Is There Any Reason to Doubt Evolution If Faith Is Not A Factor?

[Smidlee]

Yes there is because evolution as stated is a theory that has not been confirmed by any repeatable tests. It is only an assumption based upon unsupported beliefs. When I say unsupported I mean there is no scientific testing that has confirmed evolution. Not the evolution proclaimed that all life came from one single original creature. It is an unsubstantiated theory.

The belief you are referring to is the principle of continuity. Most modern day scientific theories are based on this religious principle.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

Yes there is because evolution as stated is a theory that has not been confirmed by any repeatable tests. It is only an assumption based upon unsupported beliefs. When I say unsupported I mean there is no scientific testing that has confirmed evolution. Not the evolution proclaimed that all life came from one single original creature. It is an unsubstantiated theory.

Evolution is tested every time a new species is discovered. Does this species fit within the parameters of descent with modification? For example, if its a bird that has a beak, does it also have feathers, or does it have hair? Hair could work, but would be at odds with evolution as we know it.

Evolution is tested in computer simulations. These are repeated over and over.

Evolution is tested by looking for, and finding, predicted intermediate fossils in the fossil beds of the expected era.

Evolution is tested by examining non-coding DNA for similarities across species lines, and finding them, in the same way similarities within a species can show who the parents are.

 

[rjs330]

Evolution is tested every time a new species is discovered. Does this species fit within the parameters of descent with modification? For example, if its a bird that has a beak, does it also have feathers, or does it have hair? Hair could work, but would be at odds with evolution as we know it.

Evolution is tested in computer simulations. These are repeated over and over.

Evolution is tested by looking for, and finding, predicted intermediate fossils in the fossil beds of the expected era.

Evolution is tested by examining non-coding DNA for similarities across species lines, and finding them, in the same way similarities within a species can show who the parents are.

That's not a test, that is an assumptive argument. Scientific testing is based upon experimentation that affirms the hypothesis. Evolution has never been tested that affirms the hypothesis. Not once. Remember we are NOT talking about adaptation for survival of a creature. We are talking about wholesale changes that move a creature from one thing to something else.

 

[pat34lee]

My question is: if belief in various interpretations of scripture were not a factor, does any reason exist to doubt evolution on evidential grounds?

Put it this way. There is no way to accept evolution except through faith in man. It defies everything you see in nature and in the labs. You have to believe that chance and blind luck not only made the universe, but all scientific laws along with information and life which cannot happen spontaneously. You then must accept that life progressively became more complex, but only until we got here to see it. Now it is all degrading.

 

[pat34lee]

And yet you have useless little toes.

Like shin splints on horses, left over from when their ancestral species had three toes. Like dew claws on cats, left over from when the paws of an ancestral species had digits that could grasp.

I like my little toes, they are part of how I balance walking. Nothing is completely useless, as we were designed. Are there errors today? Of course, it's part of our degenerating, not evolving the past 4000 years. (there was minimal degeneration before the flood)

You should look up horse evolution. Unlike the old charts, it is hardly straightforward, even for Darwinians.
What About Horse Toe Evolution? - creation.com