Do evolutionists deny the science based Facts that despute the theory?

Question

Can the world and universe with all its wonders and distinct design come from nothing? Big bang? How did the materials get there? what set them in motion? cant we see that the earth was intelligently created? or do you dis agree? " This question is not intended to bash evolutionists, Im truly interested in your opinions. THANKS!

Answer 1

"Can the world and universe with all its wonders and distinct design come from nothing?"
-Science doesn't say anything happens by chance, or that anything comes from nothing. Science operates under the methodological assumption that all natural phenomenon follows the laws of physics which govern the universe, and that if all factors can be known, all things can be accurately predicted. For example, the mothion of planets in orbit can be predicted accurately based on a mathematical equation. If an asteroid strikes the earth, it ain't chance. The collision can be predicted if the asteroid is spotted and it's trajectory determined, even years in advance.

"Big bang? How did the materials get there? what set them in motion?"
-The Big Bang has nothing at all to do with evolution. When I was a christian, I had no problem believing in evolution. Not ID, because ID states that God wasn't omniscient enough to create the laws of physics and nature so perfectly that humans would evolve according to his plan without any needed interference in the process. An all-knowing God wouldn't have to fix mistakes or guide the evolutionary process.

"cant we see that the earth was intelligently created? or do you dis agree?"
-I disagree. A perfect earth wouldn't have tornados, hurricanes, tsunamis, earthquakes, volcanic explosions, meteorite impacts (like the ones that almost destroyed all life on the planet 4 or 5 times over the last 2 billion years and will do so again someday), etc. The earth is because of the laws of physics. It is no more intelligently designed than the pattern of iron filings in a magnetic field. It is simply material following natural laws.

I'm not trying to bash your beliefs. I once shared them. I was once a christian, but even then, I still believed in evolution. I just considered that evolution was God's tool to create us. The God I observed at the time obeyed the laws He created.

However, I eventually came to the point where I realized that my awe of the Big Bang and abiogenesis, which I could only credit to God, was an Appeal to Incredulity/Appeal to ignorance.
"I don't know how it could have happened naturally, so God must have done it."
To me, that is no longer a valid reason to believe in God.

Regardless, my reasons for not believing in God anymore are unimportant. I can no more prove that God doesn't exist than you can prove that he does. We all have our own reasons.

However, there is evidence for evolution, and it spans all areas of science: geology, biology, paleontology, microbiology, comparative anatomy, biogeology, zoology, genetics, heredity, and others. All evidence points to the fact that all life has a common ancestry.

One can still feel free to believe it was caused by God, but to deny it is to cling to dogma while forgoing objectivity. Christians shouldn't be threatened by evolution, or any other branch of science.

El Chistoso

Answer 2

"Evolutionists," whatever that means, would follow the evidence wherever science leads them.

That's the neat thing about science. It doesn't claim to know the answer to everything, but it keeps on trying to figure it out, rather than just say "God did it" and give up.

I also think you're confusing the Big Bang with evolution. Two different things.

And for the millionth time, evolution does not posit that things came from nothing. That is the creationist worldview ... that a god just made things magically appear.

"Can't we see that the earth was intelligently created," you ask, yet you say you don't want to bash "evolutionists." Nice try. I see evidence of natural evolutionary forces bringing us to where we are. Claiming an invisible spirit did it isn't an answer. You might as well say a bunch of unicorns made it, because it's just as meaningless.

Answer 3

The big bang is a Theory. It is not proven, but there are other theories on how the earth came into being. Creationists have one of their own, and they call it God. They cannot, however, prove the existence of a god just as scientists cannot prove the Big Bang theory. I would also like to add that Darwin's theory of evolution never mentions the big bang. It simply states that life, the strongest of the living to be specific, evolves. My personal opinions on why this contradicts the God theory and even disproves it is that if we had a perfect intellegent designer there would be no need to evolve. We would have been created with everything we need already.

Answer 4

Well.....my answer will try to cover a lot of ground.....

