proving evolution as just a "theory"

[lesliedellow]

if so why so many scientists (including biologists) reject evolution?

They don't. The fact that creationists can dig up a few mavericks proves nothing.

 

[Jimmy D]

Ask them to prove evolution is a fact.

Like the last time you asked?

What findings are those?

The one's that you claim you're not interested in learning, remember that?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Like the last time you asked?

Like the last hundred times.

The one's that you claim you're not interested in learning, remember that?

Once one watches those findings fall apart time after time....what's the point. I tried...I really did.

 

[miamited]

iam trying to prove to a friend that the christian way is the true way but he tells me to give an explanation of evolution and dinosaurs.

any things i could say to prove him wrong?

love
camila smith <3

Hi camila,

A debate regarding evolution vs. creation is an extremely difficult way to show someone the truth of God. There are just waaaay too many arguments for and against and the 'truth' of creationism. Such an understanding must find its foundation in faith. For example, the Scriptures tell us that God created the first couple by His own hand. But, you have to believe in God to believe that. You can tell them that Jesus spoke of Adam being the first man, but one would have to believe that Jesus even existed as the Son of God and that his words were truth, to believe that he knew what he was talking about. You can say that God's word tells us that He created all organic life as their separate 'kinds', but again, you would have to believe in God to believe that there is any truth in that.

So, while a applaud and encourage you in trying to reach your friend with the truth of God, I'm not sure that debating this issue is the best way to do that. It wasn't until I understood the truth of who Jesus is, that I came to understand all the truth found in the whole of the Scriptures. I believe the Scriptures tell us why that is so. We are told that it is only by the Holy Spirit that we come to know the truth, but we must first have the Holy Spirit to come under that conviction.

I would rather tell your friend that what he is attempting to do is akin to jumping into calculus III without first establishing the knowledge of calculus I. If a college student were to be going off to college and for his first semester picked calculus III, then he's likely to be working through a great fog of knowledge that he wouldn't likely understand because he had missed the foundations of calculus first.

So, my encouragement would be to ask him to hold off on the meatier truths of the Scriptures until he had grasped the more simple foundation of the Scriptures -- Jesus. The issue of this created realm being created as God has told us that it was created, begins with the understanding of the power and plan of God. I'd start there.

Explaining that the whole of the Scriptures outlines a plan. A plan whereby God created this realm of life in which we live and will also bring it all to a close. I've found that the better way to start off with trying to prove that God does exist is through the explanation and understanding of prophecy. Ask your friend if he's willing to set that question aside for a bit. Then, beginning with the law and the prophets, help him to come to faith in God first.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted

 

[Jimmy D]

Like the last hundred times.



Once one watches those findings fall apart time after time....what's the point. I tried...I really did.

What findings, how do they fall apart?

 

[Jimmy D]

Like the last hundred times.

Yes, the time you refused to address the ERV evidence then ran away springs to mind, was that the last one or has there been a more recent one?

 

[_-iconoclast-_]

What findings, how do they fall apart?

Hey jimmy d

Why Do Giraffes Have Long Necks? ... The giraffe's long neck is a perfect adaptation to the animal's natural habitat. Clearly the giraffe evolved this uncommon and helpful trait in order to reach those nourishing leaves. That's how natural selection works.

Do you agree with this statement?

Cheers

 

[Kenny'sID]

What findings, how do they fall apart?

All that say they prove evolution is fact, and they fall apart in that they don't prove evolution. You honestly think I'm going to rehash them all? lol I guess you weren't paying attention when I said "what's the point".

You got something new?

 

[DogmaHunter]

iam trying to prove to a friend that the christian way is the true way but he tells me to give an explanation of evolution and dinosaurs.

any things i could say to prove him wrong?

No. Nothing sensible or rational anyway, because evolution is actually accurate...

 

[Kenny'sID]

Yes, the time you refused to address the ERV evidence then ran away springs to mind, was that the last one or has there been a more recent one?

Point out where I ran away.

 

[DogmaHunter]

i am not sure. but even if we are talking about 1% percent, we may dealing with thousands of them. actually it doesnt matter at all, since science is base on evidences and not on surveys.

Which means that it doesn't actually matter who doesn't accept it.

Way to shoot down your very own line of argumentation.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Ask them to prove evolution is a fact.

The name "theory" is kind of a giveaway.
Theories aren't facts. Facts aren't theories (and never were theories).

Instead, theories explain facts.
Facts support theories.

What findings are those?

Natural selection, mechanisms that introduce variation/changes, genetics which provides the physical means to accomplish exactly that, the observed instances of speciation, the nested hierarchies in phylogenies, etc.

You know.... biology.

 

[sfs]

if so why so many scientists (including biologists) reject evolution?

They don't. The number of biologists who reject evolution is tiny, and virtually all of them are motivated by religious reasons, not the biological data.

I've been in genetics for 18+ years. I've listened to, seen and read thousands of presentations on biology, a substantial fraction of which involved evolution. I've had conversations with hundreds of biologists. The number of times that I've encountered skepticism about common descent in all of those interactions is zero. I've heard geneticists express opinions that they won't offer in public for fear of repercussions -- like the possibility that different ethnic groups differ in intelligence for genetic reasons -- but I've never heard anything like that about common descent. The notion that there's some kind of real controversy about the topic within science is simply wrong.

 

[Jimmy D]

All that say they prove evolution is fact, and they fall apart in that they don't prove evolution. You honestly think I'm going to rehash them all? lol I guess you weren't paying attention when I said "what's the point".

You got something new?

What findings? You say they fall apart, which ones? Can I suggest that you won't "rehash them" because you are talking nonsense? I'm happy to accept correction if there have been developments in the scientific community I've missed.

The "point" is that you claim that "their findings fall apart" which isn't really true.

 

[Jimmy D]

Point out where I ran away.

The link to the thread was in the post you quoted.

 

[sfs]

What findings are those?

As one of my colleagues put it, when the subject of evidence for evolution came up, "The evidence is everything we do." I just gave a short list of some of the genetic evidence that evolution predicts and explains: "For example, what are the creationist predictions for what the transition-transversion rate should be when you compare humans and chimpanzees? Chimpanzees and bonobos? Different species of orangutan? What are the creationist predictions for correlation between interspecies divergence and within-species diversity? What are the creationist predictions for how diverged any two species should be at sites that are CpGs in either species?"

There are many more. But start by answering those questions, and then we can move on to the others.

 

[xianghua]

They don't. The number of biologists who reject evolution is tiny

so there are biologists that reject evolution or not?

I've heard geneticists express opinions that they won't offer in public for fear of repercussions -- like the possibility that different ethnic groups differ in intelligence for genetic reasons -- but I've never heard anything like that about common descent. The notion that there's some kind of real controversy about the topic within science is simply wrong.

again: science base on evidence. and we indeed have evidence for creation.

 

[sfs]

so there are biologists that reject evolution or not?

Sure, just as there are physicists who reject Special Relativity. One can find crackpots in all fields. What does that have to do with the claim that evolution is a controversial theory within biology?

 

[lesliedellow]

They don't. The number of biologists who reject evolution is tiny, and virtually all of them are motivated by religious reasons, not the biological data.

At least one of them (Todd Wood) will freely admit that.

 

[sfs]

At least one of them (Todd Wood) will freely admit that.

Yup, and I admire his intellectual integrity (even if I think his beliefs are kind of nutty). Not all creationists appreciate his outspokenness, though.