• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

Facts to disprove theory of evolution

Status
Not open for further replies.

Reasonably Sane

With age comes wisdom, when it doesn't come alone.
Oct 27, 2023
1,102
494
69
Kentucky
✟39,610.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
Interesting. Eye witness testimony is the most unreliable form of evidence. I have a very low regard for my own observational accuracy, so you may imagine the regard in which I hold that of the rest of you. What counts is that referenced by BCP1928

In a murder trial the eye witnesses may lie, the forensic evidence is much less likely to.
Why believe anything at all? After all, we believe forensic evidence only because we are eye witnesses of it.

But my take on the skepticism of eye witness evidence is that it's really just a cop out when there is a multitude of eye witnesses. I will grant you that sometimes it's not the eye witness evidence that's dicey, but the witnesses interpretation of it. A simple example would be a person who said the sky was "literally on fire" when the sun set, when actually it was just a spectacularly beautiful sunset. And the "fact" is that it was a sunset spanning some specific shades of red and orange.
 
Upvote 0

AV1611VET

SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE
Site Supporter
Jun 18, 2006
3,855,701
52,520
Guam
✟5,132,146.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Personal experience works. Two healing miracles, four visions, one audible word from God, etc. But it's only good for the person who first hand experiences it. And much greater miracles have been claimed to be witnessed by many. e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. All Christians can do is offer the information. It is up to the person to accept the message. Back in 1981 I was an "intellectual agnostic". A "skeptic", if you will. For me the evidence was compelling on many levels. It only got stronger over the years. Now, you could no more convince me that Jesus didn't do what is claimed than you could convince me my wife doesn't exist. Personal experience is very powerful.

And in Christianity, our relationship with our creator is VERY personal. One on one.
I can totally accept that and respect it.


I myself had a very strange experience,
full daylight, real as a city bus.

I'm disinclined to say what it, was
but it wasnt " of this world".

The being, unsurprisingly, was distinctly Asian.
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Why believe anything at all? After all, we believe forensic evidence only because we are eye witnesses of it.

But my take on the skepticism of eye witness evidence is that it's really just a cop out when there is a multitude of eye witnesses. I will grant you that sometimes it's not the eye witness evidence that's dicey, but the witnesses interpretation of it. A simple example would be a person who said the sky was "literally on fire" when the sun set, when actually it was just a spectacularly beautiful sunset. And the "fact" is that it was a sunset spanning some specific shades of red and orange.
Multitude?Miracle of the Sun - Wikipedia

Or all the ones who swore before God they
" heated " Joseph smith's good books.

" why believe anything" is for you to study.
 
Upvote 0

Astrid

Well-Known Member
Feb 10, 2021
11,052
3,695
40
Hong Kong
✟188,686.00
Country
Hong Kong
Gender
Female
Faith
Skeptic
Marital Status
In Relationship
Why believe anything at all? After all, we believe forensic evidence only because we are eye witnesses of it.

But my take on the skepticism of eye witness evidence is that it's really just a cop out when there is a multitude of eye witnesses. I will grant you that sometimes it's not the eye witness evidence that's dicey, but the witnesses interpretation of it. A simple example would be a person who said the sky was "literally on fire" when the sun set, when actually it was just a spectacularly beautiful sunset. And the "fact" is that it was a sunset spanning some specific shades of red and orange.
" only because"? No. It's repeatable, it's.there for anyine a ytime. Available through more than eyes, verifiable.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,229
10,122
✟283,714.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
But my take on the skepticism of eye witness evidence is that it's really just a cop out when there is a multitude of eye witnesses.
Except those eye witnesses contradict each other as to what they saw, unless they are able to discuss it among themselves in which case a consensus develops, the character of which is determined largely by the eye witnesses with the most persuasive personalities. (Or when the witnessess are conspiring to conceal the truth.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Astrid
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
8,630
4,322
82
Goldsboro NC
✟260,809.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Why believe anything at all? After all, we believe forensic evidence only because we are eye witnesses of it.
Are you saying that forensic evidence is without value unless there are eye-witnesses to the event?
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,082
8,298
Frankston
Visit site
✟773,725.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
What sort of facts could disprove it?

Does anyone have any?
Not that any pro evolutionist will accept. Evolution is not based on facts, so how can facts prove or disprove it?

The Elephant in the Living Room

Writer George V. Caylor interviewed Sam, a molecular biologist. George asked Sam about his work. Sam said he and his team were scientific detectives, working with DNA and tracking down the cause of disease. Here is their published conversation.

G: “Sounds like pretty complicated work.”

S: “You can’t imagine how complicated!”

G: “Try me.”

S: “I’m a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britannica. Seventy volumes, thousands and thousands of pages of small print words.”

G: “With the computer power, you can just use ‘spell check’!”

S: “There is no ‘spell check’ because we don’t know yet how the words are supposed to be spelled. We don’t even know for sure which language. And it’s not just the ‘spelling error’ we’re looking for. If any of the punctuation is out of place, or a space out of place, or a grammatical error, we have a mutation that will cause a disease.”

