Evolution...

"I didn't realize you were a world-reknowned authority on all practice of medicine during human history.
"

*sigh* you don't read much do you..hint..I do.


"Modern science is much better at testing and evaluating hypotheses. "

I agree, but this doesn't discount science has been wrong in the past...would you like me to find current instances where science has been wrong? I'm sure it will be quite easy.....


". What you describe sounds very little like science, and very much like people trying to explain science to laymen, and doing it badly. "

nope, sorry. I would say this is exactly how EVOLTIONARY THEORY works, not science. It has become more dogmatic then most religions I have studied. The paradyme shift is gonna be crazy when it finally comes. Evolutionists will be on the rampage when it turns to the theory of adaption.

"Most explanations I've seen of evolution are *horrible*. "

I agree, that's why I studied it specifically before I dropped my bio major.

Consider: Einstein's laws replaced Newton's, but we still teach Newton's laws, because they still work.

". What you describe sounds very little like science, and very much like people trying to explain science to laymen, and doing it badly. "

nope, sorry. I would say this is exactly how EVOLTIONARY THEORY works, not science. It has become more dogmatic then most religions I have studied. The paradyme shift is gonna be crazy when it finally comes. Evolutionists will be on the rampage when it turns to the theory of adaption.

"Most explanations I've seen of evolution are *horrible*. "

I agree, that's why I studied it specifically before I dropped my bio major.

When was this? Nothing you've described sounds at all like evolutionary theory as I've learned it. It's a fairly non-dogmatic field; there are substantial debates over parts of the theory.

The stuff that's not, realistically, subject to debate is the basics: We know that one species, split into two populations, can quite easily turn into two species, given even a few hundred years. We know that natural selection is active in guiding the changes of species over time. None of that can be doubted without throwing out the entire scientific method, or finidng some *very* interesting new results - which no one has yet done, and it's not for lack of trying.

If you want to argue issues like common descent, it gets more interesting; we can show common descent of some things, but it's very hard to get detailed information from, say, a billion years ago.

Still, the basic model seems pretty solid. Anyway, if it's wrong, what's your replacement? How do you explain the fossil record, the studies we can do to trace DNA back from one generation to another, and all the other cool stuff that's current in the field?

I can see doubting that evolution, completely without divine intervention, is the only way that anything ever came to be. There's certainly lots of room for debate on that. However, I can't see how anyone who has studied the available data could seriously doubt the basic model: Life forms change over time, and, over enough form, change into things that we would call different "species".

"Consider: Einstein's laws replaced Newton's, but we still teach Newton's laws, because they still work. "

So? Some science is still wrong, that's the blunt of it.

"We know that one species, split into two populations, can quite easily turn into two species, given even a few hundred years. "

Thats the point. We DON'T know that, we assume that. That's why its theory and that's why it still has some asteriod sized holes in it.


"or finidng some *very* interesting new results - which no one has yet done, and it's not for lack of trying. "

Its wrong, but lets keep it because its the only thing we have? That's not science at all..come on now...


"Anyway, if it's wrong, what's your replacement? How do you explain the fossil record, the studies we can do to trace DNA back from one generation to another, and all the other cool stuff that's current in the field? "

And this is the evolutionists caught in a corner response..okay, well what's YOUR theory then.?!?!?! Please don't point fingers. If a theory is wrong, then its just wrong, you don't have to have a replacement, that is a another discussion enterirely.


"Life forms change over time, and, over enough form, change into things that we would call different "species".
"

Well according to a recent poll..44% of americans don't believe in evolution (and I would venture to say that college educated people are in there too).

quote
"Life forms change over time, and, over enough form, change into things that we would call different "species".
------------------------------------------------

To my limited knowledge, there is no concrete proof on this yet. Have they found a life form that has shown favourable mutations?

It's been awhile since I've researched evolution. It seems to take more faith for evolution than for creation.

quote
"Anyway, if it's wrong, what's your replacement? How do you explain the fossil record, the studies we can do to trace DNA back from one generation to another, and all the other cool stuff that's current in the field? "
-----------------------------------------------------
Are they still using carbon dating? Have scientists thrown the great flood into their reasoning to see where it gets them? As far as the layers of fossil records in the rock there is a few good explainations out there which support creation. I don't recal at this moment. If you research you will find them.

Carbon dating will get you a date back to about 50,000 years ago; you'll need Potassium-Argon dating to go back further.

About the flood however, the fossil record and stratographical layout are totally non-compatible with a total global flood.

Isn't it funny how the missing link is still missing?

Oh, did I say "the" missing link? I meant the millions of missing links necessary to prove evolution is even remotely true.

__________________
Eric

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear..."

1John 4:18
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.
2 Tim 1:7

Considering that next to no actual scientific evidence suggests Biblical creation to be true... evolution is the best hypothesis we've got right now.

I challenge you to present one piece of evidence to support Biblical creation that can stand up to scientific reasoning.

See, the deal here is that there are two opinions. Let us assume that one is right and one is wrong.

Now, for one there should be so much proof it would be unreal. I mean billions of years of evolution should leave massive amounts of transitional fossils. These fossils should, by all rights, out number "modern" fossils. However, this isn't exactly true is it? Well, over 90% of all fossils found are "modern" fossils, meaning they directly correspond to a current or recently living species. The ones that aren't proven to be modern already are, at best, shaky in geoogical proof. Some have been disproven through the years (Nebraska Man is just one example) which puts into serious question the reasoning capabilities of evolutionary scientists. Maybe they go more on faith??

Why does the evolutionary theory not have tons of proof? Massive amounts of transitional fossils just aren't there. In fact, NO concrete, proven transitional fossils are in existence. Why should I believe something that should have so much proof, yet has NONE??

__________________
Eric

"There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear..."

1John 4:18
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind.
2 Tim 1:7

tericl2, so your basic opinion is

"I don´t think there is enough evidence for evolution, and I don´t believe that the existing evidence is valid, so creationism must be correct."

The question is still here: where is a single piece of evidence FOR creation?

__________________
Hier sitz´ich, forme Menschen
Nach meinem Bilde,
Ein Geschlecht, das mir gleich sei,
Zu leiden, zu weinen,
Zu genießen und zu freuen sich
Und dein nicht zu achten,
Wie ich!

(Johann Wolfgang von Goethe: Prometheus)

Easy. Naturalism.

Just look at the computer you are typing on, the house you live in and the car you drive to work.