The Demise of Evolution

[Subduction Zone]

Very likely a scientific fantasy.

No, scientific ideas have to be testable and confimable. The theory of evolution has been confirmed countless times. Meanwhile creationists are afraid to form a testable version of their beliefs. They have learned from past failures.

 

[Need answers]

This is a poorly worded post on your part, but we can observe evolution through the fossil record.

I don't think that you understand what observation is.

The fossil record is nothing more than a few skulls. Im not impressed, and should i be?. The real fossil record doesn't support evolution at all. You would surely have more than a few ape skulls if the fossil record actually supported this theory as you say. But thats not the case.

 

[Need answers]

No, scientific ideas have to be testable and confimable. The theory of evolution has been confirmed countless times. Meanwhile creationists are afraid to form a testable version of their beliefs. They have learned from past failures.

Not really, they are uncertain and subject to change. This is especially true with the origin of mankind and evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The fossil record is nothing more than a few skulls. Im not impressed, and should i be?. The real fossil record doesn't support evolution at all. You would surely have more than a few ape skulls of if the fossil record actually supported this theory as you say. But thats not the case.

Nope, it is millions upon millions of fossils all telling only one narrative.

Seriously when you make such claims you only demonstrate a complete lack of education in this topic.

If the fossil record did not support the theory of evolution there would be no end to the claims of creationists. You may have gotten your claims from a creationist site. You were lied to.

 

[Speedwell]

Very likely a scientific fantasy.

At least there is evidence for it, even though you refuse to understand it.

Have you observed dust turning into a man? Or a man's rib turning into a woman? You have no evidence of that at all.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not really, they are uncertain and subject to change. This is especially true with the origin of mankind and evolution.

Oh my, you are failing to follow the conversation. The changes are very minor at this time. And of course they are subject to change. That is a plus, not a minus. Think of it, the Bible stories of Genesis if one interprets them literally were refuted over one hundred years ago. You have a belief system that cannot correct its errors. Please note that not all Christians follow this belief system. You basically refute your own God with your beliefs.

 

[Need answers]

Nope, it is millions upon millions of fossils all telling only one narrative.

Seriously when you make such claims you only demonstrate a complete lack of education in this topic.

Show me the lineage of mankind and the animal kingdom as well, using this fossil record. You cant because all you have are a few ape skulls

 

[Subduction Zone]

Show me the lineage of mankind and the animal kingdom as well, using this fossil record. You cant because all you have are a few ape skulls

They are all ape skulls. You keep forgetting that you are an ape.

Ask your question properly and I will answer it.

 

[Need answers]

At least there is evidence for it, even though you refuse to understand it.

Have you observed dust turning into a man? Or a man's rib turning into a woman? You have no evidence of that at all.

No more than you can observe what you believe.

 

[Need answers]

Oh my, you are failing to follow the conversation. The changes are very minor at this time. And of course they are subject to change. That is a plus, not a minus. Think of it, the Bible stories of Genesis if one interprets them literally were refuted over one hundred years ago. You have a belief system that cannot correct its errors. Please note that not all Christians follow this belief system. You basically refute your own God with your beliefs.

You have a scientific fantasy propagated by men who think they are smarter than God.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You have a scientific fantasy propagated by men who think they are smarter than God.

Nope, that is not the case.

Any other false claims?

 

[Speedwell]

No more than you can observe what you believe.

What I believe happened left evidence behind. You might not think it is enough, but you've got no evidence at all of what you believe happened.

 

[roman2819]

I'd hardly say the Bible's version is a clearer description of a tank than mine....

You think that your description better than Bible? I am not convinced you were describing a tank. And the way you write was essay style at school or college, not the manner of writing in religious manuscript.

About the Bible saying God hardened pharaoh's heart, the following is from my posting last year.

Key points:

1. Will a powerful Pharoah listened to a lone ranger Moses and let the slaves walk away? We have to get real and consider human emotions when we read scriptures too, don't just read words. The scribes won't delve into detail to explain things (even if you think they should).

2. it is a case of the Bible assert God's sovereignty, everything that happen is attributed to God, they do not distinguish whether He caused it or He allowed people to proceed with their own choice - the Bible still said God caused it or it was His will.

Many Christians wonder whether God caused Pharaoh to stop the Hebrew slaves from leaving Egypt. Puzzled by the words "I shall hardened Pharaoh's heart and he shall not let them go," we debate over this issue. Hopefully, the following will help:

Egypt was the most advanced civilization at that time, and Pharaoh was king, He was commander of a powerful army, with hundreds of thousands of soldiers, cavalry and chariots. Would such a powerful figure listen to Moses? To a person (Moses) standing with only a stuff in his hand, would the authoritarian say, “Ok prophet, I will let your people go as you ask”? Think about it and the answer is obviously no.