G: “So how do you do it?”

S: “We are learning as we go. We have already ‘read’ over two articles in that encyclopedia, and located some typos. It should get easier as time goes by.”

G: “How did all that information happen to get there?”

S: “Do you mean, did it just happen? Did it evolve?”

G: “Bingo. Do you believe that the information evolved?”

S: “George, nobody I know in my profession truly believes it evolved. It was engineered by ‘genius beyond genius,’ and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book. Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise. A bit like Neil Armstrong believing the moon is made of green cheese. He’s been there!”

(Of course, we have an issue right there. Many refuse to accept that man has walked on the moon. So it's hardly surprising if many reject the idea that evolution is untrue. "Facts" become irrelevant to people who are unable or unwilling to face truth. - AP)


G: “Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?”

S: “No. It all just evolved.”

G: “What? You just told me —?”

S: “Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don’t believe in evolution. All government work, search grants, papers, big college lectures—everything would stop. I’d be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn’t earn a decent living.” [emphasis added]

G: “I hate to say it, Sam, but that sounds intellectually dishonest.”

S: “The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind’s worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the ‘elephant in the living room’.”

G: “What elephant?”

S: “Design. It’s like the elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn’t there!”
 
Upvote 0

Reasonably Sane

With age comes wisdom, when it doesn't come alone.
Oct 27, 2023
1,102
494
69
Kentucky
✟39,610.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I can totally accept that and respect it.


I myself had a very strange experience,
full daylight, real as a city bus.

I'm disinclined to say what it, was
but it wasnt " of this world".

The being, unsurprisingly, was distinctly Asian.
I believe God approaches each of us in a way to communicate what needs to be communicated. I'm guessing that Asian is what you needed. I see our bodies as nothing more than biological machines that we occupy. And our interpretation of the world around us, observations, wants, needs, etc. are very much influenced by the brain of the body we occupy. But we are the mind that uses that brain. I think of it like a computer. The brain is the hardware and the soul is the software.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
8,630
4,322
82
Goldsboro NC
✟260,809.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Not that any pro evolutionist will accept. Evolution is not based on facts, so how can facts prove or disprove it?

The Elephant in the Living Room

Writer George V. Caylor interviewed Sam, a molecular biologist. George asked Sam about his work. Sam said he and his team were scientific detectives, working with DNA and tracking down the cause of disease. Here is their published conversation.

G: “Sounds like pretty complicated work.”

S: “You can’t imagine how complicated!”

G: “Try me.”

S: “I’m a bit like an editor, trying to find a spelling mistake inside a document larger than four complete sets of Encyclopedia Britannica. Seventy volumes, thousands and thousands of pages of small print words.”

G: “With the computer power, you can just use ‘spell check’!”

S: “There is no ‘spell check’ because we don’t know yet how the words are supposed to be spelled. We don’t even know for sure which language. And it’s not just the ‘spelling error’ we’re looking for. If any of the punctuation is out of place, or a space out of place, or a grammatical error, we have a mutation that will cause a disease.”

G: “So how do you do it?”

S: “We are learning as we go. We have already ‘read’ over two articles in that encyclopedia, and located some typos. It should get easier as time goes by.”

G: “How did all that information happen to get there?”

S: “Do you mean, did it just happen? Did it evolve?”

G: “Bingo. Do you believe that the information evolved?”

S: “George, nobody I know in my profession truly believes it evolved. It was engineered by ‘genius beyond genius,’ and such information could not have been written any other way. The paper and ink did not write the book. Knowing what we know, it is ridiculous to think otherwise. A bit like Neil Armstrong believing the moon is made of green cheese. He’s been there!”

(Of course, we have an issue right there. Many refuse to accept that man has walked on the moon. So it's hardly surprising if many reject the idea that evolution is untrue. "Facts" become irrelevant to people who are unable or unwilling to face truth. - AP)


G: “Have you ever stated that in a public lecture, or in any public writings?”

S: “No. It all just evolved.”

G: “What? You just told me —?”

S: “Just stop right there. To be a molecular biologist requires one to hold on to two insanities at all times. One, it would be insane to believe in evolution when you can see the truth for yourself. Two, it would be insane to say you don’t believe in evolution. All government work, search grants, papers, big college lectures—everything would stop. I’d be out of a job, or relegated to the outer fringes where I couldn’t earn a decent living.” [emphasis added]

G: “I hate to say it, Sam, but that sounds intellectually dishonest.”

S: “The work I do in genetic research is honorable. We will find the cures to many of mankind’s worst diseases. But in the meantime, we have to live with the ‘elephant in the living room’.”

G: “What elephant?”

S: “Design. It’s like the elephant in the living room. It moves around, takes up an enormous amount of space, loudly trumpets, bumps into us, knocks things over, eats a ton of hay, and smells like an elephant. And yet we have to swear it isn’t there!”
Not even people looking hard for it have found it yet.
 
