Question:
Evolution vs. Creationism?
?
2009-05-08 16:40:36 UTC
What proof is there (if any) that evolution does not exist, and that creationism is the way we came to be.
I'm looking for sources outside the bible.
23 answers:
2009-05-09 20:34:56 UTC
Consider this



Mysteries In Science

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5725394906886443944&ei=QHDFSeLrD47I-gG6m6z1Bw&q=fingerprints+of+creation&hl=en



The Young Age of the Earth

http://www.veoh.com/browse/videos/category/faith_and_spirituality/watch/v142573852wTf25Nx#



The Origin of Man by Dr. Duane Gish

http://www.strimoo.com/video/14877425/The-Origin-of-Man-by-Dr-Duane-Gish-Veoh.html



Skull Fossils - As Empty as the Evolutionary Theory

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Yu5jN897kM



Neanderthals - Smarter Than We Thought

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxL636n3w2o



Creation In The 21st Century - Our Young Moon 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5i3jtYx7NMk



The "Dark Cloud" of the Big Bang

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8903287973124207940&ei=znTFScGOApzE-gHD6IHBCg&q=Dr+Robert+gentry&hl=en



Why do creationists feel sorry for delusionists?

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=d4b_1214585502



Today's World Population Debunks Evolution- Dr. Carl Baugh

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWxqzNM76jE



Creation In The 21st Century -- Noah's Ark and Jesus 1 of 3 (Parallel)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FQg67H4GK1o
pygonza
2009-05-08 16:58:10 UTC
Anomalies in the fossil record disprove evolution.

Discovery of a 6 foot tall pre-homo sapien (called the strapping youth) disproves the evolution of man from smaller primates because a fossil represents thousands of living creatures in history that died but did not fossilize.



There is no missing link. Cromagnon man appears on the scene with a highly organized frontal cortex with no predecessor leading up to it. Neanderthal was a contemporary of Cromagnon and not a predecessor.



Life cannot come from lifeless matter. However this must be for evolution to be the case.



Like produces like. A fish does not give birth to an amphibian. Yet this must have happened somewhere along the line in order for evolution to be true.



It takes more blind faith to believe that all living species are a result of random mutation in a single celled organism, than it does to believe in God. You might as well theorize the Mona Lisa was a result of falling paint.
2009-05-08 16:46:50 UTC
There is no credible evidence that creationism is true. In fact every piece of pseudoscience has been debunked.



"Debating Creationists on the topic of Evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon; it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory." - Scott D. Weitzenhoffer







Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty--above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution--or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter--they are not expressing reservations about its truth.



In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution. The NAS defines a fact as "an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as 'true.'" The fossil record and abundant other evidence testify that organisms have evolved through time. Although no one observed those transformations, the indirect evidence is clear, unambiguous and compelling.



All sciences frequently rely on indirect evidence. Physicists cannot see subatomic particles directly, for instance, so they verify their existence by watching for telltale tracks that the particles leave in cloud chambers. The absence of direct observation does not make physicists' conclusions less certain.
2009-05-08 17:33:26 UTC
There would be too much to explain here. I will try to cover as much and break it up in paragraphs to make it more digestible.



First of all I believe in adaptation and the ability of organisms to make small changes to suit their environment. That includes size differences and other functions. What I don't believe in is that living things come from non living things. Let me set this up for you.



One reason I don't accept macro-evolution is because I don't believe in spontaneous generation. If you every take a basic biology course, the first thing you will learn that living things can not arise from nonliving things. This means that water doesn't just create fish and mud doesn't create frogs.



If you ask an atheist where we came from, they will say we evolved. If you ask them what our ancestors evolved from, they will say primordial ooze. If you ask them what that came from, they will say organic molecules. If you ask where that came from they will usually not respond. That is where I say so you came from dirt?



One of the first things we learn that living things don't come from non-living things. The bible tells us that we came from dirt as well as many native american tribes who even though were very spiritual about other gods believed that we came from the earth.(not planet earth but in the sense of Ground earth).



This proves that if atheist are right about us coming from dirt then it means they proved one fact in the bible themselves.



