Draka
Wonder Woman
The thing is, there are mounds of evidence. There are many fossils which actually show the transition. So the question then becomes...what exactly are you looking for?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Would it be best for evolutionists to just ignore creationsts?
- Thread starter St Giordano Bruno
- Start date
The thing is, there are mounds of evidence. There are many fossils which actually show the transition. So the question then becomes...what exactly are you looking for?
outhouse
Atheistically
because you lack the education on the subject at hand.
Possibly because you refuse to look at the valid evidence taught in every major university around the world as higher learning.
how are you trying to educate yourself properly on this subject??? because you have been here long enough and we have showed you many times the evidence you now ask for.
and why would your belief change when we show you solid evidence? a second time, or a third
why would we waist time knowing you wont change belief with any amount of evidence
Photonic
Ad astra!
There's your customary dodge, courtesy of creationism.
Matthew78
aspiring biblical scholar
Wow, I must be a clever cookie!
You got it exactly wrong. You say that evolution retrodicts that man evolved from "ape-like" creatures. I asked you to explain why you think evolution retrodicts this. I ask you what you think evolution retrodicts to see if you really understand evolution as much as you think you do.
The problem is that creationists make all kinds of half-baked statements about evolution which betray an astounding ignorance of it. Consider this silly example:
"If mankind evolve from apes, why are there still apes?"
This betrays a profound ignorance of evolution. I would ask a creationist who asks this question, "What makes you think that evolution retrodicts that a parent species cannot exist simultaneously with a daughter species?" and this would be after pointing out that no evolutionary biologists believe that man came from apes, only that man and apes share a common ancestor.
First of all, I'm not asking you to show anything. I asked you a question in order to understand how fully well you understand evolution so I can understand why you don't believe it. I find that most people who disbelieve that evolution happened know little about it.
Secondly, why are you asking evolutionists for empirical evidence? I bet a dime to a dollar that you don't believe that empirical evidence doesn't exist and cannot exist. What is "empirical evidence" to you? What does that term mean?
Third, I suspect that if someone showed you empirical evidence for evolution, you'd probably dismiss it as a hoax of some sort. Maybe a demonic hoax designed to test the faith of believers like yourself.
Lastly, suppose you were asked for empirical evidence to prove that God exists, that Jesus Christ rose from the dead, and that the Bible was inspired by God. Do you have empirical evidence? If not, why demand empirical evidence for evolution?
Quite a statement from a ToE proponent on a website dedicated to religious topics.
Why not have a ToE forum and only allow those who believe in evolution as members?
BTW, lumping anyone who believes in creation with the YEC crowd is both dishonest and wrong.
St Giordano Bruno
Well-Known Member
I've shown you many examples, in post 149. In true creationist fashion, however, you steadfastly look the other way.
Not trying very hard, are you?
They will only tell you they were "placed in the rocks by Satan to deceive us" (sic)
sandy whitelinger
Veteran Member
Resistance is futile.
The question is a good one and I may sound foolish but even with all the science evidences and years of schools teaching me the understanding of evolution, I still have this empty feeling that I can not ignore; like there's more to it.
I'll be honest, I feel that if I totally expect evolution I somehow am questioning my faith. I don't think I'm totally alone in this situation. At least I hope not.
Precisely!
I believe most of the reason for the existence of Creationism is the emotional rejection of the idea that humans are "just animals". Some people apparently feel that it is offensive or disrespectful not to claim that humans were Meant To Be as such from the start.
Can 1+1=3 exist if 1+1=2 is proven. No!
Creationism exists simply because evolution is not proven, scientifically speaking.
And scientifically speaking, evolution belongs to history instead of science. If you are scientific enough, you should have known that evolution by far can hardly bring up a testable model for scientific predicatability and falsifyability.
A little eraboration, science is about the discovery of existing physics laws and natural rules. They are regarded as laws and rules simply because we speculate that things repeat (yes, REPEAT) themselves such that we can speculate and predict when they repeat. We don't have laws and rules so to speak if things don't repeat.
While history occurred only once, it thus can't be scientific as you can't make history repeat. What evolution does is actually a trick. On the one hand, it claims a repeating process called "evolution by natural selection", on the other what the theory can bring up is historical evidence instead of repeatable speculations and predictions.
For example, when you claim that "dinosaurs evolve to birds", this is just a one time event occurred in history. You don't have a "dinosaurs evolve to birds" process repeat itself as we speak for us to speculate and predict. It is thus all guess work, no matter how evident you think it is. It is because if nothing repeats then no laws nor rules can be summed up.
Worst still, now you can replace "dinosaurs" above with any species or any living organism you know of, you'll notice ToE is all guess work over 99.9999% living organism on earth. That is to say, over 99.9999% living organisms ever existed on earth, we can hardly say that they follow the rule of evolution to evolve, simply because nothing repeats there for such a rule to be scientifically speculatable and predictable. And because all evidnece provided are of one time occurance in the past that whatever you claim can hardly be scientifically falsifyable. That is to say, if your claim is not truth, we have no way to falsify your claim scientifically.
