Question:
What proof it there of creationism?
Erdnaface
2008-02-10 03:21:18 UTC
Only science,
nothing from the bible please
23 answers:
Lyall H
2008-02-10 03:25:54 UTC
I believe that there doesn't need to be proof if you have faith.

You can't convince someone who have believed with out logic their entire lives using logic.
____________
2008-02-10 11:40:53 UTC
well all snowflakes have their own individuality ... hydrogen is flamable, oxygen feeds fire yet both together make water, even the eye made Darwin shudder as to how it could be that evolved since it is so complex that there is no way it could thrive with one part missing of it again also with evolution although you are mistaken to think it science denies symbiotic relationships like bees and flowers or crocodiles and the birds that pick their teeth also for being at the top of a evolutionary ladder we seem to lack the most ... some animals walk at birth other s are independent from birth .. we are not .. some can reproduce by themselves... even with bacteria there is such a design that if while waiting to evolve such things it cannot be accounted how they thrived until now ... again even the properties of beef or metal or wood were possible before we realized we could do such things with them if anything my friend there is more proof for creationism than a lack thereof.
Dalarus
2008-02-10 11:33:33 UTC
A lot of people believe in creationism for emotional reasons and pretend that its science.



They believe the bible is the literal word of god and do not allow such things as truth or evidence to interfere.



Some also take pseudoscience such as "irreducible complexity" to take aim at evolution. But there is no alternate theory. All of the evidence points to evolution. It is just a matter of filling in the gaps.



P.S. Evolution is not the same as atheism, by the way. However, I do think a scientific view of the world must recognize that there is no evidence for the supernatural. People are free to believe whatever they want.
Questioner
2008-02-13 21:17:03 UTC
First of all, “proof” is one of those words. As Jim McGuiggan has said, “‘Proof’ in math isn’t the same as proof in history or in interpersonal relationships or in biology or in any one of a host of other disciplines. Ask a child (or a husband or a father or a friend) to ‘prove’ the beloved really loves them and it isn’t possible. Even if it could be ‘proved’, the child may not be able to make the case well enough to convince the critic. In this case it would be the child’s inability that would be the problem and not that the claim couldn’t be ‘proved.’ The trouble with critics is that often they can’t tell the difference between someone being unable to prove it and the ‘prove-ability’ of the claim. In addition, more often than not they don’t know what kind of ‘proof’ is required in the various disciplines.”



And as John Lennox said in his debate with Richard Dawkins, “Of course, we do no speak of ‘proof.’ You only get proof, in the strict sense, in my own field of mathematics. But, in every other field, including science, we can’t speak of proof—we can speak of evidence, of pointers, of being convinced beyond reasonable doubt.”



The universe is here (cosmological argument), design is here (teleological argument), beauty is here (aesthetical argument), morality is here (moral argument), the desire for God is here (universal belief argument), etc.—what is their adequate preceding cause? Many people believe this points to God.



As Wayne Jackson has said, “It is not reasonable to assume that chaos gave rise to order, that the nonrational produced the rational, that nonliving evolved into the living, that nonconscious became conscious, that amoral developed morality, etc. The simple fact is, people do not accept evolution because it is the logical thing to do; rather, many believe it because they have a vested interest in not wanting to acknowledge the Creator!”



If you want to know more, I would go to creationist websites and not Yahoo Answers:

http://www.answersingenesis.org

http://www.apologeticspress.org

http://www.icr.org

http://www.trueorigin.org
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:23:55 UTC
None, none at all.



Creationism is really just pathetically well-organized attacks on the scientific method, specifically evolutionary biology.



Lately, they've come to confuse the Singularity with it.



Hasse Jo just proved my point. All of the materials he mentions offer no evidence in support of creation, merely attacks on science from money grubbing scoundrels, and people like Behe who were shamed on the witness stand over "Irreducible Complexity", which was explained many years ago by evolutionary biologists.



Yet, Ham, Hovind and Behe continue with their lies.



It's so sad.



Behe's mousetrap analogy was disproved overnight by thousands of engineering students.
Cosmodot
2008-02-11 00:14:19 UTC
No proof, just weak rationalizations and the fact that they refute Evolution to make it seem more probable, even though evolution doesn't directly conflict with the possibility of a "creator."





They're simply fulfilling a desire to have answers, where they decide that if they can't presently explain something of unnerving complexity, they might as well just save brain space and rest on the conclusion that "God did it." so they don't have to think about it anymore.



It's convenient.
Emma
2008-02-10 11:30:48 UTC
Research has shown that the earth is made up of the same chemical elements that are needed to sustain human life. But vegetation must first convert these elements into forms that can be assimilated by the body. Some of these elements may amount to no more than one hundredth of one percent of the human body, but they are necessary for life. Cooperating in making them available are thousands of millions of living organisms in the soil, of countless different designs, each working to convert dead leaves, grass and other waste matter back to usable form or to loosen up the soil so that air and water can get in. Who can honestly deny that great wisdom is evident in this arrangement to sustain life?