When the Earth was created scientist believe that Earth was just a mass of floating rocks and gas. These elements started coming together and started to slowly rotate together. The heavy molecules sunk to the core and the light gases and solids floated to the top and rose. The chemicals reacted forming different compounds and we have Earth. All the leftover bits when to other planets. That is basically it in a nutshell. It sounds even more ridiculous then I made it. I did not make this up. This is from NASA.

http://www.nasa.gov/worldbook/earth_worldbook.html



I believe that it is a pretty illogical theory. Especially considering the fact that a bunch of chemical gases and rocks were just lying around and the molecules between them just coincidently happened to attract and they self sorted themselves in layers forming a perfect sphere. The chemicals in the atmosphere formed water and a atmosphere started to form. Because the distance between the sun and earth were perfect for the temperatures to not scorch the planet, we were able to have everything you see today. I find this highly improbably to come about by random chance.



That is barely the tip of the iceberg. I can't make a super, long post so I will wrap this up. There are plenty of creationist books out there(Darwin's Black Box, The Science of God, etc) that can explain what I am saying in far greater detail than I possibly can



http://freehovind.com/watch-_6814048597272982882

100 reasons why evolution is stupid(Its very long*1 and half hour* but it is only because evolution has so many holes that it takes more than an hour to explain. That is only 1 of about 20 videos)



Just search creationism books in google. They are hard to find because atheist want to hide the truth. The easiest way to control a population is hide information from people. Atheist are trying to hid God.
2009-05-08 16:50:29 UTC
No and no. We've seen evolution happen. The only "proof" that creationists offer are failed attempts at trying to find problems with evolution (which still would not prove creationism by default).

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html



Note that "creationism" is not the same as "theism". Evolution does not disprove the existence of God, nor does it try to. It does however show that a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 and 2 don't match up with reality. Most Christians I know would say that to treat the stories like that is to miss the message.

http://talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html



Most of the arguments against evolution come from people who have no idea what evolution is about. You can tell by some of the phrases they use like "It says we came from monkies! [sic]" (actually it shows that we share a common ancestor), "It's just a theory" (were they all absent from 8th grade science class on the day that they learned the difference between the scientific meanings of "hypothesis" and "theory"?), "It's all random chance" (that's NOT how natural selection or the laws of chemistry work), or they try to expand the definition to include abiogenesis, cosmology, etc.
Puppy kicking commie for Christ?
2009-05-08 16:50:54 UTC
Is this not the most played out question of all time? I think perhaps we need to start asking something else.



To the creationists, I would ask "Why in the scope of your faith is it important that this story be literally true?"



Jesus used parables and made points. The prodigal son did not actually exist and yet we understand from it that God our father will always let us come home. Whether or not the creation story literally happened we learn from the start of the bible that there is one God and that God created the Earth to be good, he created mankind in his image and pronounced them good.



Could the point trying to be taught be "Why?" instead of "How?" what does it actually matter if that is exactly how it happened?
2009-05-08 16:51:15 UTC
Look at yourself in the mirror, and then go outside and look at the world around you. The fact that you are alive and breathing is proof that you did not evolve. Everything about science points to there being a creation, and not an evolution.
punch
2009-05-08 16:51:49 UTC
There isn't any. I really don't think that creationist and other certain Christians understand how much we know on the formation of the earth and the condition and early life. We really know a lot. Not everything. But we have a pretty good picture. You can have your own truth. But you can't have your own facts.
2009-05-08 16:54:47 UTC
"The fact that you are alive and breathing is proof that you did not evolve."



Um. No, sorry. That doesn't prove either one.



Anyway, if evolution didn't exist, how is it that viruses from all different sources evolve into one cohesive virus? Like the swine flu...
2009-05-08 16:43:43 UTC
Evolution means that we have undergone through Natural Selection.

We're not the same as we were a long time ago. Humans adapt, and maybe God wanted it that way.
Jim ((C.A.B.))
2009-05-08 16:52:13 UTC
The Bible is NOT a history textbook. It is a book that conveys religious truth. When reading the Bible, we need to take into account that it's collection of books are like a library - we cannot read each and every book in the same manner. For example, we would not read "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer" with the same attitude that we would read "A History of WWII". Same goes for the Bible. The majority of people's questions about the Bible would be resolved if people would take this thought into account upon their theological study.



The Bible did not just fall down from heaven already printed. It IS God's word, but God did not simply tell the authors what to write, who in turn copied it down on paper. God left the authors the free will to write His Word with elements pertaining to their own time period. So, of course, things that make sense to someone living in 3000 B.C. would not be logical when read by someone living in 2000 A.D. It is still God's Word, however. People just need to take into account that the Bible's scientific and historical elements were based on the knowledge from THAT time period - not ours! Therefore, we cannot assume the scientific and historical elements to be necessarily true!



