o Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law.
o Increasingly, scientists doubt the truth of evolution. Little solid science supports evolution.
o If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?
o Evolution cannot explain how life first appeared on earth.
o Mathematically, it is inconceivable that even something as complex as a protein could spring up by chance.
o The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that systems must become more disordered over time.
o Mutations cannot produce new features.
o Nobody has ever seen a new species evolve.
o Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils.
o Living things have fantastically intricate features. The only prudent conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution.
o Life has a quality of complexity that could not have come about through evolution.
A fuller list is at:
http://www.cubicsecond.org/creatnons/
2007-10-12 12:23:12 · 11 answers · asked by Super Atheist 7 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
For those nervous about clicking links, this is a site I set up myself, and I guarantee it's free of malware of all kinds.
If you're still skeered - thanks for your time, and please pass by.
2007-10-12 12:26:03 · update #1
OMG! Greg T thinks I'm being 'intelligent'.
Bet he hasn't read the PDF...
2007-10-12 12:43:47 · update #2
Folks, PLEASE don't provide 'answers' to each of these points - the linked site does that!
2007-10-12 12:46:46 · update #3
I won't present a bullet by bullet guide to answering all these questions because I know that you're already aware of the answers.
It's funny isn't it - you can line up all their arguments and not a single one stands up to scrutiny for a microsecond.
I did find it funny when the creationist thought you were being intelligent... It takes courage to be that ignorant.
2007-10-12 13:22:36 · answer #1 · answered by Leviathan 6 · 3⤊ 0⤋
I'm not a creationist but oh well I'll try.
Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact or a scientific law. - Don't know. Never studied it.
o Increasingly, scientists doubt the truth of evolution. Little solid science supports evolution. - Don't know.
o If humans descended from monkeys, why are there still monkeys? - Stupid logic
o Evolution cannot explain how life first appeared on earth. - False
o Mathematically, it is inconceivable that even something as complex as a protein could spring up by chance. - Probably
o The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that systems must become more disordered over time. - Never studied
o Mutations cannot produce new features. - False
o Nobody has ever seen a new species evolve. - Well since Darwin said it would take a very long time to say a species evolves, I would agree. Unless Darwin was wrong and evolution is a quick process.
o Evolutionists cannot point to any transitional fossils. - Mostly false.
o Living things have fantastically intricate features. The only prudent conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution. - Neutral
o Life has a quality of complexity that could not have come about through evolution. - Neutral.
2007-10-12 19:40:36 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 4⤋
I'll start with the short list:
-No. It isn't "only" a theory, but a scientific theory. There's a difference.
-Yes and no. Many scientists DO have a problem with SOME areas of evolution. There is, however, LOTS of evidence to support evolution within species. Or shall we say, natural selection.
-We didn't evolve from monkeys.
-Yes, I agree. Abiogenesis is the field that attempts to explain that, not evolution.
-Don't know. I'll let you know when I've finished reading both Darwin's Black Box (Michael Behe) and The Blind Watchmaker (I'm sure you know).
-Don't know. I'll have to look into that one.
-No, of course they can. But is that natural selection? And is it always POSITIVE mutations?
-Yes, that's true, to the best of my knowledge. Though some changes within species have been observed.
-No, that's not true. And I thought there was no such word as "evolutionists"?
-Haven't finished "Watchmaker" or "Black Box." Haven't made up my mind on that one.
-SOME things within life are too complicated, and not explainable by science. Some are.
I'll get to the others later. Right now I've got a migraine coming on and I'm a little tired.
2007-10-12 19:42:59 · answer #3 · answered by The_Cricket: Thinking Pink! 7 · 0⤊ 2⤋
I don’t understand the (New Age) idea’s of “Creationists” and/or “Christian sciences” .. I think it’s all some plot to perplex the youth of American and to smuggle in religion into the class rooms. I think creationists just use scientific sounding mix-um-up word salads to give some kind of credit to the funny fictional story book the bible. It’s all bullshit; Just because I can type in crap about jet engines and rockets don’t make me rocket scientist or inventor at NASA.
2007-10-13 01:05:02 · answer #4 · answered by Johnny S 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
i actually have a back ground in science
based on the basis of abiogenesis, I know that no life could start,
i will post this as a question later and see if anyone has the moral fiber, the intellectual courage to answer it
so far no one has
cowards (not all, but most)
2007-10-12 23:00:39 · answer #5 · answered by magnetic_azimuth 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
What about the banana that God apparently designed specifically for the human hand?
2007-10-12 19:40:46 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
i noticed you didn't put the one of the tornado in the junkyard
2007-10-12 19:31:10 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Yes!
Do you know what Laminin is?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ejj51hNIL3E
2007-10-12 19:43:05 · answer #8 · answered by ElioraImmanuel 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
That site is a great contribution Super. Its now in my bookmarks, thanks.
2007-10-13 05:53:50 · answer #9 · answered by tanjaneeka 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I know that the science is not the only way of knowing. : )
2007-10-12 19:49:08 · answer #10 · answered by SeeTheLight 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