Is Evolution A Lie?

[theFijian]

Now I'm going to throw some parts that make up a watch in a shoebox an shake it for a little while, according to evolution, if I just shake long enough, I will get a watch.

EDIT: Half hour of shaking, still no watch... I want a new watch, why doesn't evolution provide it for me?

Unfortunately that's because your going on the strawman version of Evolution as according to Creationism.

 

[welshman]

What do we mean by "evolution"? That is a very slippery term. Differences observed in species? Sure, anyone I think in this debate (creationists and evolutionists) agree that this occurs.

Changes by natural selection (some call this "macro-evolution") that Charles Darwin tried to discuss? No. It's never been observed or confirmed by any forms of evolutionary science, nor has any of the leading figures from the "evolutionary" corner got any idea whatsoever how life began. Even Richard Dawkins admits this in the documentary "Expelled" by Ben Stein. All he can offer is the theory that aliens planted a "seed" on earth (I kid you not). I recommend anyone watching this DVD.

Plus, I think you have to toally distort the Bible (and the Hebrew and Greek) to come up with God's Word teaching us that we came from monkeys.

Just my opinion.

 

[theFijian]

Plus, I think you have to toally distort the Bible (and the Hebrew and Greek) to come up with God's Word teaching us that we came from monkeys.

You'd also have to distort it so say that the earth revolves around the sun.

 

[Celtic D]

nor has any of the leading figures from the "evolutionary" corner got any idea whatsoever how life began.

That's not strictly true - a lot of scientists are in fact Christians - that is a fact, and I speak as one of them, and of the many that I know - indeed I know more scientists who are Christian than who are not - but all that is an aside.

I fully agree you can't make something out of nothing and if the world is in equillibrium, something had to tip the balance (Before you pick on my "science" I am merely explaining my thoughts in very simple terms). Aside from the fact I am a Christian and have regularly experienced God in my life, these points alone would be enough to make me question the existence of a "higher power"

 

[Mr Dave]

Bit late into the merriment, but no evolution is not a lie, but the way in which the variety of life on earth came to be.

 

[Astridhere]

Evolutionists are no more ignorant than they are liars - they are neither ignorant or liars

The exact same can be said for creationist teaching.

And also untrue. I asked if evolution is a lie, there is a difference. If that is being provocative then I am being provocative to myself seeing as I am a Theistic Evolutionist

Yes, and Christians are very guilty of that. I have found in discussions with other Christains that very few are willing to look outside their comfort zone and get very defensive if you challenge their viewpoint


Indeed, I agree - BOTH sides

Most people are taught basic biology in school, so I am pretty sure they do know what they are talking about.

In fact what you say applies more so to creationists who repeat parrot fashion what is said on creation science websites - thing is the science doesn't hold up on these websites.

I actually thought from the tone of your post that you were being rude to evolutionists, so I was actually sticking up for evos, although not one myself.

I'd say there are both evolutionists and creationists that repeat
'parrot fashion'from the words of others. Creationists have websites to refer to. Evolutionists have text books to refer to that are usually outdated by the time they reach the book shelves.

 

[Celtic D]

Evolutionists also have websites to refer to - the difference being that the evolutionist sites contain real and verifiable science, whereas the creationist ones do not.

 

[s_s]

Evolutionists also have websites to refer to - the difference being that the evolutionist sites contain real and verifiable science, whereas the creationist ones do not.

Did you start this thread just to have an argument?

Creationist websites contain much fact. Evolutionist websites contain some fact. Both have errors.
And yet you choose to agree that evolutionists should not be call liars, yet above, call the creationists the very same.

I am a creationist, because my God is a creationist, and the Bible is a book of creation.
Y'all can keep your god that had to practice on monkeys until he came up with y'all. Me, God made me specially. There's no monkey ancestry in me. I don't want a weak pathetic god that couldn't do that from the off.

Anyway, there are areas of this website specifically for this. It isn't a UK-related issue specifically.

 

[Celtic D]

I started it for discussion, which is what we are doing in the UK bit because I wish to fellowship with British Christians, but if others wish to join us in our little corner, and they have that is fine too.

I like your tact I must say, you disagree with me so by inference I am arguing - it takes 2 to argue anyway, even if I was!

If you don't like the discussion, well nobody asked you to participate, you did that voluntarily

I don't think creationists are liars, misguided yes, but not liars, and creationist sites contain very little fact, and even less scientific fact.

I have some good creationist friends, including the one who led me to Christ, and it really isn't an issue between us - there are far more important things which we do agree on like The Great Commission.