So not only that ToE is not scientific, but also that it is a deceptive piece of art claiming the existing of a repeating process called "natural selection" but can hardly scientically back it up.
Creationism exists simply because evolution is not proven, scientifically speaking.
And scientifically speaking, evolution belongs to history instead of science. If you are scientific enough, you should have known that evolution by far can hardly bring up a testable model for scientific predicatability and falsifyability.
A little eraboration, science is about the discovery of existing physics laws and natural rules. They are regarded as laws and rules simply because we speculate that things repeat (yes, REPEAT) themselves such that we can speculate and predict when they repeat. We don't have laws and rules so to speak if things don't repeat.
While history occurred only once, it thus can't be scientific as you can't make history repeat. What evolution does is actually a trick. On the one hand, it claims a repeating process called "evolution by natural selection", on the other what the theory can bring up is historical evidence instead of repeatable speculations and predictions.
For example, when you claim that "dinosaurs evolve to birds", this is just a one time event occurred in history. You don't have a "dinosaurs evolve to birds" process repeat itself as we speak for us to speculate and predict. It is thus all guess work, no matter how evident you think it is. It is because if nothing repeats then no laws nor rules can be summed up.
Worst still, now you can replace "dinosaurs" above with any species or any living organism you know of, you'll notice ToE is all guess work over 99.9999% living organism on earth. That is to say, over 99.9999% living organisms ever existed on earth, we can hardly say that they follow the rule of evolution to evolve, simply because nothing repeats there for such a rule to be scientifically speculatable and predictable. And because all evidnece provided are of one time occurance in the past that whatever you claim can hardly be scientifically falsifyable. That is to say, if your claim is not truth, we have no way to falsify your claim scientifically.
So not only that ToE is not scientific, but also that it is a deceptive piece of art claiming the existing of a repeating process called "natural selection" but can hardly scientically back it up.
Last edited:
Skwim
Veteran Member
Creationism exists because some Christians can't reconcile evolution with their religious beliefs, religious beliefs that must be upheld at any cost.
You funny guy . . . or a troll, and I'll let it go at that.
You must be kidding me. Creationism exists long before the concept of evolution emerged! Creationism is following a book written thousand years ago!
You don't have an argument here, just admit that you take ToE as your faith!
Skwim
Veteran Member
I was speaking in the present tense: "Creationism exists because. . . ." Unlike the creationism of old, which was taken at face value, today's creationism is all about battling evolution. The mission of today's creationist is to prove why evolution is wrong, rather than trying to prove why creationism is right---a widely recognized tactic. And this is done because they recognize the threat science poses to their beliefs. Why else try to get creationism taught in public school science classes? Because they fear it will corrupt the religious beliefs of Christian students. This is no secret, but well recognized and even admitted to by creationists. Creationists fear the power of science and rational thought, which they should, and is why they've gone to outlandish extremes to shore up their belief with distortions, deceptions, and even outright lies---and no, I'm not going to give you examples because a quick Google search will turn up plenty of them.
Rationally, creationism is a bankrupt concept whose only basis is faith, and faith alone. And if that's enough for you, then go for it. Just don't try to push it into places it doesn't belong.
johnhanks
Well-Known Member
Scientific theories are never proven; the best you can get is that they have been tested and not yet falsified.
You seem to imagine there's nothing more to evolutionary theory than phylogeny - the reconstruction of past evolutionary relationships. Evolution is a much broader theory than that, addressing genetic changes in contemporary populations as well as those of the past.
Father Heathen
Veteran Member
I'm beginning to think that creationism apologists require not only willful ignorance and intellectual dishonesty but also a bit of masochism as well.
Photonic
Ad astra!
Well, to be fair, I think they are just so blinded by personal and emotional bias that they don't even realize they are being masochistic.
Photonic
Ad astra!
Evolution has existed for hundreds of millions of years. Possibly billions if life on other planets exists. (that's another discussion)
Whether you chose to accept the facts or not doesn't change the validity of the science.
That's what it all comes down to with you people. You assume that it, as a "faith" in your eyes, would replace your own faith.
Let me help you here, it isn't a faith. It doesn't need you to exist or to continue to exist, because as scientific fact it is outside of humanity, yet defines us.
So you don't really have an argument, you are simply denying fact.
Man of Faith
Well-Known Member
I've shown you many examples, in post 149. In true creationist fashion, however, you steadfastly look the other way.
Not trying very hard, are you?
This picture only validates that evolution is a scam and I will tell you why. Out of one side of the evolutionists mouth they say that this picture is evidence of common descent of humans and out of the other side of their mouths they say that no fossil can be shown to have any ancestry or descendant relationship with any other fossil.