In fact, an Egyptian pharaoh was considered to be half-god half-human. The Egyptians worshipped other gods, not Jehovah. No doubt the king and his people heard the Hebrews' belief that the God of Jacob would lead them out of slavery one day but without seeing Jehovah's might before, the pharaoh would not believe Moses. Even among the Hebrews, many must have wondered whether God of their forefather Jacob was a just a myth - this was what it would feel like after seven or eight generations were enslaved for almost 400 years.

The Pharaoh could not afford to let the slaves go unless he had a death wish or wanted to abdicate. There were about 1/4 million Hebrew slaves; they were servants at Egyptian households, they labored at the pyramids and did work that are shunned by the Egyptians. Would the Pharaoh want to incur his people’s wrath by letting the slaves go? Would be choose to be hated, villified and ridiculed?

Consider these human factors and we will realize that Pharaoh would harden his own heart. So why then did the Bible say God harden his heart?

For all events, the Scriptures would only sum them up in a few words. The Bible doesn't explain situations in detail. It is not trying to be a novel that describe everything. While reading, we have to think about how things happened, what people did, and how they felt. The Scriptures does not delve into how things unfold gradually at ground level. Instead, whatever that happened - layers and layers of human drama and interaction - is just stated in a few words.

And the words of Scriptures assert God’s sovereignty. To say that He hardened Pharaoh is a manner of writing that asserts His sovereignty. The Scripture portrays God as active, as if He causes all things to happen, even if He only allowed them. Such was the way of writing during biblical times. The writers did not distinguish between whether God cause or allow something to happen -- unlike the way we analyzed today. We have to understand their mindset. In Judah and Ephraim, when the Israelites continued to indulge in idolatry, Isaiah lamented, "Why, Lord, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts so we do not revere you? ?" [Isaiah 63:17] However, this does not mean God literally cause then to harden. It is just the way the Hebrews use words as they write Scriptures.

Today, too many of us read words only -- and try to analyze words only. We try to think up many theories to explain tough issues, such as how God hardened Pharaoh's heart. However, we will do better to know that it was simply the way the scribes wrote.

Even the tough issue of Judas betrayal can be understood, that it is not God who cause Judas to betray Jesus. It was his own act. However, the timing of the betrayal was managed by God.

 

[Kylie]

You think that your description better than Bible? I am not convinced you were describing a tank. And the way you write was essay style at school or college, not the manner of writing in religious manuscript.

I think my version describes a tank more accurately than what's in the Bible.

And I came up with that in five minutes. Sorry it wasn't perfect enough for your high standards.

About the Bible saying God hardened pharaoh's heart, the following is from my posting last year.

Key points:

1. Will a powerful Pharoah listened to a lone ranger Moses and let the slaves walk away? We have to get real and consider human emotions when we read scriptures too, don't just read words. The scribes won't delve into detail to explain things (even if you think they should).

2. it is a case of the Bible assert God's sovereignty, everything that happen is attributed to God, they do not distinguish whether He caused it or He allowed people to proceed with their own choice - the Bible still said God caused it or it was His will.

Many Christians wonder whether God caused Pharaoh to stop the Hebrew slaves from leaving Egypt. Puzzled by the words "I shall hardened Pharaoh's heart and he shall not let them go," we debate over this issue. Hopefully, the following will help:

Egypt was the most advanced civilization at that time, and Pharaoh was king, He was commander of a powerful army, with hundreds of thousands of soldiers, cavalry and chariots. Would such a powerful figure listen to Moses? To a person (Moses) standing with only a stuff in his hand, would the authoritarian say, “Ok prophet, I will let your people go as you ask”? Think about it and the answer is obviously no.

In fact, an Egyptian pharaoh was considered to be half-god half-human. The Egyptians worshipped other gods, not Jehovah. No doubt the king and his people heard the Hebrews' belief that the God of Jacob would lead them out of slavery one day but without seeing Jehovah's might before, the pharaoh would not believe Moses. Even among the Hebrews, many must have wondered whether God of their forefather Jacob was a just a myth - this was what it would feel like after seven or eight generations were enslaved for almost 400 years.