 

[minidvr]

Y'all can keep your god that had to practice on monkeys until he came up with y'all. Me, God made me specially. There's no monkey ancestry in me. I don't want a weak pathetic god that couldn't do that from the off. .

It's an interesting commentary that someone declares with such certainty that there is no monkey ancestry within them. Science and genetics demonstrate that the Primates and the closest to human genetic among the animals.

Science does not state that humans descended from monkeys, but that during the process of evolution, we come from a similar gene pool and that there might be a shared ancestry who mutated and developed in different ways. There's ample examples in nature to demonstrate this.

And if you don't believe the science, you can't be typing on a computer or the internet as these developed through science and technology, through man kinds ingenuity and invention. Science does not have all the answers, as a scientist is always asking "So What?", which is something we need to to do keep an open mind.

 

[Bungle_Bear]

nor has any of the leading figures from the "evolutionary" corner got any idea whatsoever how life began.

Ah, the old evolution = abiogenesis argument. Two entirely different things being lumped together just demonstrates ignorance. Evolutionary theory does not attempt to explain the origins of life.

 

[bloodbought09]

Its OK bloodbought09 I don't need the conversion chat - if I really understood what you were trying to say anyway (hint: try using paragraphs and puting ideas toghether its easier for those of us with language perception difficulties to follow - thanks).

Christ is my Lord and Saviour, Jesus loves me just as I am

Not trying to convert you to anything. I do not lead you but the Holy Ghost does into all truth. Just some of what we study, maybe He did not want us to go there. Jesus loves us the way we are but He will not leave us the way we were when we first confessed Him.

 

[theFijian]

Y'all can keep your god that had to practice on monkeys until he came up with y'all. Me, God made me specially. There's no monkey ancestry in me. I don't want a weak pathetic god that couldn't do that from the off.

Your personal preferrance of what God should or shouldn't be like is quite irrelevant.

 

[non-religious]

[theFijian] Christians have nothing to fear from modern scientific discovery neither do they have to force a science into the Bible or vice-versa.

Exactly.....

 

[artybloke]

I guess the only thing I have to add is tha I hate evos saying creationists are ignorant.

That's true. Many of them are fully aware of what the theory of evolution is and still continue to spread lies, strawmen, and deliberate misunderstandings of the theory around so that they can fool the gullible.

 

[Ar Cosc]

That's true. Many of them are fully aware of what the theory of evolution is and still continue to spread lies, strawmen, and deliberate misunderstandings of the theory around so that they can fool the gullible.

But, on the other hand, many of them are ignorant. Or else just dishonest. Otherwise we wouldn't see the repeated arguments about evolution=abiogenesis, and putting scrap metal in a box and shaking it, etc.

Just to address a few arguments made in this thread:

-Evolution of already existing life is a completely seperate theory to the origin of life itself. One does not depend on the other.

-Every species is a transitional species. No scientist worth his salt would ever suggest that there should be a continuous fossil line. The chances of a particular organism being fossilised are staggeringly small. It is completely unsurprising that there are large gaps in the fossil record. The fossils we do see are completely consistent with the theory of evolution being true, however.

 

[Celtic D]

How do you believe life started Ar Cosc?

 

[Ar Cosc]

How do you believe life started Ar Cosc?

I don't think we have enough information at this time to say with any certainty. However, I am convinced it wasn't the god of a Middle Eastern tribe, in the same way as you are probably convinced Odin and his brothers didn't lift the world out of the sea. Simply because we don't have any evidence of this outside of mythology.

 

[Celtic D]

I don't think we have enough information at this time to say with any certainty. However, I am convinced it wasn't the god of a Middle Eastern tribe, in the same way as you are probably convinced Odin and his brothers didn't lift the world out of the sea. Simply because we don't have any evidence of this outside of mythology.

Would you agree though that it did not start spontaneously?

 

[Ar Cosc]

Would you agree though that it did not start spontaneously?

I'm not in a position to say, I'm a mechanical engineer, not a biologist. It would also depend on your definition of "spontaneously". From what I've read, the most plausible theory at present seems to be that the most basic life was formed by electrochemical reactions under specific conditions. Unfortunately, we have no idea how specific those conditions have to be, and by extension, how likely it is for life to form.

Now, I'm not ruling out some sort of "uncaused cause" for the universe itself, not even a sentient entity, but I am fully convinced the particular sentient entity described in the Bible, or any other religious text I have come across, is purely fictional, for various reasons. My personal belief at the moment is that the laws of causality and physics as we know them break down at some point around the Big Bang, and it's going to take some pretty A-Grade science to sort out what actually happened.