Evidence against Evolution

[Me Myself]

In response to the 'evidence against speciation?' thread, im making this to present some of the evidence that some scientists have identified which contradict aspects of the current model of ToE and do give people like myself a reason to doubt.

As you yourself put, scientists are refining and debating about the specifics of evolution, but the fact that evolution happens is undebated.

I've asked this many times, but:

Can you name me any non-christian biologist alive today that doesn't believe in evolution?

I haven't heard a single name since I asked the question, and I even made a thread about it. Quite honestly, I thought at least 3 joes would come up. But none. Not a SINGLE one.

The biologist can be hinduist, atheist, agnostic, buddhist, whateverist.

Take your pick, I just want some non-christian one that has something against evolution and hasn't died already.


NOT EVEN ONE so far. And one would still be abismally low mind you. But not even ONE.

 

[icebuddy]

Actually it doesn't take billions of positive mutations. Most of it is done by neutral mutations called genetic drift.
The Lion and the Tiger are different species, but they really aren't all that different from one another.

I dont disagree with Evolution, however It sounds like the drifting is all done within a kind of species. But that wouldnt be my disagreement anyways... (I dont limit Gods creation)

As another example, we know the mutations that happened to make us different from Chimps (we don't yet know what all they do) and most of them are simple single nucleotide changes. For instance there is a single nucleotide difference between our FoxP2 gene and theirs. FoxP2 is one of the genes that gives us the ability to talk. Obviously not all of these changes needed to happen at the same time, but slowly over a period of 6 to 4 million years.

Ok this is where i would have some disagreement. It is my thinking that the earth in not Millions of years old. Since, I dont disagree that Evolution of Gods creation is possible, maybe we should talk about why one thinks the earth is so old... Most creationist will say the earth is under 25,000 years and Evolutionist will say Billions...

i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate. Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes. There are others like Salt in the ocean, Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

 

[icebuddy]

Facts not Faith

Im reading a great book thats called "I dont have enough Faith to be a Athiest". Its a very good read for someone with an open mind.

In Love,
Tom

 

[Tristesse]

Im reading a great book thats called "I dont have enough Faith to be a Athiest". Its a very good read for someone with an open mind.

In Love,
Tom

A couple things I find odd with that book title, number one, it takes absolutely no faith to be an atheist, because most atheistic positions are a rejection of a faith based position, secondly, I thought faith was a good thing from a religious perspective. If the author of this book is religious and is cattering towards a religious crowd, wouldn't atheists having more faith be a good thing?

 

[tumbleweed41]

Despite what you heard at a "Creationist Seminar", astrophysics, nuclear physics, chemistry, biology, geology and all other related scientific disciplines empirically verify the age of the Earth as being well over 4 billion years old.

And most YEC's claim the Earth is 5,700 to 10,000 years old. You will notice that YEC's do not provide any scientific evidence for these claims. But rather attempt to discredit known scientific evidence with pseudoscientific claims and logical fallacies.

 

[Dan4reason]

Im reading a great book thats called "I dont have enough Faith to be a Athiest". Its a very good read for someone with an open mind.

In Love,
Tom

I can assure you that most of the arguments in that that book are pretty weak and that book makes some generalizations about what atheists believe.

Did you know we have found over 4,000 hominid fossils the ancestors of modern humans?

 

[painted wolf]

Im reading a great book thats called "I dont have enough Faith to be a Athiest". Its a very good read for someone with an open mind.

In Love,
Tom

I would suggest you read "Finding Darwin's God" by Dr. Ken Miller.
Amazon.com: Finding Darwin's God: A Scientist's Search For Common Ground Between God and Evolution (9780060930493): Kenneth R. Miller: Books

You don't need to be an atheist to accept the evidence for evolution. I'm not an atheist and I'm a biologist and so are a significant portion of evolutionary biologists.

wa:do

 

[painted wolf]

I dont disagree with Evolution, however It sounds like the drifting is all done within a kind of species. But that wouldnt be my disagreement anyways... (I dont limit Gods creation)

Drift is a feature of populations... not "kinds of species"
Two populations within a species will drift away from one another until they can no longer reproduce with each other and are different species the smaller the population in isolation the faster the drift happens. This is why the Foxes of the Channel islands are different species from the Grey Foxes on the main land.

