Creation vs. Evolution Paper?

Question

Im writting a research paper on creationism versus evolution for my english class. Im for the creation side of it, but there is another kid also in my class and he is for the evolution side of it. I want it to be very believable and compelling. What are some good quotes from famous people on this subject? Thanks to anyone who gives a serious answer! :]

I have A LOT of other evidence, I just wanted some quotes from famous people, who could put into words what i can't. I'm not argueing purley evolution as in 'molecules to man' but how the world was created from an evolutionists or an atheists point of view.

Answer 1

quotes will be quotes .. thats it .. quotes aren't facts.

but anywayz.. is should be big bang vs creation .. or abiogenesis vs creation .. not evolution. Evolution is NOT the theory of how we got here.. or how the world started. Its how we evolved AFTER we got here. the big bang theory is not part of evolution

but i guess thats for the other person to worry about

Answer 2

First of all, there's nothing believeable about creation and you can get all the quotes you want from famous people but they're just opinions. They don't prove anything one way or another so it's a pretty poor way for you to try to prove your point.

Secondly, you can't really compare the two as evolution doesn't deal with how man was, pardon the term, created. You'd have to go back to first causes which could be seen as the Big Bang or the theory of abiogenesis.

And lastly, how does this fit into an English class? Last time I checked Darwin wasn't on the reading list for english although we did go over this in my last year of biology.

Answer 3

Very important. The most compelling Creationists I have heard speak do believe in "micro-evolution" an entirely different process from Evolution ("macro-evolution").

According to the theory, Noah did not have all of the millions of species we see today on the arc. He actually only had representatives of the animal families which diversified while spreading to re-populate the world. That explains why certain seemingly different animals (say tigers and lions) can breed together, but apparently similar animals (say foxes and dogs) cannot: they are from 2 different pairs from the arc.

One of the weak points in the theory of evolution is that there is no real evidence for macro-evolution. There is plenty of anecdotal evidence for diversification but no real proof that an whole population of animals could successfully change into an entirely different family of animals with a different number of genes.

In fact it is the gene code that is the weakest part of the Theory of Evolution. There may be a missing link between one type of ape and another, but there are no missing links that only have a half gene or a partial gene number change. Animals have a distinct number of genes.

ADD: Also, do not get Creationism mixed up with Intelligent Design. Creationists literally believe in man being made out of clay and formed as is. ID argues that a Creator designed the complexities of nature that science is discovering the secrets of. Very different beliefs (of which Creationists are in the minority).

Answer 4

Dr. Henry Morris has an excellent CD (and maybe book too?) called "Tha Their Words May Be Used Against Them", quotes from famous evolutionists.

Also www.icr.org is a great place.

Handy Dandy Evolution Refuter, also called evolution cruncher, is a great resource. The accompanying book is called the Evolution Handbook.

A search for evolutionist Michael Denton and evolution might work also.

Answer 5

In your paper you should show that the debate is wrong. And that the creationists were afraid to face scientific evidence not against a God but for him. Man's knowledge and perception of the physical universe changes with time based on new discoveries. Man's created discipline of science is the best tool man has for making those discoveries.

But man's created of religion realizes a source for our physical universe and consciousness to exist. Man's religious discipline recognizes there were well organized well structured scientific laws that predated man's existence. And that only brilliant scientific men discovered them. If man call those men brilliant for discovering them. Then it is equally true the laws they discovered were equally brilliant. And if that is the case how did they come into existence in the first place?

Those are just my thoughts.

Below are some links below for some famous scientists in the past whom were actually founders of many of the branches of science we have today, believed in God.

I am also reading a book by Alister and Joanna McGrath called the Dawkins Delusion who himself is a peer and scientist of Richard Dawkins who authored the God Delusion. He was once an atheist and is now a Christian.
(On a side note Lee Strobel's book "The Case for Christ" is another good book of faith from an atheist who converted to Jesus Christ. But is not part of the evolution creation debate.)

