Creationists: What are the reasons general acceptance of deep time and evolution

[Gene2memE]

This is a question for creationists, primarily young earth creationists.

What, in your opinion, is the reason that the scientific community - and the public more generally - accepts evolution as the prevailing model for biology and also deep time as the prevailing concepts for geology and cosmology?

Note that I'm not asking you to explain why you are a creationist or what you believe, or to defend your position.

What I'm interested in is what reasons you think that evolutionary biology is the generally accepted explanation for the diversity of life and that there is scientific concordance about the ages of the earth and the universe.

It is a scientific conspiracy? The influence of satan or other supernatural forces? Is it man deliberately misleading himself?

What is your explanation?

 

[juvenissun]

This is a question for creationists, primarily young earth creationists.

What, in your opinion, is the reason that the scientific community - and the public more generally - accepts evolution as the prevailing model for biology and also deep time as the prevailing concepts for geology and cosmology?

Note that I'm not asking you to explain why you are a creationist or what you believe, or to defend your position.

What I'm interested in is what reasons you think that evolutionary biology is the generally accepted explanation for the diversity of life and that there is scientific concordance about the ages of the earth and the universe.

It is a scientific conspiracy? The influence of satan or other supernatural forces? Is it man deliberately misleading himself?

What is your explanation?

Lies have different levels. Some obvious, some are deep. The best lie is one with 99% truth and but only 1% or less false on the key point. The best example is the one satan gave to Adam.

Evolution is such a system. One needs to be a good Christian scientist to see its problem. General public do not know how to argue by seeing the displayed facts. They can not tell facts from interpretations either. And most scientists are not Christian.

You believe in evolution. Because you can not see its problem.

 

[Strathos]

Lies have different levels. Some obvious, some are deep. The best lie is one with 99% truth and but only 1% or less false on the key point. The best example is the one satan gave to Adam.

Evolution is such a system. One needs to be a good Christian scientist to see its problem. General public do not know how to argue by seeing the displayed facts. They can not tell facts from interpretations either. And most scientists are not Christian.

You believe in evolution. Because you can not see its problem.

What is this problem?

 

[juvenissun]

What is this problem?

In short: Evolution is not a continuous change. That is fatal to this idea.

 

[TLK Valentine]

In short: Evolution is not a continuous change. That is fatal to this idea.

How so?

 

[juvenissun]

How so?

I thought you are an evolutionist. Aren't you?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I thought you are an evolutionist. Aren't you?

I thought you had an answer. Do you?

 

[juvenissun]

I thought you had an answer. Do you?

No. I have no answer, but many many questions.
YOU, are the one who has a lot of answers.

 

[TLK Valentine]

No. I have no answer, but many many questions.
YOU, are the one who has a lot of answers.

So if you have no answers, then when you said this:

In short: Evolution is not a continuous change. That is fatal to this idea.

You were just making things up?

 

[juvenissun]

So if you have no answers, then when you said this:



You were just making things up?

Was I wrong?

 

[bhsmte]

Lies have different levels. Some obvious, some are deep. The best lie is one with 99% truth and but only 1% or less false on the key point. The best example is the one satan gave to Adam.

Evolution is such a system. One needs to be a good Christian scientist to see its problem. General public do not know how to argue by seeing the displayed facts. They can not tell facts from interpretations either. And most scientists are not Christian.

You believe in evolution. Because you can not see its problem.

What about this Christian scientist's opinion on evolution?

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming. And it is becoming more and more robust down to the details almost by the day, especially because we have this ability now to use the study of DNA as a digital record of the way Darwin’s theory has played out over the course of long periods of time.
Darwin could hardly have imagined that there would turn out to be such strong proof of his theory because he didn’t know about DNA - but we have that information. I would say we are as solid in claiming the truth of evolution as we are in claiming the truth of the germ theory. It is so profoundly well-documented in multiple different perspectives, all of which give you a consistent view with enormous explanatory power that make it the central core of biology. Trying to do biology without evolution would be like trying to do physics without mathematics

 

[MikeCarra]

Can I say I LOVE this exchange?