1) Scientists endeavor to find out what existed prior to the Big Bang and never stated that "nothing" was "there" prior to the event. I've read where some think that there are other universes parallel to ours that are being born all the time - similar to soap bubbles beneath running water. But not one scientist has said that they know - they always test their theories. A sure sign of sanity.

2) Radio Carbon Dating is admittedly imperfect but not to the point of being totally unreliable and therefore not necessarily wrong about the age of the planet Earth. ID proponents contend that Earth is 6,000 years old a point clearly disproved by RCD.

3) Creationists don't test their faith, it is a realm of stasis. Without testing there is no reason to dispute beliefs. Other religions are branches of disagreeing parties but that's as far as putting dogma to the test gets in idealogical terms.

4) Evolutionists never expect anyone to agree with them. The theorists don't want to become attached to their theorems. Science is about growth and any theory that is proven through testing at that point become open for analysis and are put up against other theories.

5) The purpose of science is not meant to be a religion. Religion is not meant to be science. Imagine a glass filled half full of water and the remainder with oil. Now, with one word, try to accurately describe the contents of the glass to someone who can't see, can't smell, or taste anything - nor has never known what water or oil are. The analogy is meant to describe how science and religion cannot co-exist in the same arena of discussion. None of us "know" what either is truly about yet, so how can Creationist Theory attempt to explain the real universe with a conclusionary leap of faith and expect to be taken seriously?

6) Since Evolutionism requires testing and proof, we are somewhat limited by the fact that we cannot go back in time to take samples of the Big Bang, or refer to a indisputable record of physical evidence to conclude that we aren't evolving. So science does the best it can with observational studies and simple deduction. I don't sense that with the religious community. They go to many lengths to "dispute" scientific theories with the same reasoning that UFOlogists, ghost hunters, and Bigfoot afficianados do. That is, "We think it's true therefore it is, so science be damned."

Answer 5

As far as the Big Bang is concerned, it is possible that the total energy content of the Universe is zero---that is, the positive energy of all the particles and their motions is cancelled by the negative gravitational potential energy. That means that the Big Bang might not entail the actual creation of any stuff, so much as the separation of positive and negative energies from the vacuum. Of course this presupposes that the laws of physics existed in some form, and we have no idea where they came from, if indeed the "came from" anywhere.

Answer 6

You said "science based Facts", yet did not mention any, was this an oversight?

Just because you are not aware on Super-String theory or the basis behind evolution does not make your questions facts.

There is nothing to indicate that the world was intelligently designed, and many indications that it wasn't. The ID hypothesis was never formally presented for review, instead it was published for laymen, indicating that even it's creator could not make a valid scientific case for it.

Answer 7

How does the bible explain dinosaurs? The earth is 6 billion years old. Human life has only been here for 6 thousand. Big Bang is a theory just like Adam and Eve is a theory.

Answer 8

Which "science based Facts" exactly are you talking about? Nothing you've mentioned in your question is either science-based or a fact.
It seems all you have is your subjective belief that the universe seems designed, and an ignorance of how it could have been created naturally. Neither of those can objectively be considered evidence of anything, and certainly neither contradicts the theory of evolution.

Answer 9

why are some of you bashing this guy and assuming he believes in god? the question doesnt even give his position? a little defensive here? we have a chance to intelligently answer the question but some of you make us look bad by resorting to god bashing whats up with that? by the way the chrisian bible does give an account for the dinosaurs. In gen. and as for the theory there are alot of gaps i want to believe evo theory but we have yet to find evidence of any of these halfway creatures, and the bible gives real accounts of history that can be traced to the source, the city of sodome? i went there and saw the coals of fire that rained down on it. the landscape is ravaged with sulfer balls and burned mountaind ect. you can see its chared from space, check the bottom of the red sea...pharoes army is spread about the floor, with chariots and bones to this day, the evidence is overwelming. Just some food for thought.

Answer 10

well, the nitpicking of the differences between biology and physics aside, we have a working theory based on the observation and knowledge of how matter acts. It's not the only theory, just the most accepted one. Now, the fact is that science really does not have all the answers, nor does it claim to. Science involves the continuing search for those answers wheras religion claims to already possess that knowledge and refuses to acknowledge new evidence.