proving evolution as just a "theory"

xianghua said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Kenny'sID said:

Ask them to prove evolution is a fact.

Click to expand...

Like the last time you asked?

Kenny'sID said:

What findings are those?

Click to expand...

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

Jimmy D said:

Like the last time you asked?

Click to expand...

Like the last hundred times.

Jimmy D said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Camila Smith said:

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

Click to expand...

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

Kenny'sID said:

Like the last hundred times.



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

Click to expand...

What findings, how do they fall apart?

Kenny'sID said:

Like the last hundred times.

Click to expand...

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?

Jimmy D said:

What findings, how do they fall apart?

Click to expand...

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

Jimmy D said:

What findings, how do they fall apart?

Click to expand...

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?

Camila Smith said:

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?

Click to expand...

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

Jimmy D said:

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?

Click to expand...

Point out where I ran away.

xianghua said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

Way to shoot down your very own line of argumentation.

Kenny'sID said:

Ask them to prove evolution is a fact.

Click to expand...

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?

Click to expand...

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.

xianghua said:

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

Click to expand...

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.

Kenny'sID said:

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?

Click to expand...

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.

Kenny'sID said:

Point out where I ran away.

Click to expand...

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

Kenny'sID said:

What findings are those?

Click to expand...

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.

sfs said:

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

Click to expand...

so there are biologists that reject evolution or not?

sfs said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

xianghua said:

so there are biologists that reject evolution or not?

Click to expand...

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?

sfs said:

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.

Click to expand...

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

lesliedellow said:

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

Click to expand...

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