Final stumpers for Creationists

[Franc28]

Frequently Asked But Never Answered Questions... Evaded by Creationists


1. Is there any evidence for your hypothesis ?
(Creationists usually have evidence against Neo-Darwinism, but disproving Neo-Darwinism does not prove Creationism)

1b. Is there any observation which supports any feature of your theory? Has Creationism ever made a true prediction ?

2. Where is the physical evidence that evolutionary mechanisms cannot cross the barrier of "biblical kinds" ?
(Creationists routinely claim that "macroevolution" - a made-up term - cannot exist in evolution, while "microevolution" - another made-up term - can exist)

2b. Where is your evidence of God ?
(Creationists also routinely claim the existence of a supernatural Creator as scientific fact, but without evidence)

3. Explain why we have plentiful evidence of transitional forms in the fossil record.
(The mere existence of one transitional form, let alone the dozens that we have, disproves Creationism)

4. Explain why we observe a nested hierarchy of species which is true both at the phenotypical and molecular level.

5. Explain phenotypical and molecular vestigial structures.

6. Explain suboptimal anatomical functions.

7. Explain protein and DNA redundancy.

 

[TheBear]

Franc28,

What is the source of your questions? I'll get into details later.



John

 

[Franc28]

The source is myself. I have compiled and asked you the questions myself. Now please answer them.

 

[maninastrangeland]

since when do you need a source for a question?

 

[TheBear]

First of all, welcome to Christian Forums. Secondly, I have reviewed all of your posts, and by the 'tone' of your posts, it seems that you come here with a chip on your shoulder, and an axe to grind against Christians. You have opted to not have private messages sent to you, so I will have to state this publically. If you have legitimate questions, that's fine. But, you might want to tone it down a little, in order to enter into meaningfull dialog. There are many non-Christian and atheist members here, who are capabable of discussing the same points you raise, without lowering themselves to the level of being obnoxious and condescending. Read the forum rules. Consider this a warning.


John
Christian Forums Administrator

 

[Josephus]

Franc28. Do you even know what a phenotypical and molecular vestigial structure is? - without looking at your notes now.

I suppose this is as much common knowledge to you as your "biblical" challenge in the Round Table was then. Do you even bother to read and think for yourself? If so, prove it.

Come up with something unique.

 

[Josephus]

To further prove my case: Franc28, why don't YOU explain protein and DNA redundancy in your own terms, and then I'll come back to you on that one.

 

[elephanticity]

I think i've seen this list before, on a link off of the talkorigins site.

While i believe in Evolution, i believe even more in honesty.

The terms micro and macro evolution ARE legitimate scientific terms. They just don't mean what creationists seem to think they mean.

AIG has gone as far as to accept that there are 'candidate' transitional fossils, but you still have to pony up irrefutable evidence that they are.

While evolution seems the best explanation for the facts accumulated, and creationism is moving backward from doctrine to fact, just bashing for the sake of bashing isn't helping anyone.

Maybe you should pick ONE of those topics for a thread....just for efficiency.

 

[TheBear]

Attacking something, shotgun style, hardly accomplishes anything but confusion. It leaves too many avenues of response to make any sense. Let's confine our points to one at a time. After a point is discussed, we can move on to the next point, if necessary.


John

 

[TScott]

Attacking something, shotgun style, hardly accomplishes anything but confusion.

True, but this looks more like a drive-by.

The poster known as Franc28 is guilty of one-dimensional thinking here. There is plenty of evidence for creation, and it does not neccessarily have to preclude natural selection or evolution.

 

[brt28006]

To Franc28:

Like elephanticity said, microevolution is a legitimate scientific term.
Also, like everyone else here has said, you do come off as being extremely condescending.

HOWEVER, I've noticed that nobody has actually answered your questions either. I don't know how many creationists have posted on this thread, but none of them have offered any answers.

 

[TScott]

There is plenty of evidence for creation. Look at the evidence for the Big Bang. If that isn't creation, then what is it? As has been discussed on several threads already, nearly all cosmologists believe in the "Big Bang".

 

[RufusAtticus]

Originally posted by TScott
There is plenty of evidence for creation. Look at the evidence for the Big Bang. If that isn't creation, then what is it? As has been discussed on several threads already, nearly all cosmologists believe in the "Big Bang".

However, I do not know of a single theoretical physicist that choses to explain the big bang, or the debated alternatives, with "God did it."