And the “heavens”—do they reflect the understanding that indicates intelligent design? It is noteworthy that, while the moon has virtually no atmosphere, the earth, where man lives, has an atmosphere with just the right content of gases for us to breathe. No “space suits” are needed in order to live here. Fittingly, too, the atmosphere has such properties that when meteors are drawn in by the earth’s gravity, most of them burn up before ever reaching the ground, thus safeguarding us from bombardment by the 200 million rocks that plunge into the atmosphere daily. And this same atmosphere makes possible the formation of rain to refresh the earth, protects against excessive heat from the sun during the day, and retains a reasonable amount of heat during the night. How evident it is that the atmospheric “heavens” were carefully designed, the work of One with understanding far surpassing ours!



Do not plants spring from seeds in which there is life? Do not insects, fish, land animals and humans come from living parents? Nothing living comes from a rock, unless seeds have lodged in its crevices or eggs have been laid there. So, then, the producing of something that has life requires a source that is alive. Biologists agree, but those who advocate evolution ask you to believe that, although they can point to no example of it today and there is no parallel for it, life sprang repeatedly from nonliving matter many millions of years ago. Since they cannot find proof of it here on the earth, they have had manned expeditions look for evidence of it on the moon, and they hope to check out their theory on Mars. The Bible, however, agrees with the observable fact that life derives only from a living source.
METALLICA
2008-02-10 11:28:47 UTC
I watched how the earth was made a few weeks ago. They said some interesting things. They said that Planet Earth was made by Meteor Shower from the Solar System. Also, The meteors contained the water we have Today.
commonsense
2008-02-10 11:31:00 UTC
none no proof at all.

it is just a god of the gaps theory...



By the way irreducible complexity is supposed to be proof for intelligent design not creationism....and this theory has been debunked many times...See the Dover trial...
anonymous
2008-02-11 00:11:48 UTC
Only a completely irrational book called the babble .



http://lizardofahaz.multiply.com/video/item/10/How_to_get_to_heaven.wmv
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:25:14 UTC
None, but that's because its a philosophical theory not a scientific one.



The basic logic being that something cannot simply come from nothing and/or that the world is so complex that it lends to the idea that some sort of 'intelligent design' was put into it.
Jenny
2008-02-10 23:13:30 UTC
To believers, everything is around them is proof.

To non-believers, nothing provides proof.
snouts
2008-02-10 11:28:42 UTC
none, anyone can use the Bible to build a case for pretty much anything.
Aphrodite
2008-02-10 11:28:42 UTC
It's just the church trying to get their foot in the door like in the old times when they killed all the scientists/witches.
LatterDaySaint and loving it
2008-02-10 19:52:33 UTC
lets see you make a tree, not grow one, make it from scratch. lets see you make the sky blue



God created it, you don't have to believe it, you just enjoy it.
Atlas
2008-02-10 11:30:29 UTC
I got a little up my sleeve, but it's not the biblical account of creation. You have to look around the world we have today and see how everything is falling into place, as well.



Anyway, here's my whole Mars spiel, which takes me a good amount of time to deliver. It gives evidence that our ancestors witnessed a massive reordering of our solar system, one which may have set our world back and ended many great civilizations. It opens the possibility that catastrophic events occur regularly in our world, and that it happens with such precision that it can only have been created in such a way to do so.



It comes hand in hand with the Electric Universe theory, a new way of viewing how our planets interact with their surroundings. It offers an alternative to how we think gravity works, and offers explanations for the vast amount of "anomalies" that we have witnessed in the heavens. We believe that Saturn's rings are millions of years old, held in place by gravity and yet experiments in a lab over ninety years ago have been able to replicate them with electricity:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060901saturnxray.htm

If you scroll down the following page, you will see satellite pictures of the sun, and a picture of another lab experiment by the same scientists, for comparison. It's from the thunderbolts website's forum:

http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=800&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

There is so much evidence for the electric universe I often wonder why our scientists have not discovered it. It only takes a little imagination to be able to "see" it. Looking back in history though, it's as if I can see efforts to hide it, and lead us away from it. As if we weren't ever meant to reach it.



This is a topographic map of Mars:

http://ssed.gsfc.nasa.gov/tharsis/Mars_topography_from_MOLA.new/

Do you see that scar that is in the middle, to the left? That is the Valles Marineris, and it is the largest canyon in our solar system. It extends almost a quarter of the way around the planet.



If you look closely, at either end of the canyon you can see an arm that extends from it. On the eastern side of the canyon, an area of lower elevation extends to the north. It heads back around to the west and then makes its way back to the center of the canyon. At the western end of the canyon a mountain range works its way to the south and comes back around to the middle of it.