Answer 6

This website though religous gives some good arguements no famous quotes however

http://www.biblicaldiscipleship.org/Creation_vs_Evolution/cve.htm

Another arguement is concerning transitional fossils although evolutions say that they exist non have never bee found in tact. They are always pieced together by the finders. China has claimed to have found some intact however they were uncovered as hoaxes. Read the section at the above website concerning cock roaches and turtles... interesting.

Answer 7

Try and find out about the trail at Dover. That should answer your questions on famous people giving compelling answers of creationism.

Answer 8

I was just doing some research on this:

In the book In the Centre of Immensities, British astronomer Sir Bernard Lovell wrote about the extreme complexity of the simplest life-forms on earth. He also discussed whether such life would likely have occurred by accident. His conclusion: “The probability of . . . a chance occurrence leading to the formation of one of the smallest protein molecules is unimaginably small. Within the boundary conditions of time and space which we are considering it is effectively zero.”

examples of the “intricate organization” that is found in living things. Neurosurgeon Joseph Evans said of the human brain and spinal cord: “The reality of great order is almost overwhelming.” Of the microscopic living cell, bacteriologist H. J. Shaughnessy stated: “The complexity and beautiful order of the microbiological world is so wonderfully constructed that it appears to be part of a divinely ordained system.”

Molecular biologist Michael Denton : “The complexity of the simplest known type of cell is so great that it is impossible to accept that such an object could have been thrown together suddenly by some kind of freakish, vastly improbable, event.” “But it is not just the complexity of living systems which is so profoundly challenging, there is also the incredible ingenuity that is so often manifest in their design.” “It is at a molecular level where . . . the genius of biological design and the perfection of the goals achieved are most pronounced.”

Denton further states: “Everywhere we look, to whatever depth we look, we find an elegance and ingenuity of an absolutely transcending quality, which so mitigates against the idea of chance. Is it really credible that random processes could have constructed a reality, the smallest element of which—a functional protein or gene—is complex beyond our own creative capacities, a reality which is the very antithesis of chance, which excels in every sense anything produced by the intelligence of man?” He also states: “Between a living cell and the most highly ordered non-biological system, such as a crystal or a snowflake, there is a chasm as vast and absolute as it is possible to conceive.” And a professor of physics, Chet Raymo, states: “I am dazzled . . . Every molecule seems miraculously contrived for its task.”

Denton concludes that “those who still dogmatically advocate that all this new reality is the result of pure chance” are believing in a myth. In fact, he calls the Darwinian belief regarding living things arising by chance “the great cosmogenic myth of the twentieth century.”"

Professor Michael J. Behe stated: “To a person who does not feel obliged to restrict his search to unintelligent causes, the straightforward conclusion is that many biochemical systems were designed. They were designed not by the laws of nature, not by chance and necessity; rather, they were planned. . . . Life on earth at its most fundamental level, in its most critical components, is the product of intelligent activity.”

in the book In the Centre of Immensities, British astronomer Sir Bernard Lovell wrote about the extreme complexity of the simplest life-forms on earth. He also discussed whether such life would likely have occurred by accident. His conclusion: “The probability of . . . a chance occurrence leading to the formation of one of the smallest protein molecules is unimaginably small. Within the boundary conditions of time and space which we are considering it is effectively zero.”

Regarding our universe. Astronomers have used electronic devices to study its origin. What have they found? In God and the Astronomers, Robert Jastrow wrote: “Now we see how the astronomical evidence leads to a biblical view of the origin of the world.” “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians [persons believing in creation] who have been sitting there for centuries.”

Rocket scientist Dr. Wernher von Braun stated: “The natural laws of the universe are so precise that we have no difficulty building a spaceship to fly to the moon and can time the flight with the precision of a fraction of a second. These laws must have been set by somebody.”

Hope these help!

Answer 9

http://www.jesusandmo.net/2007/11/26/fact/

Answer 10

you wont get much on famous people cause all there so called evidence they get from the bible