 

[TScott]

RufusAtticus wrote:

However, I do not know of a single theoretical physicist that choses to explain the big bang, or the debated alternatives, with "God did it."

You don't read much on the subject, do you. Nobel Physicist Leon Lederman wrote in his book, the God Particle:

We don't know anything about the universe until it reaches the mature age of a billion of a trillionth of a second. That is, some very short time after creation in the big bang. When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up--we are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the very beginning.

Also, I don't neccessarily subscribe to him, but read Hugh Ross sometime.

Charlie Townes, a Berkley physisist who won the Nobel for the discovery of the maser wrote:

In my view, the question of origin seems to be left unanswered if we explore from a scientific view alone. Thus, I believe there is a need for some religious or metaphysical explanation. I believe in the concept of God and in His existence."

There are many things that science is not capable of describing or equating. Scientists, more than anyone else are aware of this.

 

[God Fixation]

Are you asking us to prove God creating everything, our religion, or the Bible? *lost, blink*

 

[Gooch's dad]

God_fixation, good question.

I think it is fair to ask *what* physical evidence specifically points to 'special creation' rather than evolution, for the species we see existing all around us.

And complexity alone isn't enough, because complexity CAN be accounted for quite nicely in evolutionary biology.

Let me give an example of what could, hypothetically, be such evidence. You say that God created the entire universe especially for humans, and we are 'in his image'. OK, so what if humans looked like absolutely NOTHING else on earth? What if we looked like one of those aliens from the cantina in Star Wars, with really no resemblance to any primate, mammal, reptile, bird, cetacean, or fish on earth?

Add to that, all the other animals having completely different biochemistry from each other. One class maybe has DNA biochemistry, another has biochemistry based on RNA, another has biochemistry based on some other long chain of proteins, but unlike DNA. You get the idea.

And the biochemistry of humans is absolutely unlike any other creature on earth.

Sure, some skeptics might go to great lengths to try to discount this as evidence for creation, but they would have to bend over backwards to do so. And they couldn't come up with a naturalistic explanation without most scientists, 99% of scientists, just laughing at them and saying "are you kidding? You're not doing science, you're ignoring the evidence right in front of your face!"

Get the idea here? And no, don't tell me that scientists who believe in evolution ARE the equivalent of those skeptics, because the vast majority of scientists (I would put it at well over 99%) DO see evolution as the best explanation for what we observe.

I hope this helps.

 

[Franc28]

"There is plenty of evidence for creation, and it does not neccessarily have to preclude natural selection or evolution."

Then why do all the Creationists here do nothing but stalling ? If you did have evidence, you would answer the questions.

 

[TScott]

Then why do all the Creationists here do nothing but stalling ? If you did have evidence, you would answer the questions.

What's your problem? Reading or comprehension? I wrote that the proof for creation is the evidence for the Big Bang. What is your answer to that?

 

[God Fixation]

I have all the proof I need. The change God has made in my life is enough proof to prove every last thing written that Holy book that so many of you think is myth. You truely have no idea the experience you are leaving yourself out of by refusing God. It is not my job to convince you, but merly love you(to the best of my ability) as Christ would, does, and has. Whether that is enough 'proof' is totaly up to you, I have done my part and will continue to do so, but you saying we are 'stalling' is rather cursory. We are doing what we are called to do as followers of Christ, love our neighbors AND our enemys, tell everyone about His love and saving Grace that is available to all. Nowhere in God's Holy word does it say to prove His point for Him, He is perfectly capable of doing that on His own and whether He chooses to include us, is totally up to Him. May God bless you and make Himself known to you. And may you have the wisdom to see it when He does.

 

[sr. scholls]

*roars with applause* Well said God Fixation! I completely agree with you on those points. I really do think the reason that scientists and skeptics of creationism believe in evolutionism because they are too blind to see the miracles we encounter in our lives everyday. The further technology and science advance, the more credit they have to give to creationism itself. I know that the "Big Bang" didn't just explode out of nowhere. If everything evolved from that one instant where gasses and particles collided, where/how could they get there in the first place? I mean...If God didn't do it, then whatAnyways, I don't think it's fair to pre-judge Christians who don't dabble in the world of science. I know that I would like to know more about your theories and how you came to believe them, but I don't think that anyone should knock anyone else down for their beliefs. I believe that Jesus died for my sins, so that I could spend eternity with Him in heaven. I know it is the TRUTH. And I can't force you to believe it. All I can do is pray that you will someday understand it.

God bless you