Opponents of evolution?

Question

The argument "If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?"
Is this supposed to be your trump card or your strong finish or something? Even if we do excuse the terminology ('monkeys') it still seems like it would be an extremely weak argument. In spite of that it seems to frequent this forum.

So my question to you is, do you have any real arguments that may question the theory of evolution?

The best answer goes to the person with the most reasonable argument against evolution, so lets dig deep here.

...and before someone points out the fact that this isn't a religion question, I am very aware of that. Most who use the biology section are not opponents of evolution, so this would be a better section to find the audience I am looking for.

"African Texas Girl"- I'm with you on that one. It is a pretty lazy way to answer a question and I doubt it yields too high of a "best answer" rate.

Answer 1

The main problem with the theory of evolution, as I understand it, is that there should be a clear and discernible series of fossils that show a consistent state of evolution. There isn't. In reality, there are gaps, where we can fill in the blanks of missing "link" species (e.g. we know that the species evolved from x to z, have found no proof of y, but can logically assume that y existed).

The fact that these "link" species are so widely missing tends to lend to the argument that evolution as a theory is incorrect; rather, it was God that created these species, and some just died out earlier than others.

That's my best foot forward, anyway. Unfortunatly, I can think of several arguments immediately refuting it.

Answer 2

I am against evolution, and I hate when people use this argument. It doesnt make any sense. Too many Creationists write off evolution as a totally false and idiotic idea, when in actuality, it is a well though-out and sensible theory. But there are flaws, and that is why I believe in a Creator. But the fact that there are still monkeys is not one of them. It makes us Creationists look bad when people use arguments like the one you just used as an example.

Here is a real, scientific, sensible argument. Everything has a beginning. Nothing comes from nothing. It defies all laws of physics. So then where did the universe come from? If it is infinite, then there must be an infinite God. If it began at one point in time from nothing, then there must be a Creator.

Just tryin' to stand up for my beliefs! Hope this makes sense!

Answer 3

BIBLE THUMPER

I know I am supposed to answer the question asked, but I have to comment on your answer.

First of all, thanks for all of the entertaining data. It was very informative and enlightening.

I do however, have to disagree with what I feel is the main "punch line" of your answer. That line is:

"But there is no logical way out of it. . . . For life to have been a chemical accident on earth is like looking for a particular grain of sand on all the beaches in all the planets in the universe—and finding it.” In other words, it is just not possible that life could have originated from a chemical accident. "

The true FACT is, that given enough time, anything is possible. Even finding that grain of sand. AND it might be the first one you find. Even is long odds, there is always the chance of the one you are looking for being first.

It is not know how long this planet has been here. It could have been 1 to the 100,000,000,000,000 power before first life began. Given that kind of time, any of the above data you have given could have happened. To call things impossible, because they are improbable is to believe that bumbles can not fly.

Answer 4

Evolutionists say that dinosaurs were extinct 45 million years before man, therefore, men never saw a living dinosaur.

However, in Natural Bridges National Park (Utah, USA), in the Grand Canyon, and in Montrose County, Colorado, there are petroglyphs (rock etchings) that show dinosaurs.

In Mexico, there have been hundreds of clay figures of dinosaurs found.

In Peru, there are burial stones from ancient Inca tombs that have dinosaurs painted on them.

There is a bass relief sculpture of a dinosaur in an ancient Cambodian temple.

Much of this art shows known, recognizable dinosaurs, yet this art was formed hundreds or thousands of years before those dinosaurs were "discovered".

If these are not dinosaurs what are they and why do they look so much like known dinosaurs?

If they are dinosaurs, how did these men know what they looked like?

Answer 5

When you look at the question: If we came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys--it doesn't make sense at all.

As a questioner once posted on here a few minutes back to the creationists: if we're made from clay, why is there still clay? As humorous as that question may sound, it doesn't make sense either.

Answer 6

There is a lacking in the fossil record of transitionary species. I've read good arguments that the timeframe alloted for evolution of species - in particular post-jurassic evolution is far to short a period of time for random evolution to have developed species in existence today.

As a theory, I can accept evolution - but it's typically being accepted as scientific fact by many. I don't think we know all the variables yet - and to pretend we do is very ignorant.

Answer 7

i've heard something about irreducible complexity - something like there's too many things necessary for evolution to take place. evolution argues that what you need to evolve is too complex to exist on its own to evolve to something more.

also, there's something called entropy - things do from order to disorder, not disorder to order. evolution contradicts just about every other process observed. what else to we see around us that is naturally getting more complex. most things fall apart in time.

i just don't think there's been enough time for all these changes to take place. if evolution is true we are one lucky planet!!

Answer 8

@keevelish
I can't believe you people, did you notice that by your logic air conditioners should not exist. Please try taking a physics class for once. As an engineer the entropy argument creationists use gives the creeps.

All creationists that believe entropy refutes evolution, should be whacked by an air conditioner!!

Answer 9

Second Law of Thermodynamics: everything tends to move towards a state of entropy. It would seem impossible therefore, for atoms to form complex molecules to form living systems that are so insanely intricate. Can you imagine how much must be perfect in the development of a human embryo to create a properly working body? It's amazing.

Answer 10

I'm for evolution, but I'll try anyway, suspending my inteligence for a while...

What was the evolutionary purpose of emotion and a sense of beauty?