Evolution vs. Creationism

[Mistermystery]

Hovind himself admitted in a radio debate that he proof which he is asking for even in the opinion of evolutionists would not prove evolution (because what he is asking for is not observed evolution but saltationism).

jwu

Not only that, but he's also again asking proof for things like the big bang, and what not. Not to mention that the " independant judges" are really questionable independant judges.

 

[Herman Hedning]

Evolution is wrong either way

I see that little emoticon of yours is going "La, la, la, I can't he-e-e-ar you!"

 

[Novaknight1]

C.

http://www.geocities.com/lamb_of_god_2005/no_evolution.html

Additionally, Polonium halos were discovered.

Also, the LAWS defy Evolution. When do laws come randomly?

 

[Tomk80]

C.

http://www.geocities.com/lamb_of_god_2005/no_evolution.html

Additionally, Polonium halos were discovered.

Also, the LAWS defy Evolution. When do laws come randomly?

What laws defy evolution. Pray tell.

 

[Physics_guy]

What laws defy evolution. Pray tell.

Desperately waiting to hear yet another invocation of creationist misunderstandings of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and/or the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.

No matter how many times creationists are shown that they are trying to use things that they do not understand (nor have even bothered to try to understand), they will continue to spout foolishness, thus erasing any doubt of their ignorance.

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Hi,
C I am a creationist. Just not a YEC or a creation science advocate.
E I believe God made use of evolution to create the biodiversity that currently exists.

But hasnt there been ideas or theories within Evolution that have been found false or have been dropped by evolutionists over time?
(peppered moth, fruit fly)

You misunderstand what was shown by the peppered moth.
Dig around talk.origins. There were a couple of interesting experiements. But ultimately you need more generations than can be reasonably done to expect speciation.

I did a quick search for the stuff that I mentioned above and this site talks about both.
http://www.pathlights.com/ce_encyclopedia/

And yes im sure there have been ideas by creationists that have been disproved was just trying to bring up that some things about evolution have been disproved.

If you know of any others please let me know

• FACT:Over time some species have died off and some species have appeared.

• FACT: The vast majority of species can be naturally organized in a tree of life by looking at how they are put together, i.e. their morphology.

• FACT: Molecular genetics has come up with a number of tests of descent which produce results that very closely match the morphological tree.(and which are not suceptible to the "reuse a good design" argument)

Evolution is a fact.
There are also evolutionary theories. The theories are often debated and flawed. But that doesn't change the fact of evolution.

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/gould_fact-and-theory.html
[font=Arial, Helvetica, Ms sans serif]In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.


[/font]

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

So my first proof for creation is this. Ill start simple. Evilutionist acknowledge that fossil record is one of fully-formed abrupt appearances and no change of time.

No, Gould's original strong position is, at this point, no longer correct.
e.g. http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/creation/fossil_series.html
There are certainly examples in which species appear in geologically instantaneous periods of time. (which of course is a great deal different from no change in time)

The simplest form of life is tremendously complex. like the simple bacteria cell which has 100 proteins, DNA, RNA, and contains one hundred BILLION atoms. All of those together, and none work without the other, For instance in a cell, the information to construct the apparatus to synthesis proteins is stored in the DNA, but the extraction of this information requires the apparatus to be in place already. Ill start there you next

And we know that this is the simplest form because?
And this has what to do with evolution?

 

[Robert the Pilegrim]

Desperately waiting to hear yet another invocation of creationist misunderstandings of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics and/or the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.

No matter how many times creationists are shown that they are trying to use things that they do not understand (nor have even bothered to try to understand), they will continue to spout foolishness, thus erasing any doubt of their ignorance.

Go to the web site that was cited in the post you got the quote from and your wish will be fulfilled. Really bad.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

The sun moves away from the earth at the rate of 5 miles per hour. If we were to go back just 1 million years, the sun would be so hot that the earth, and all it's inhabitants would be dead, and we wouldn't be here.

When Satan sinned...
Isaiah 14:12-14, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."

...all creation was damaged beyond repair and the heavens and the earth started dying.

When Adam and Eve believed Satan's Great Lie...

Genesis 3:4-5, "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

and they sinned...

Genesis 3:6, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."

...and all mankind was damaged beyond repair and everyone started dying.


​

 

[Arikay]

1) What does this have to do with his false information?

2) You do realize Lucifer is a man, right? Or did you even bother to read Isaiah 14?


Nova: Have you bothered to study polonium halos? Did you know that the discover admited in court that he ignored possible natural causes of these Halos during his investigations?

When Satan sinned...
Isaiah 14:12-14, "How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High."

...all creation was damaged beyond repair and the heavens and the earth started dying.

When Adam and Eve believed Satan's Great Lie...

Genesis 3:4-5, "And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil."

and they sinned...

Genesis 3:6, "And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."

...and all mankind was damaged beyond repair and everyone started dying.


​

 

[Pilgrim 33]

deleted

 

[Greo]

the germ isnt a theoery its what it is. you didnt excactly disprove what i wrote besides what i said about theories which no matter how you say it its not fact. its an assuption with a lot of science in it. So you add scientific proof throw in asumptions from your hypothesis and boom you get a theory. You just made the hypothesis seem more real. please give me a specific theory that proves evilution. just one, so i can disprove it.

