Question for creationists only: What is the theory of evolution?

[Subduction Zone]

Origin of the species is a work of pure fiction.

Nope. It was a work that was far ahead of its time. We have come a long way since then but it was far from fiction. There is more evidence for the theory of evolution than any other scientific theory in existence.

That makes it pretty much a stone cold fact.

 

[AdB]

I don't think it's worthwhile to explain the reasons why I am a believer in this thread, I will say though that I actually became a Christian because secular science doesn't provide much of answers to a whole range of questions. Although I'm absolutely convinced of the reliability of the Bible I still am very interested to see how scientific evidence fits in the Biblical narrative. There are some scientific theories that I find quite compelling and am looking deeper into these to see if they hold ground both scientifically and Biblically. This is why I also am curious to see which arguments are brought up that counter my worldview, the best measure for your ideas is to see if they can stand in the face of opposition...

So regarding this discussion here, I only asked a simple question for which, for a variety of reasons, no straight forward answer was provided. I will look at the website that was provided, I think I'm already familiar with some of its content, but will take some time to digest that....

 

[Bradskii]

I don't think it's worthwhile to explain the reasons why I am a believer in this thread, I will say though that I actually became a Christian because secular science doesn't provide much of answers to a whole range of questions. Although I'm absolutely convinced of the reliability of the Bible I still am very interested to see how scientific evidence fits in the Biblical narrative. There are some scientific theories that I find quite compelling and am looking deeper into these to see if they hold ground both scientifically and Biblically. This is why I also am curious to see which arguments are brought up that counter my worldview, the best measure for your ideas is to see if they can stand in the face of opposition...

So regarding this discussion here, I only asked a simple question for which, for a variety of reasons, no straight forward answer was provided. I will look at the website that was provided, I think I'm already familiar with some of its content, but will take some time to digest that....

If that was in response to me asking what your alternatives are to the evolutionary process, then it's no answer at all. Why you believe is entirely separate from how you think the process played out in us being here.

As I said, if your answer is 'Well, God did it somehow' then you're definitely not in a position to challenge someone else's well documented and scientifically supported proposal.

I'm getting the same problem on another thread where someone has made a claim and then spent post after post knocking any and all proposals that counter the claim. Without the slightest attempts at putting forward any viable alternatives that back up the original claim.

I don't want to appear brusque, but if you have nothing to put forward then what is there worth discussing? It really becomes tiresome just trying to respond to post after post of negative comments.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I don't think it's worthwhile to explain the reasons why I am a believer in this thread, I will say though that I actually became a Christian because secular science doesn't provide much of answers to a whole range of questions. Although I'm absolutely convinced of the reliability of the Bible I still am very interested to see how scientific evidence fits in the Biblical narrative. There are some scientific theories that I find quite compelling and am looking deeper into these to see if they hold ground both scientifically and Biblically. This is why I also am curious to see which arguments are brought up that counter my worldview, the best measure for your ideas is to see if they can stand in the face of opposition...

So regarding this discussion here, I only asked a simple question for which, for a variety of reasons, no straight forward answer was provided. I will look at the website that was provided, I think I'm already familiar with some of its content, but will take some time to digest that....

You seem to have the mistaken idea that people are trying to use the fact of evolution to refute Christianity. That is not the case.
And you do not realize it, but you just admitted to becoming a Christian for irrational reasons. You almost.certainly were brought up a Christian and always were one. You were probably just not a strong Christian at all times. Evolution on its own does not.refute Christianity.

What specific questions do you think need to be answered that have not been answered? I will answer your questions or explain why they can't be answered.

 

[Ophiolite]

Nope. It was a work that was far ahead of its time. We have come a long way since then but it was far from fiction. There is more evidence for the theory of evolution than any other scientific theory in existence.

That makes it pretty much a stone cold fact.

You were responding to @Lost4words post where he claimed "Origin of the Species (sic) is a work of pure fiction". I found his claim amusing. He seems unaware that the structure and style of On the Origin Species were greatly influenced by Darwin's high regard for Paley's From Natural Theology, or Evidences of the Existence and Attributes of the Deity Collected from the Appearances of Nature. That's the one with the "watch on the heath" argument, so popular with Creationists. I think Darwin took a copy of it with him on the Beagle. May we conclude that Lost4words also considers Paley's famed Creationist writing is also a "work of pure fiction".

I also note Lost4words' misnaming of On the Origin as "Origin of the species". It is an error I've seen often before. I wonder if Creationists mistakenly think the book is mainly about the origin of what they consider to be the only important species - humans. That would also be amusing, given that, IIRC, Darwin mentions human evolution only once in the book.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

That is the assumption...
And still... fashioned from already existing code...

Fashioned from already existing non-code... It's non-coding DNA - which would include viral insertions (ERVs).

 

[pitabread]

Origin of the species is a work of pure fiction.

Have you read it?