What is the greatest evidence against the theory of evolution...?

florida2 · Apr 21, 2016

ClothedInGrace said:
I believe God's Word as written by men to be more true than Godless interpretations of the natural world.

Here's an interesting fact.

In the 19th the study of geology began. Do you know who the first geologists were? They were very strong Christians who wanted to find evidence of Noah's flood.

They found nothing, zilch, that was evidence it happened. This was a huge surprise to them but to their credit they had the intellectual honesty to say so. They followed the evidence in the world despite what their religious beliefs made them want to believe. They go found that there was no global flood and that the Earth was much much much older than 6000 years.

juvenissun · Apr 21, 2016

PsychoSarah said:
Obviously, the number of neurons matters more. The brain growth restrictor restricted cellular division of neurons. An elephant's brain is bigger than ours, yet has fewer neurons than that of a chimpanzee.

If the number of neuron matter, than compare to the intelligence of elephant, the neurons in our brain should be millions of miles long. Obviously neuron number is only a feature, not the cause of our super high intelligence.

juvenissun · Apr 21, 2016

Shemjaza said:
No, "Humans are much smarter then chimps", is not a reason.

Do you think human intelligence is genetic or not? (Because if you think it's somehow metaphysical then why bother with science in the first place?)

I never say it is only science. Creation is more than science.
The intelligence of human is created.

juvenissun · Apr 21, 2016

Hoghead1 said:
Seduction brought up a good point. Your posts puzzle me since you are setting yourself up against the scientific community. Well, given that the is a choice between your word and theirs, any sane, rational person is going to go on theirs, as the scientists are the highly educated experts on these matters. Do you really believe that as an unschooled lay person you really are smarter and wiser and can see further than all these scientists and then find flaws they themselves missed? I mean , c'mon on.

Certainly I can. In some fields of biology/biochemistry related, it might take me longer time. But I will get there if I like to.
I am not afraid of question any scientist, include those Nobel Prize winners. I only see one true scientist here, sfs. But too bad that he can not see the big mistake he is trapped in because of his profession. He is a TE.

I never say anything against science. My whole earthly life goes around science since I was 6 years old.

juvenissun · Apr 21, 2016

KTS said:
Citation required.

Seriously, provide a citation for your claim here.

You and your pet ARE one of my citation.

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

Hoghead1 said:
Because the Bible was not intended to be a book of science.

It's a book of truth.
Science studies the creation.
The Bible shows us the Creator.

I well realize that Genesis and evolution stand in tension.

Not tension, opposition.

The Bible was not intended to be a scientific witness and therefore should not be pitted against science.

We weren't created by any scientific natural process. Our Creator is supernatural.
[quote[What you are really arguing for here isn't really the validity of the Bible, its the validity of your fundamentalist ideology about the Bible. [/quote]
False, as usual. Only one of us actually quotes Scripture. It isn't thou.

As such, it can and should be submitted for testing.

And it has been; many times. Prophesies written come true many years later. It might surprise you that science can't disprove a single miracle, because miracles are by definition against the laws of nature.

That way, you can take the pressure off yourself for being in error.

The best way to make sure you are not in error is to NOT disagree with the Scriptures or the teaching of Christ.

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

Hoghead1 said:
More bombast and inflammatory personal attacks.

Wong! I am pointing out that you are teaching contrary to the Scriptures, which makes you a false teacher by definition. Even when showed in Scripture where you are 100% contrary to what is written, you persist with your own consistent attack against the word of God.

Question is, Where on earth does the Bible say that Moses came down the mountain with that written on the tablets?

Try Exodus 32.

The Cadet · Apr 21, 2016

KWCrazy said:
And it has been; many times. Prophesies written come true many years later.

For example?

KWCrazy said:
It might surprise you that science can't disprove a single miracle, because miracles are by definition against the laws of nature.

...Given that the laws of nature are descriptive, how is this even a coherent claim?

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

The Cadet said:
I was referring to Matthew 21:7. Which, IMO, is the funniest part of this whole debacle - at least one gospel got it right. This is kind of a smoking gun that something in Matthew wasn't kosher.

Christ only rode one, the other was used for carrying clothing.

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

Hoghead1 said:
Don't you ever pay attention to my posts? I said the "brother of" in not in any of the original Hebrew texts.

If you read any of the actual text you would see that this came later in David's reign as King, when he was slowing down and not going into battle himself because of the risk.

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

Chris B said:
But I do know where I'm going after I die: A research lab in Oxford is waiting for me.
Well, my brain, anyway.

That accounts for the shell you're in, but not for you.