C

Nothing can be really proven. There can only be evidence for what is. And evidence is based on what can be measured, experienced or theorized. Science it's self is limited to what can be measured and experienced. This being the case then one has to have faith that everything experienced by ones self is actually reality. This is the same with faith in God and creation, God and evolution or evolution without God. It all comes down to what you choose to believe in, based on ones own reasoning of what is truer or what is easier to believe in or what fits or works for them. Now everything having the basis of faith through ones own reasoning, if one chooses to believe in a creationist point of view then one will interpret the Genesis account of creation to be literal, according ones faith that God made the earth in that way. Therefore whether you are a Christian who believes in evolution or a Christian who believes in Creation, the debate is not really about creation Vs evolution but instead is about whether you interpret the creation account in Genesis to be literal or symbolic. And what is deeper than that would be whether you have an Exegesis or Eigesis view of the Bible. If you are a Christian you have to ask yourself which one will I believe? And depending on what you believe, your view of the Bible and interpretation of Genesis will dictate whether you will believe in evolution or creation.

 

[Physics_guy]

Go to the web site that was cited in the post you got the quote from and your wish will be fulfilled. Really bad.

Wow - a whole lot of stupid statements in that website. I feel quite a bit dumber now for wasting ten minutes.

BTW - it was good to see Sarfati's lie about the Supernova Remnants still going strong.

The saddest thing is some people believe truly ignorant people like the one who made that website. The person obviously didn't bother to understand any of the topics he discussed (and they are vast from General Relativity and Big Bang physics to biochemistry to thermodynamics). Good to see though that we can point to a single website to get 40 PRATTs at once!

 

[Physics_guy]

William Jay Schroeder,

Are you purposefully writing evolution as "evilution" again and again, or is it just a typo? I would really like to know - it would help me figure out whether you are earnest or just a parody.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

C

Nothing can be really proven. There can only be evidence for what is. And evidence is based on what can be measured, experienced or theorized. Science it's self is limited to what can be measured and experienced. This being the case then one has to have faith that everything experienced by ones self is actually reality. This is the same with faith in God and creation, God and evolution or evolution without God. It all comes down to what you choose to believe in, based on ones own reasoning of what is truer or what is easier to believe in or what fits or works for them. Now everything having the basis of faith through ones own reasoning, if one chooses to believe in a creationist point of view then one will interpret the Genesis account of creation to be literal, according ones faith that God made the earth in that way. Therefore whether you are a Christian who believes in evolution or a Christian who believes in Creation, the debate is not really about creation Vs evolution but instead is about whether you interpret the creation account in Genesis to be literal or symbolic. And what is deeper than that would be whether you have an Exegesis or Eigesis view of the Bible. If you are a Christian you have to ask yourself which one will I believe? And depending on what you believe, your view of the Bible and interpretation of Genesis will dictate whether you will believe in evolution or creation.

(obtw-it's eisegesis)

"What does God need with a starship?-Jas Kirk

I think I'll have to go with the Vulcans in believing that possibilities always exist on this one. I go with The Gap theory and place the giant dinosaur bones in that time frame and submit it is entirely possible they were the result of early attempts at creating by Satan and other fallen angels many of which spawned other giant creatures known as the Nephilim spoken of many times throughout the Bible and that those angels that spawned them were cast into the Bottomless Pit and Satan will one day be given the Key to release them and they will once again spawn the Nephilim who will take over the world to the point that mankind will assemble its forces worldwide to battle them and it will take the intervention of The Lord Jesus and His angelic army to defeat the Nephilim and their demonic horde.

All those giant rock statues, stones, pyramids, stonehenge, several apparently for celestial observation and very reminiscent of the purpose behind the tower of babel--all those big rocks in england, polynesia, south america, eqypt and elsewhere--it is curious how they all appeared all over the earth within about the same timeframe, basically, in an era of bear skins and stone knives.

Also, please see Joel 2:1-10.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

Are you purposefully writing evolution as "evilution"

 

[Arikay]

Not quite, the stones of stonehenge are thought to have been placed between 4500 and 4000 years ago. Right on the heels and into the british bronze age. The pyramids of egypts are thought to have been build in the middle of the middle east bronze age.

"within the same time frame" is a bit missleading since we are talking about hundreds of years difference. Using that thinking, the sistine chapel and Shrek are "within the same time frame."

All those giant rock statues, stones, pyramids, stonehenge, several apparently for celestial observation and very reminiscent of the purpose behind the tower of babel--all those big rocks in england, polynesia, south america, eqypt and elsewhere--it is curious how they all appeared all over the earth within about the same timeframe, basically, in an era of bear skins and stone knives.

Also, please see Joel 2:1-10.

 

[Greo]

"What does God need with a starship?-Jas Kirk

It is interesting that the question is not answered but that it has something to do with His being "imprisoned in this place" for so long.

God seems to be presented in the way presented by that episode some times. But maybe it is because we are limited to a human perspective and so require faith in what is unseen and unexplained instead of trying to find the answers ourselves, trying to depend on our limited capacity to comprehend the unknown.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

"within the same time frame" is a bit missleading since we are talking about hundreds of years difference.

at the tail end of an age when mankind lived seven, eight and nine hundred years that little bit ain't gonna have much bearing.

 

[Pilgrim 33]

It is interesting that the question is not answered but that it has something to do with His being "imprisoned in this place" for so long.

God seems to be presented in the way presented by that episode some times. But maybe it is because we are limited to a human perspective and so require faith in what is unseen and unexplained instead of trying to find the answers ourselves, trying to depend on our limited capacity to comprehend the unknown.

It is the odd man out of all the Star Trek movies.