Ok this is where i would have some disagreement. It is my thinking that the earth in not Millions of years old. Since, I dont disagree that Evolution of Gods creation is possible, maybe we should talk about why one thinks the earth is so old... Most creationist will say the earth is under 25,000 years and Evolutionist will say Billions...

i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate. Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes. There are others like Salt in the ocean, Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

So, all of science is wrong. Every branch of science from Physics and Chemistry to Geology, Paleontology and Archeology to Biology are all wrong.
All of them.

If you really wanted you could easily look up all those creationist arguments and find out how they are based on mistakes and outright fraud. They sound reasonable until you actually look at the evidence.

wa:do

 

[secret2]

i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate. Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes. There are others like Salt in the ocean, Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

You don't really need your notes. Just search "XXXX young earth" (for example, "salt in ocean young earth" or "moon receding rate young earth") and you'll find that these supposedly kick-butt evidence have got their butts kicked numerous times.

 

[Dan4reason]

Here are great resources for you:
How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments
An Index to Creationist Claims

i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate.
Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes.

Refuted here.
How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Hovind's 'Proofs'

There are others like Salt in the ocean,

Refuted here.
CD221.1: Amount of dissolved sodium in oceans

Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

Refuted here.
How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments: Hovind's 'Proofs'

 

[fantome profane]

i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate. Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes. There are others like Salt in the ocean, Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

An Index to Creationist Claims

Here, you can look up all of those things you were told at that "seminar". And please by all means dig deeper. You wii find that you were lied to

 

[McBell]

Im reading a great book thats called "I dont have enough Faith to be a Athiest". Its a very good read for someone with an open mind.

In Love,
Tom

Actually, that book is nothing more than a preaching to the choir.

 

[Krok]

It is my thinking that the earth in not Millions of years old.

What you think is of no value. It's what you can demonstrate that counts.

Since, I dont disagree that Evolution of Gods creation is possible, maybe we should talk about why one thinks the earth is so old...

As I'm currently working on the Dwyka Group, I offer that Group as evidence that the earth is way more than 25 000 years old. You can read up on it yourself. Dwyka Group - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please also don't ignore the references at the bottom.

The Dwyka Group consists mainly of horizons of diamictite, but also includes alternating horizons of shale, sandstone and even a coal seam occur in places.

As we know the mechanisms by which diamictite, shale, sandstone and coal form and the maximum thickness of the Group, the Dwyka Group therefore consists of strata taking a life-span of much, much more than 25 000 years to form.

The Dwyka Group is also the lowermost group of the Karoo Sequence, which consists of numerous other formations and groups.

Thus, the earth is definitely more than 25 000 years old.

Apart from that, we can actually measure the age of the diabase and dolerite dykes and sills in and around the Dyka Formation directly utilising radiometric dating methods. When considering their field relationship to the Group, these methods agree that the Dwyka Group is Permo-Carboniferous in age. This is an empirical measurement.

Furthermore, the maximum age inferred from fossils found in underlying strata is Late Devonian or Early Carboniferous, and minimum age inferred from fossils in the upper glacial deposits is Early Permian. More empirical evidence.

What's your's that the earth is maximum 25 000 years old?

Most creationist will say the earth is under 25,000 years...

What they say is of no value. It's what the can demonstrate that counts. How do they measure the age of the earth empirically?

..and Evolutionist will say Billions...

Why can't creationists get it into their heads that geologists determine the age of rocks and the earth, not "evolutionists"? In science evolutionists do biology, not geology.

..i was at a Creationist Siminar and although I dont have my notes now, I remember them talking about earths measureable events that dont add up to the years Most evolutionist put on things. An Example would be the moon moving away from earth at a steady rate. Go back Millions of years and one would have to duck every time the moon passes. There are others like Salt in the ocean, Comets shouldnt exist and scientist know this so they invented the Oort cloud, and many others...

They lied to you. That's all they have.

 

[icebuddy]

Did you know we have found over 4,000 hominid fossils the ancestors of modern humans?

What makes them Ancestors of humans? In my mind i think of things as extinct. Why does one connect to the human geneology? It seems to me that Like my Jehovah Witness buddys we are all following the leader without ample evidence or knolledge.

 

[painted wolf]

What makes them Ancestors of humans? In my mind i think of things as extinct. Why does one connect to the human geneology? It seems to me that Like my Jehovah Witness buddys we are all following the leader without ample evidence or knolledge.

You realize we have genetic material from some of them as well right?

Plus, in all honesty.... it's impossible to look at this and not recognize it as related to us.

wa:do

 

[Pegg]

You realize we have genetic material from some of them as well right?

Plus, in all honesty.... it's impossible to look at this and not recognize it as related to us.

wa:do

neanderthal most likely ARE humans... from not so long ago. My guess is that it is the apelike fossils that many people have a hard time believing are our ancestors.

 

[painted wolf]

neanderthal most likely ARE humans... from not so long ago. My guess is that it is the apelike fossils that many people have a hard time believing are our ancestors.

You mean like this guy?

Though thanks to the genetics we have from Neanderthals, we know they weren't "human" at least not the same species as we are.

wa:do

 

[icebuddy]

You realize we have genetic material from some of them as well right?

Plus, in all honesty.... it's impossible to look at this and not recognize it as related to us.

My thoughts are that God made alot of things and some look alot alike. Take Dogs, cats, wolves, lions, ect... I believe that science cannot provoke the supernautral and therefore can be very wrong if God exists (as I believe).

For example, we all know Mt Rushmore was created by men with inteligence. However, One could explain it away as formed with natural causes if he wanted to. (Although he would be wrong) Thats how I see what going on here with some science and Evolution theories... Not once do we see God as the answer, but many of us know God Exists, so there becomes confussion...

 

[icebuddy]

Despite what you heard at a "Creationist Seminar", astrophysics, nuclear physics, chemistry, biology, geology and all other related scientific disciplines empirically verify the age of the Earth as being well over 4 billion years old.

And most YEC's claim the Earth is 5,700 to 10,000 years old. You will notice that YEC's do not provide any scientific evidence for these claims. But rather attempt to discredit known scientific evidence with pseudoscientific claims and logical fallacies.

What i know is that certain dating methods are more accurate than others. I have to go through my notes, but there are many YEC that have scientific answers. Of couse we will not all agree in here, but its enough for me. Even certain dating meathods come up with young dates from time to time when material is subbmited without labels. (Just date this)

Also, all dates that go back very far depend on all half lives starting off at the same point. (which no one knows for sure) No one was around durring the creation of the universe to know how exatly everything started off.

We use to think of Diamonds as being very old, hence, Diamonds are forever. Now we know diamonds can be formed in a lab in a very short time with the right conditions. But Im sure we wont all agree on all things...

 

[icebuddy]

You mean like this guy?

Though thanks to the genetics we have from Neanderthals, we know they weren't "human" at least not the same species as we are.

wa:do

For years we taught that Pilt Down man(1912), as well as some others, where the true missing link. Science Evolutionist put this in text books and told us what he ate, what he hunted and where he lived. Basicaly everything we needed to know about him. Dating him and fit him in perfectly with in the Evolutionary chart. Hundreds of papers written, leading science down a blind alley for 40 years. Many other theories spun off because of this find and others like it. However, 40 years later, after it fueled the fire of Evolution theories that still exist today, it was found to be a fraud.

Others like Java Man, Nebraska man, Peking man, Lucy, and even Neanterthal man either fall in the same situation or have unclear results that some have jumped to conclussions...