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

The Cadet said:
...Given that the laws of nature are descriptive, how is this even a coherent claim?

Iron, which has great mass, falls into water which has lesser mass and sinks to the bottom. Holding a stick over the water does not in any way change the mass of the ax head and make it buoyant, so science would hold that such a thing could not happen. Science cannot, however, account for the intervention of a supernatural force which made the ax head float. Thus, it cannot be proved by science because natural law prohibits it, or disproved by science because science is only the study of the natural word; not the supernatural.

The Cadet · Apr 21, 2016

KWCrazy said:
Christ only rode one, the other was used for carrying clothing.

Then why would they reference a prophecy that implies Jesus riding on both?

4 This took place to fulfill what was spoken through the prophet:
“Say to Daughter Zion,
‘See, your king comes to you,
gentle and riding on a donkey,
and on a colt, the foal of a donkey.’”
6 The disciples went and did as Jesus had instructed them. 7 They brought the donkey and the colt and placed their cloaks on them for Jesus to sit on.

The prophecy they reference is explicitly mentioned as having the king riding on a donkey and the foal of a donkey. This is a fairly clear mistranslation by the author of Matthew.

KWCrazy said:
Iron, which has great mass, falls into water which has lesser mass and sinks to the bottom. Holding a stick over the water does not in any way change the mass of the ax head and make it buoyant, so science would hold that such a thing could not happen. Science cannot, however, account for the intervention of a supernatural force which made the ax head float. Thus, it cannot be proved by science because natural law prohibits it, or disproved by science because science is only the study of the natural word; not the supernatural.

Actually, if this happened, the law of density would be considered falsified, and we'd be left scrambling to find an explanation for this anomalous behavior. Like I said, scientific law is descriptive, not prescriptive.

Chris B · Apr 21, 2016

KWCrazy said:
That accounts for the shell you're in, but not for you.

That's me. A transient being.
A temporary concatenation of matter.

A poor player that struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more.
(As Shakespeare could conceive of it.)

Though I seriously considered other possibilities,
(put twenty years hard work into one of them)
I couldn't make them hang together in the long run.

Shemjaza · Apr 21, 2016

juvenissun said:
I never say it is only science. Creation is more than science.
The intelligence of human is created.

Those are assertions as usual.

So is intelligence separate to our physical bodies? Is it actually a separate miracle for each of us?

KWCrazy · Apr 21, 2016

Chris B said:
Though I seriously considered other possibilities,
(put twenty years hard work into one of them)
I couldn't make them hang together in the long run.

Possibly you were listening to the orchestra instead of the Master.
Going to church and following the Ten Commandments may make you a better person but they won't save you. Only the Master can save you. He is found not through logic and reason, but through faith and obedience.

Justatruthseeker · Apr 21, 2016

DogmaHunter said:
Ignoring the facts, like the facts of genetics, don't make them go away.

Agreed, ignoring the facts that Asian remains Asian and African remains African and only when the two mate does variation come into the species will not make it go away.

You can make all the claims you like, but the simple fact is those infraspecific taxa never become anything new until they mate with another infraspecific taxa in the species. We all understand you must ignore what is right in front of your eyes to peddle your dogma.

Hieronymus · Apr 21, 2016

KWCrazy said:
He is found not through logic and reason, but through faith and obedience.

I say through both. Definitely.

The marvels of our reality in every way we explore it testify of a mind or maybe minds plural behind it.
We can even recognise some kind of disagreement or conflict in it.
Life, potentially perfect, a totally awesome phenomenon.
But there's misery and pain, diseases, mutations, extinction, violence, general decay and death.
It is a diseased system without maintenance.
So "What went wrong?" or "(why) is this necessary?" are legitimate questions man has been pondering throughout time.

Justatruthseeker · Apr 21, 2016

The Cadet said:
...Given that the laws of nature are descriptive, how is this even a coherent claim?

Funny how quantum physics is trying to say the exact opposite of what you claim.

Jimmy D · Apr 21, 2016

Justatruthseeker said:
Agreed, ignoring the facts that Asian remains Asian and African remains African and only when the two mate does variation come into the species will not make it go away.

You can make all the claims you like, but the simple fact is those infraspecific taxa never become anything new until they mate with another infraspecific taxa in the species. We all understand you must ignore what is right in front of your eyes to peddle your dogma.

Hmmm, but what about huskies?

What is the greatest evidence against the theory of evolution...?

Well-Known Member

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

... and God saw that it was good.

Newbie

Newbie

SO COOL

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

Newbie

SO COOL

Old Newbie

Regular Member

Newbie

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Newbie

Well-Known Member

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency