beliees that the Cray was the results of a series of small explosions in a warehouse full of raw materials, and yet these so-called scientists believe that the DNA was the result of a series of small accidents, one on top of another!
Furthermore, if we were to study entropy and the laws which govern the distribution of energy in a closed system, we would see that the universe is moving FROM order TO chaos. However, for evolution to work, we would have to have the universe violate the absolute laws of the universe, and move from CHAOS towards ORDER!
Oh, and did I mention that when the mitochondria goes through the "energy-cycle", the first thing that happens is that it LOSES a couple of units of energy, on the road to converting raw materials into usable energy in the cell? Well, if it were up to evolution, that is to say that if evolution and random accidents were in charge, this process would have never gotten one foot off the ground. As soon as it started LOSING energy in it's attempt to GAIN energy, it would have stopped and tried a different approach!
Evolution is both unscientific, and totally illogical.
The only thing that I'M surprised at is that with all this information freely available, that people still hold on to their archaic fairytales!
Oh, one last thought on this. A challenge to anybody who actually DOES believe in evolution:
Go out and buy a Cray computer and - what? Too expensive? Ok. Instead, go out and buy a Timex mechanical (not digital) watch. Take that watch apart, screws, springs and gears. Don't lose any parts, but put all the parts into a sealable baggie. SEAL the baggie with all the parts included, then put it into the clothes dryer and turn on the dryer for oh, say 3 to 4 months. Looking at the comparitive complexity of a Timex mechanical watch to the complexity of a living cell, or even only one PART of the living cell, just the DNA alone, the relative time frame would be reduced to 3 to 4 months at most. After the 3 or 4 months (you can leave it in an extra couple of months if you think an extra 100 million years are necessary), but when you decide to stop the clothes dryer, take out the baggie, and open it up, and take everything out of the baggie.
Much to your surprise, you will NOT find a Timex watch that "took a lickin', but still keeps tickin'!"
Evolution just can not work, period! It's utter nonsense!
I've shown you the science, now it's up to you to decide if you want to believe in lies, or grab hold of the Truth; or should I say, let the Truth grab hold of YOU and have it's way with you?
One last point. Sherlock Holmes (or should I say Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who wrote Sherlock Holmes?) said that once all the impossible options are removed, then whatever is left, no matter how improbable, is the truth.
Since evolution is out of the picture because it is impossible, then the only other option, (that God created the universe and created life on this earth), even though it may SEEM improbable, is the Truth.
Additional Comment:
The most amazing thing about this is that people will persist to believe the lies, inspite of the evidence! What faith they must have! And yet they say they aren't a religion!
2007-09-20 13:52:22 · answer #5 · answered by no1home2day 7 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Don't you think the world's greatest scientists just might have noticed if one of the major scientific theories of all time wasn't backed up by abundant solid scientific evidence?? Dut of course, that is redundant since a hypothesis doesn't get elevated to the exalted status of scientific theory until it is thoroughly supported by evidence.
2007-09-20 12:51:10 · answer #6 · answered by PaulCyp 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
God's thoughts are never subject to evolution. Whatever seems to evolve is temporal. Actually, the belief that God is now out of the picture and evolution has taken the throne is insulting to God, to say the least.
2007-09-20 13:44:03 · answer #7 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
DEG,
you're in an area that i feel strongly about.
you sound like a christian, with the ability to look at things rationally.
my opinion is that evolution is so complex, and such a successful system of prolonging life on the planet no matter what you do to it, that it can only be a gift from god.
who else but god, and intelligent, all knowing god, could come up with a method for life to go on, whether the planet is hit by a comet, that kills off all of the dinosaurs, or is strangled by pollution caused by man?
i came from a very christian family that just happened to be headed by a scientist. (my father)
i just don't understand why more christians don't see evolution as proof there there is one supreme being who made it all, and plans on keeping it going whether we pollute it, or nuke it.
keep an open mind!
2007-09-20 12:50:17 · answer #8 · answered by buddhablue 2 · 3⤊ 2⤋
anyone who bothers to study science even a little will know that a theory in science is not a guess, but is a structural framework that explains observed facts. like the "theories" of gravity or relativity, evolution is very well supported.
of course anything in science is subject to revision, and will eventually be revised as we learn new facts. but you're right, there are tons of evidence supporting the theory of evolution.
and not one of them can disprove god. one has nothing to do with the other.
2007-09-20 12:53:51 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
No...because I learned about evolution in a concise manner in 10th grade with a good teacher who showed how convincing the argument really is and how well supported. Anyone who thinks otherwise has never been taught anything more than basics, and, even if they have been, they enter the course with the specific intent of completely disregarding and poking holes in everything they hear...
2007-09-20 12:44:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 2⤋
If evolution did not have any evidence, it would not be a scientific theory.
"A theory is a logically self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of a related set of natural or social phenomena. It originates from or is supported by experimental evidence."
--------
"Geology shows that fossils are of different ages. Paleontology shows a fossil sequence, the list of species represented changes through time. Taxonomy shows biological relationships among species. Evolution is the explanation that threads it all together. Creationism is the practice of squeezing one's eyes shut and wailing: 'does not!'" — Dr. Pepper.
2007-09-20 12:41:55 · answer #11 · answered by qxzqxzqxz 7 · 13⤊ 2⤋