For example, let's take the ages of some of the famous Old Testament figures. The Bible states that some of these people lived to be several hundred years old! However, we know that this is not possible. This misunderstanding most likely came from a gap in the calendar system between our times and theirs. We follow the Gregorian Calendar, which is a revised version of the Julian Calendar. The inventors of both of these calendars lived long after the Old Testament was written. Therefore, we KNOW that the calendar system used during the Old Testament wasn't the same as today. Thus, with the application of a little logic and reason, we know that the age of Old Testament figures was not actually several hundred years old on the scale of today's calendar system!



The Bible conveys religious truth. Not historical and/or scientific fact. If the Bible was meant for science and history, we'd use it in school classrooms!



Scientific evolutionism CAN coexist with theistic creationism. As long as God put the whole thing in motion (but allowed things to evolve from there), there would be no conflict between science and theology. Even the Big Bang Theory can make sense in the picture! Did you know that the Big Bang Theory was hypothesized by an ordained Christian minister?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georges_Lema%C3%AEtre



Natural selection is like this:



Say you had 10,000 mosquitoes put into a room. Then you spray pesticide to kill them. However, out of the original 10,000, 200 of them survive. They survive because they have a gene defect that makes them immune to the pesticide used. Because these 200 are the only ones left, they will reproduce and repopulate the room with more mosquitoes. Each and every one of these mosquitoes will have the same special gene that makes them immune to the pesticide, since they inherited it from their parents, who passed on the gene. This means that if the pesticide was sprayed again, all the remaining mosquitoes and their offspring would be immune. This makes the species stronger, and more immune to environmental factors that would have otherwise killed them all.



That's where the saying "survival of the fittest" comes from. Only the organisms that are equipped to survive the best will survive. The weaker organisms will die off from various environmental factors. This makes the species as a whole stronger and more durable. That is what it means for a species to evolve.



Natural selection is not really something you can argue about. It's just something that HAPPENS, regardless of whether you want it to or not. Ignoring this fact is pure ignorance on your part.



Besides, how is acceptance of this an automatic conflict with belief in God? I'm Christian, but I am not blinded by my belief in God so much that I stubbornly refuse to accept this fact of life.
2009-05-08 16:47:15 UTC
There is no proof that evolution does not exist, because it does.



There is no proof that creationism is the way we came to be, because it wasn't.
Barthayn
2009-05-08 16:47:02 UTC
Evolution is unscientifically accurate. The Laws of science according to science states they [the laws of science] were always there and cannot be change. Evolution states it is always there and nothing exploded and made everything. That is extremely unscientific because it breaks many laws, including the Laws of Conservation of Energy and Mass.



The Bible is true and is scientifically accurate. There are many verses in the Bible that is scientific before science proved it was right. Such as bleeding to death, if you are bleeding you are losing life because life is founded in the blood.



'For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul. Therefore I said unto the children of Israel, No soul of you shall eat blood, neither shall any stranger that sojourneth among you eat blood.' Leviticus 17:11-12 (KJV)



Please note the example of the Bible for having science in it is just one, of the many, examples can be found in the Bible.
Garth B
2009-05-08 16:43:55 UTC
There is no such proof. The Bible isn't even consistent. There appears to be more than one tale involved in the "Creation" story.
2009-05-08 16:44:09 UTC
There is no proof for creationism. It simply doesn't exist.



Creationism is just bad science and faulty reasoning with a massive dose of blind faith.
2009-05-08 16:48:33 UTC
Evolution isn't possible to happen or to ever happen. The Bible is the TRUE WORD OF THE ONE ONLY GOD, and it says on the first day God created light. On the second day God created the heavens and earth but with no land. On the third day God created solid land. On the fourth day God created vegetation and foliage. On the fifth day God created the animals. On the sixth day God created Man and Woman, Adam and Eve. On the seventh day God rested and made the Sabbath, a day of rest.
coffee_pot12
2009-05-08 16:49:39 UTC
polonium halos in granite...

http://www.halos.com/
Pyth
2009-05-08 16:43:09 UTC
there is all of one major book supporting creationism.



There are hundreds supporting evolution



EDIT: make that two, I guess the bible counts.
2009-05-08 16:43:02 UTC
There is no disproving proof?
HAMMER
2009-05-08 16:43:21 UTC
The mapping of the DNA
No Gods, No Masters
2009-05-08 16:44:19 UTC
Evolution = SCIENCE

Creationism = Utter NONSENSE
Random Nickname
2009-05-08 16:43:25 UTC
none
2009-05-08 16:44:17 UTC
just believe, and you can succeed


This content was originally posted on Y! Answers, a Q&A website that shut down in 2021.
Loading...