You can almost see the number 8. Wallace Thornhill is a researcher and proponent of the electric universe theory. He wrote the following article, comparing the Valles Marineris to a barred spiral galaxy:

http://www.holoscience.com/news.php?article=rnde0zza

To the west of the Valles Marineris are the four largest "volcanoes" on Mars, which form a triangle. I say "volcanoes" because they are the most similar features we can relate them to on our planet. A close look at the caldera of one of them reveals something of their electric nature.



http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2006/arch06/060413omcaldera.htm

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2004/arch/040705olympus-mons.htm

Looking closely, you can see craters centered on the rims of other craters. This is because the volcanoes are the sites where massive lightning bolts came out of the sky and struck the ground, staying in place and lifting the mud and rock skyward. Electricity follows the path of least resistance, and the arc eventually jumped from the lowest point, the center of the crater, to the highest point, the crater rim. Once there, it began creating another crater which is why we see craters centered on the rims of other craters.



On the northern rim we can see one centered on the biggest, central crater, then we can see another one centered on THAT one.

http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2007/arch07/070104rimshots.htm

Anyway, take another look at the topographic map of Mars. The northern hemisphere has been wiped clean. 6000 feet of elevation have been erased, leaving it mostly smooth except where a few large lightning strikes made craters. The southern hemisphere got crushed with lightning bolts, leaving it massively scarred.



Where the 4 "volcanoes" are, if you would go directly through the planet (antipodal) you would wind up where the blue depression is to the east. One side got pulled up and the other was pushed down.



So how did this go down? Our ancestors witnessed many different events and handed it down to us in our ancient myths and legends. They spoke of how Kronos (Saturn) swallowed his children, then was fed a rock wrapped in fur by his wife and threw them up. Zeus (Jupiter) battled him and hurled lightning bolts, then wrapped him in chain and cast him out of the heavens.



Saturn has rings, and our ancestors may have witnessed the creation of these rings and likened them to chains. The rock wrapped in fur may have been Venus, and it would have appeared to have been wrapped in fur because it was literally glowing with this electric energy.



Similar to a plasma ball with the purple electric filaments. When you touch it the electricity jumps to your fingertip. Ancient names for Venus include the morning star, the hairy planet, the bearded planet and the smoky planet. When it came close to the first planet the electric charge difference was so great the planet exploded and the remnants became the asteroid belt.



When it came close to Mars it fried the planet. Because of how electricity works in a circuit and how it interacts with magnetic fields it sucked the northern hemisphere of Mars off and crushed the southern hemisphere with lightning bolts. The closest point of contact became the middle of the Valles Marineris, and the spiraling arms were created.



Then it travelled by Earth and was weaker still, and created two massive hurricanes on our south and north pole, creating the ice caps. Because we are the last planet it touched, we are still in a phase lock with the Venus. 13 Venusian years are equal to 8 Earth years.



Anyway, this goes into why our ancestors were so meticulous with their chartings of the skies, and why they spoke of different ages with different suns and battles between their gods and lightning storms so powerful it appeared as if the sky were filled with arrows.



And in the midst of all this are those who know what is going on. Don't let the ignorance that fills our text books and our websites fool you. Somebody knows what is going on at all times, and they are getting ready for it.



So what does this have to do with a creator? Well our minds are storms of electricity that take place in our brains. Our arteries and veins are branched like lightning, and trees branch towards the sky in the very same way. This energy, this unifying force, is what composes our world and reality.



We complicate our experiments with cumbersome equipment and fire particles with energy levels so high to smash them into each other to see what happens. Science believes this is progress, but over a hundred years ago a man in a lab with his metal ball in a vaccuum chamber was well on his way to understanding our sun and planet interaction.



If you were going to exist onward into the infinite, what would you do to fill the time? We are just a rock that spins around a star, after all. Anyway, there is so much more out there I can't name it all here.



http://www.bearfabrique.org/Catastrophism/candaa.html

This site has some good stuff.



Maybe you won't believe it, but my point is that there is so much crazy stuff out there, so many ancient tales passed down, that there has to be something going on. Just take a look around our world, something is happening and we are getting ready for something huge. Keep an eye out and your mind open.
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:26:03 UTC
if there is a god, lion of juddah should be copy and pasting his B.s right now...





waiting..





nOODLY BLESSED r'AMEN.
hasse_john
2008-02-10 11:26:46 UTC
Have you seen "Irreducible Complexity" (A DVD) or read "CREATION'S TINY MYSTERY" by Robert Gentry? Carl Baugh, Kent Hovind and Answers in Genesis each have multiple tapes/DVDs out explaining things. None is perfect, but many make many good points. Those of you who said "none" do you really expect us to believe that you have read/seen EVERYTHING?
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:24:58 UTC
None.
Nomad
2008-02-10 11:23:26 UTC
none, nothing about it is scientific.
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:32:40 UTC
Yes, DNA.
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:23:07 UTC
There is none.
anonymous
2008-02-10 11:22:54 UTC
none.


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