Upvote 0

Aussie Pete

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Aug 14, 2019
9,082
8,298
Frankston
Visit site
✟773,725.00
Country
Australia
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Divorced
I'm just wondering how it's possible for aquatic lifeforms to  evolve into oxygen breathing animals?
Or cold blooded reptiles into warm blooded mammals. Evolutionists have an an answer of course, except it is so far fetched that it is laughable. It depends on billions of years of time. That in itself is unproveable. It is also impossible. There are still relatively soft edges to land masses that are crumbling due to wave action and weather events, storms and the like. There should be nothing left to erode by now.
 
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,908
4,203
provincial
✟952,098.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
You’ve had that explained to you. If you’re not going to address the OP why are you here?
@Estrid explained that a mudskipper fish beached itself and eventually made bonobos.
 
Upvote 0

Ophiolite

Recalcitrant Procrastinating Ape
Nov 12, 2008
9,229
10,122
✟283,714.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Private
@Estrid explained that a mudskipper fish beached itself and eventually made bonobos.
In a simplistic and general way that could almost appear correct. However, the inserted errors (apparently placed deliberately) add up to the cynical creation of a strawman. It would be so much better if you played nice and presented your arguments in good faith.
 
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,908
4,203
provincial
✟952,098.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
In a simplistic and general way that could almost appear correct. However, the inserted errors (apparently placed deliberately) add up to the cynical creation of a strawman. It would be so much better if you played nice and presented your arguments in good faith.
While not particularly accurate, my statement is true on technicality.
 
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Personal experience works. Two healing miracles, four visions, one audible word from God, etc. But it's only good for the person who first hand experiences it. And much greater miracles have been claimed to be witnessed by many. e.g. the resurrection of Jesus. All Christians can do is offer the information. It is up to the person to accept the message. Back in 1981 I was an "intellectual agnostic". A "skeptic", if you will. For me the evidence was compelling on many levels. It only got stronger over the years. Now, you could no more convince me that Jesus didn't do what is claimed than you could convince me my wife doesn't exist. Personal experience is very powerful.
Honest question here.

When you (as a self proclaimed skeptic) hear an audible word from "God", what steps did you take to discount other possibilities. e.g. Radio or TV was on, someone nearby was speaking, you heard a noise and interpreted it as a word, you imagined hearing a word, aliens with advanced technology sent a word into your brain, a ghost spoke to you, a demon spoke to you, the devil spoke to you, one of the greek gods spoke to you, one of the Indian gods spoke to you, one of the Maori gods spoke to you, the Muslim god spoke to you, a god that humans haven't named spoke to you, etc, etc...
 
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,908
4,203
provincial
✟952,098.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
Ok, I'll play for a while. In what way do you think the statement is flawed.
It seems inaccurate because of how divergent speciation is, I guess.

My question in this thread to Estrid has been: Where did the bonobos come from? Where did those ancestors come from? Where did those ancestors come from, etc. until we reach the point where we get to an animal that is the primordial ancestor of all mammals.

But apparently I'm in the wrong for saying this, even though all I'm doing is tracing evolution back to its logical conclusion.
 
Upvote 0

BCP1928

Well-Known Member
Jan 30, 2024
8,630
4,322
82
Goldsboro NC
✟260,809.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
It seems inaccurate because of how divergent speciation is, I guess.

My question in this thread to Estrid has been: Where did the bonobos come from? Where did those ancestors come from? Where did those ancestors come from, etc. until we reach the point where we get to an animal that is the primordial ancestor of all mammals.

But apparently I'm in the wrong for saying this, even though all I'm doing is tracing evolution back to its logical conclusion.
You are not wrong, but the information is quite sizeable and tedious to explain in a thread devoted to another topic. It is also readily available in a variety of formats suitable to various education levels.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

stevil

Godless and without morals
Feb 5, 2011
8,548
6,729
✟293,653.00
Country
New Zealand
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
It seems inaccurate because of how divergent speciation is, I guess.

My question in this thread to Estrid has been: Where did the bonobos come from? Where did those ancestors come from? Where did those ancestors come from, etc. until we reach the point where we get to an animal that is the primordial ancestor of all mammals.

But apparently I'm in the wrong for saying this, even though all I'm doing is tracing evolution back to its logical conclusion.
It's likely all life on earth is related.
It is likely we humans and mushrooms have a common ancestor.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Astrophile
Upvote 0

friend of

A private in Gods army
Site Supporter
Dec 28, 2016
5,908
4,203
provincial
✟952,098.00
Country
Canada
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Private
It's likely all life on earth is related.
It is likely we humans and mushrooms have a common ancestor.
Then i am not wrong to state that evolutionists believe we all came from pond scum, or a mudskipper fish, or something.

Thanks for some of you in this thread having the honesty to accept what you believe in.
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.