In short: Evolution is not a continuous change. That is fatal to this idea.

I thought you had an answer. Do you?

No. I have no answer, but many many questions.
YOU, are the one who has a lot of answers.

I love it when someone makes a POSITIVE CLAIM as Juvenissun did here ("That is fatal to this idea") and when asked to explain why that is the case...he can't?

Love it!

For the audience watching at home: This is NOT how a scientist responds.

 

[MikeCarra]

Was I wrong?

I'm gonna say "yes". And you know why?

Because you, Juvie, can't even defend YOUR OWN STATEMENT.

That's all I need to know. Even if you are somehow "right" you don't even know enough about the topic to defend your own positive claim!

 

[lesliedellow]

Evolution is such a system. One needs to be a good Christian scientist to see its problem. General public do not know how to argue by seeing the displayed facts. They can not tell facts from interpretations either. And most scientists are not Christian.

You believe in evolution. Because you can not see its problem.

Does being an FRS, like Simon Conway Morris, make you a good Christian scientist, or would some high school drop out better qualify for that appellation, provided he was also a creationist?

 

[juvenissun]

Does being an FRS, like Simon Conway Morris, make you a good Christian scientist, or would some high school drop out better qualify for that appellation, provided he was also a creationist?

An uneducated farmer may stick to one simple, but excellent idea in against evolution even he does not understand the details and can not provide argument. However, in order to give critical argument, one needs to have a similar background of education as those who insist evolution. For example, my science background is high. So I can easily pick up key questions in the idea of evolution which evolutionists can not answer.

 

[juvenissun]

I'm gonna say "yes". And you know why?

Because you, Juvie, can't even defend YOUR OWN STATEMENT.

That's all I need to know. Even if you are somehow "right" you don't even know enough about the topic to defend your own positive claim!

I know MORE than you do. So I can see very clearly on all your tricks.

You can't make me to waste my time.

Explain why was I wrong. I will certainly beat you on your shallow argument.

 

[juvenissun]

Can I say I LOVE this exchange?







I love it when someone makes a POSITIVE CLAIM as Juvenissun did here ("That is fatal to this idea") and when asked to explain why that is the case...he can't?

Love it!

For the audience watching at home: This is NOT how a scientist responds.

This is how a smart scientist responded to an ignorant.

 

[juvenissun]

What about this Christian scientist's opinion on evolution?

Francis Collins: The evidence is overwhelming. And it is becoming more and more robust down to the details almost by the day, especially because we have this ability now to use the study of DNA as a digital record of the way Darwin’s theory has played out over the course of long periods of time.

Going back to the point of the OP. Yes, the evidences are "abundant", but hardly overwhelming. That is why evolution can intimidate Christians who do not understand science. The sheer number of so-called "evidence" is where the power of deception is.

However, for those who know. ANY (challenge you here, any one!) of those "evidence" will not pass a detail scrutiny. Not a single one of them, including all the DNA arguments, can prove evolution.

The biggest joke is: Evolutionists can not even give a consistent definition to what evolution is. It is a disastrous starting point. (Do you understand why is it so?)

 

[lesliedellow]

Going back to the point of the OP. Yes, the evidences are "abundant", but hardly overwhelming. That is why evolution can intimidate Christians who do not understand science. The sheer number of so-called "evidence" is where the power of deception is.

Ah yes, there is another great mystery, isn't there? Why are all those eminent Christian scientists, like Morris or Francisco Ayala, in on the great atheist conspiracy to do down Christianity?

 

[TLK Valentine]

I know MORE than you do. So I can see very clearly on all your tricks.

And yet, you yourself have only one trick -- and we all see thorough it every time you trot it out.

You can't make me to waste my time.

Explain why was I wrong. I will certainly beat you on your shallow argument.

You were wrong because you confessed to falsely saying things you knew you couldn't back up:

I thought you had an answer. Do you?

No. I have no answer, but many many questions.