The Pharaoh could not afford to let the slaves go unless he had a death wish or wanted to abdicate. There were about 1/4 million Hebrew slaves; they were servants at Egyptian households, they labored at the pyramids and did work that are shunned by the Egyptians. Would the Pharaoh want to incur his people’s wrath by letting the slaves go? Would be choose to be hated, villified and ridiculed?

Consider these human factors and we will realize that Pharaoh would harden his own heart. So why then did the Bible say God harden his heart?

For all events, the Scriptures would only sum them up in a few words. The Bible doesn't explain situations in detail. It is not trying to be a novel that describe everything. While reading, we have to think about how things happened, what people did, and how they felt. The Scriptures does not delve into how things unfold gradually at ground level. Instead, whatever that happened - layers and layers of human drama and interaction - is just stated in a few words.

And the words of Scriptures assert God’s sovereignty. To say that He hardened Pharaoh is a manner of writing that asserts His sovereignty. The Scripture portrays God as active, as if He causes all things to happen, even if He only allowed them. Such was the way of writing during biblical times. The writers did not distinguish between whether God cause or allow something to happen -- unlike the way we analyzed today. We have to understand their mindset. In Judah and Ephraim, when the Israelites continued to indulge in idolatry, Isaiah lamented, "Why, Lord, do you make us wander from your ways and harden our hearts so we do not revere you? ?" [Isaiah 63:17] However, this does not mean God literally cause then to harden. It is just the way the Hebrews use words as they write Scriptures.

Today, too many of us read words only -- and try to analyze words only. We try to think up many theories to explain tough issues, such as how God hardened Pharaoh's heart. However, we will do better to know that it was simply the way the scribes wrote.

Even the tough issue of Judas betrayal can be understood, that it is not God who cause Judas to betray Jesus. It was his own act. However, the timing of the betrayal was managed by God.

Say what you will, the Bible still clearly states that God intentionally made sure that Pharaoh would refuse to let Moses and his folks go. God was interfering with Pharaoh's free will. God was controlling him. Doesn't matter how you spin it.

 

[Ophiolite]

It is unfortunate that when one cannot answer specific questions, he has to resort to personal accusation and abuse. You can put me on ignore if you like and I stop asking embarrassing questions and will go away.

Which specific questions do you think were not answered? Repeat them and I shall respond. We shall save each other a lot of time if you avoid strawmen, lies, or gross simplifications.

 

[Ophiolite]

In my opinion, there is no value in debating creationists, the value is in presenting the empirical evidence and legitimate science to the visitors/lurkers/passers-by who may be reading these threads out of curiosity or a desire to learn. In my opinion, that is why it is so important to counter the "willfully told falsehoods" so many creationists spout.

I am in total agreement with this point. In a decade and a half of such "dbabtes", primarily on science forums, I can recall only one definite and one probable 'conversion' from Creationist to Evolutionist (neither losing their Christian faith in the process). The target is always the fence sitter, whom one hopes will be swayed by the evidence and the reasoned argument.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I am in total agreement with this point. In a decade and a half of such "dbabtes", primarily on science forums, I can recall only one definite and one probable 'conversion' from Creationist to Evolutionist (neither losing their Christian faith in the process). The target is always the fence sitter, whom one hopes will be swayed by the evidence and the reasoned argument.

Very, very few creationists are willing to have a reasoned debate. After years of arguing they can see what reason leads to. If you look at a typical creationist 's arguments he is not looking for the truth. A typical creationist is only looking for excuses to believe the stories that they know are not true.

 

[Jimmy D]

The real fossil record doesn't support evolution at all. You would surely have more than a few ape skulls if the fossil record actually supported this theory as you say. But thats not the case.

What do you mean? What type of fossils do you think would support the theory?

 

[Larniavc]

Do you want to have NO free will? Do you want to be a programmed where you have no choice but to believe in Him?

Adam and Eve seemed fine before they ate the fruit of knowledge. Did they not have free will?

 

[pitabread]

The real fossil record doesn't support evolution at all. You would surely have more than a few ape skulls if the fossil record actually supported this theory as you say. But thats not the case.

Of course there are more than just a "few" ape skulls. There are literally millions of fossils.

Just the Smithsonian alone has over 40 million fossil specimens: Collections Overview | Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History

I think most creationists don't realize just how many fossils have been found.

edited to add:

Further, this is what the Smithsonian lists for hominid fossils: Human Fossils

From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. With the rapid pace of new discoveries every year, this impressive sample means that even though some early human species are only represented by one or a few fossils, others are represented by thousands of fossils.
​

They have over a hundred specific examples of hominid fossils on that site. More than just a "few".