Evolution is a lie

[Jazer]

Historically speaking, Christians & Jews have contributed to science, medicine, inventions, technology, & discovery since the dawn of time: we don't realize how indebted we really are to them.

We are indebted to the first farmers because it was through farming that we are able to feed people and the population can increase. Yet as often as I try I can not get them to do a study on who the first farmers were. They do not want to accept the Bible as History even though Science continues to verify that the Bible as History is very accurate and true.

So do not let them trick you. Many atheists are quick to become a traitor to science when it does not serve their cause.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

A - G

(answers in genesis)

T - C

(total confidence)

 

[JoeyArnold]

We are indebted to the first farmers because it was through farming that we are able to feed people and the population can increase. Yet as often as I try I can not get them to do a study on who the first farmers were. They do not want to accept the Bible as History even though Science continues to verify that the Bible as History is very accurate and true.

Farther, historically, there have been so many Christian scientists, inventors, explorers, doctors, helpers, mathematicians, farmers, soldiers, fathers, mothers, friends, missionaries, carpenters.

 

[Grizzly]

Farther, historically, there have been so many Christian scientists, inventors, explorers, doctors, helpers, mathematicians, farmers, soldiers, fathers, mothers, friends, missionaries, carpenters.

But I am not sure how all these facts (which are indeed true) speaks to the idea that evolution is a lie? Or the idea that science has produced so many "good fruits" yet apparently some people believe that this fruit (evolution) is so wrong. And the only evidence of this wrongness is that it contradicts a belief that has no basis in science?

 

[JoeyArnold]

Evolution is like driving in a car.

 

[Greg1234]

Or the idea that science has produced so many "good fruits"

So a man who invents a bulldozer to try drinking a normal glass of milk is better than a man who simply puts the glass to his mouth?

 

[Belk]

They used Newton's law of gravity for a long time also. Then Einstein came along with a new law of gravity.

Right now the theory of evolution is based on mutations or imperfect replication. Something Darwin never even heard of. So even if no one has a problem with evolution. People do not agree on the mechanism and science can not agree with itself. They tip their hat and give lip service. But they all disagree on what it is and how it works.

No he didn't. Newtons law of gravity remains the same. Einsteins theory of GR simply theorized an explanation of the law. However, the formula remains the same.

And you might have missed this but the theory of evolution has been revised since Darwin first proposed it to account for new discoveries and understandings. Why people keep portraying our ability to learn new things as a weakness I will never understand.

 

[Belk]

Where evolving is claimed to extend beyond starting with the created kinds, it is a lie. Yes, evolving happened. It happened to created kinds and all within a YEC time frame. The usual connotation and meaning of 'evolution' goes way beyond this.

No proof exists for Granny Bacteria mother of all living.

That's nice. Feel free to offer evidence to support your position at some point.

 

[Grizzly]

So a man who invents a bulldozer to try drinking a normal glass of milk is better than a man who simply puts the glass to his mouth?

While I have no idea what you just said, I appreciate the fact that you can communicate with me instantly from anywhere in the world. Go Science!

See that keyboard you are typing on? It has the ability to send your thoughts around the world. Pretty cool, huh?

 

[Grizzly]

Evolution is like driving in a car.

Go on....

 

[Cabal]

No he didn't. Newtons law of gravity remains the same. Einsteins theory of GR simply theorized an explanation of the law. However, the formula remains the same.

Well, no, not quite. In that form masses are treated as point masses, not extended masses, so you can't account for certain observations like perihelion precession.

Also, Newtonian gravity doesn't hold when the gravitational potential and velocity of the objects involved begin to approach the speed of light.

That said....

And you might have missed this but the theory of evolution has been revised since Darwin first proposed it to account for new discoveries and understandings. Why people keep portraying our ability to learn new things as a weakness I will never understand.

...you are right on the money here.

Firstly, I've no idea why anti-intellectualist Christians insist on coming back to Darwin, I suspect it is a projection of the flaw in their belief system where authority is predicated on charisma and personality rather than facts.

Secondly, the insistence of these Christians that changing=bad, unchanging=good misses the point entirely. It doesn't matter if your claims are unchanging if they're wrong to begin with, and Christianity falls at the first hurdle with that one.

 

[Cabal]

Go on....

I was going to say...

Evolution is like driving a car in that it occurs all the time, is very well described by current scientific understanding and doesn't require a god?

As ever, if these guys actually grasped analogies in the first place then they wouldn't be creationists.

 

[Greg1234]

While I have no idea what you just said, I appreciate the fact that you can communicate with me instantly from anywhere in the world. Go Science!

See that keyboard you are typing on? It has the ability to send your thoughts around the world. Pretty cool, huh?

So you think it's better to be dependent on a computer for such activities or not dependent?

 

[Cabal]

So you think it's better to be dependent on a computer for such activities or not dependent?

Fine.

Then all of you put away your keyboards and stop preaching your antiscience nonsense via a medium developed entirely through the application of science.

Or, you could apply a bit more consistency.

 

[Grizzly]

So you think it's better to be dependent on a computer for such activities or not dependent?

I'm not sure what you are getting at. I can communicate using various means. But I am sure happy I have this ability to communicate across long distances when I am away from home.

But the overall point is that science has correctly discovered so many facts about the natural world - and people use these fruits in their every day lives - without a problem. But the same scientific method that discovered electromagnetism also discovered evolution. And it seems that the only reason to reject evolution is because you have an ancient manuscript that you believe tells you a different story.

 

[Greg1234]

Fine.

Then all of you put away your keyboards and stop preaching your antiscience nonsense via a medium developed entirely through the application of science.

Or, you could apply a bit more consistency.

Do you think communicating via a scraped rock medium is science?

 

[Greg1234]

I'm not sure what you are getting at. I can communicate using various means.

Yes, but weren't we talking about computers and long distance?

 

[Vanderhaust]

They used Newton's law of gravity for a long time also. Then Einstein came along with a new law of gravity.

Right now the theory of evolution is based on mutations or imperfect replication. Something Darwin never even heard of. So even if no one has a problem with evolution. People do not agree on the mechanism and science can not agree with itself. They tip their hat and give lip service. But they all disagree on what it is and how it works.

Who are the "they that disagree"? I'm sure you would mind backing that up with source.

Science advances when a new theory is presented. Scientist at first will always try to prove or disprove any new theories to see if its valid or not. Once its found to be valid it becomes an accepted theory which is what evolution is. If you looked at time travel you will find plenty of theories without an accepted one.

 

[Grizzly]

Yes, but weren't we talking about computers and long distance?

Sure....as an example of the good fruits of science. If my choice is not being able to communicate long distance versus being able to, I'll take my electronic communications anyday. Except Mondays. I could live without emails on Monday.

 

[AV1611VET]

Farther, we don't know the origins of the big bang either.

Actually we do!

The big bang comes at the end ...

2 Peter 3:10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

... not at the beginning, as evolutionists say.

But truth be told, evolutionists now describe the beginning of the universe as a 'big expansion,' not a 'big bang.'

But since scientists don't like to change some of their terminology -- (it makes them look bad) -- they still call it the 'Big Bang.'

That's why we still have 'flying squirrels,' instead of the more accurate 'gliding squirrels.'