Evidence for creationism

[Chukchi Husky]

Then who were those "they" you referred to?

The only people that come close to liking me.

They sure do claim a lot don't they. Well, I have seen about every single BBC nature documentary, because I love them. And I claim they haven't watched one ever

They claim it's because those documentaries try so hard to prove that evolution is right, but they fail because they will sometimes use the word "designed".

 

[warpus]

They're far smarter than I am.

You are putting coherent sentences together, they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. Who's smarter?

 

[MobBoss]

It is known how the eye has evolved. For anyone who desires to find out, there's plenty information available.

Ziggy, I think part of the issue here is evidence of evolution shouldnt necessarily disprove creationism, in that, couldnt the ability to evolve be part of the creation itself?

For example, and correct me if I am wrong, but dont we do that ourselves with simple organisms as part of scientific research? That we can 'design' for example, animals that glow in the dark by altering the DNA? That we force evolve virus's in order to better understand them and develop ways to combat them?

If we are able to do this on even such a very small scale at our current level of science, then why is it beyond the pale to think creationism isnt possible and that evolution disproves it?

In my opinion the two are simply not mutually exclusive, and to consider them so is a terrible error I think.

 

[Chukchi Husky]

You are putting coherent sentences together, they believe the Earth is 6,000 years old. Who's smarter?

They are. I failed English.

 

[Miles Teg]

If we are able to do this on even such a very small scale at our current level of science, then why is it beyond the pale to think creationism isnt possible and that evolution disproves it?

Young Earth Creationism is ridiculous, but at least the proponents understand that evolution is a really, really weird tool for the All Powerful God of the Universe to use. It simply doesn't track. Why would God kill billions of animals as a prelude to Humanity? Why would he allow us to evolve with back problems from being bipedal with a quadrupedal spine, crappy eyes (if good by the standards of all the other half blind mammals), white people with a higher occurrence of schizophrenia and so on?

The idea that everything poofed into existence 6000 years ago makes no scientific sense, but nothing else does from a theological perspective.

@ Chukchi Husky. It's been pointed out again and again that while scientists are scientists, most creationists are preachers by trade. They're excellent at both speechifying and speaking off the cuff, and they often seem more prepared and focused in live debates with scientists. That doesn't mean that they're smarter or more correct, it means that they understand Public Speaking. It's also why scientists prefer to debate in literary journals, where that's irrelevant.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Ziggy, I think part of the issue here is evidence of evolution shouldnt necessarily disprove creationism, in that, couldnt the ability to evolve be part of the creation itself?

The claim I was reacting to was: The eye couldn't have evolved. Which is false, wrong, bull, crapola, etc, etc.

And that was all I was reacting to.

For example, and correct me if I am wrong, but dont we do that ourselves with simple organisms as part of scientific research? That we can 'design' for example, animals that glow in the dark by altering the DNA? That we force evolve virus's in order to better understand them and develop ways to combat them?

If we are able to do this on even such a very small scale at our current level of science, then why is it beyond the pale to think creationism isnt possible and that evolution disproves it?

In my opinion the two are simply not mutually exclusive, and to consider them so is a terrible error I think.

That's another issue than saying: evolution can't have happened, thus creationism.

Evolution is scientifically proven fact. What happened before evolution is still unknown, although there have been a couple of interesting leads, it's still in the unknown. So that leaves room for creationism as in forming the first life from which everything evolved, sure.

Evolution, along with a host of evidence from other fields like Geography and Astronomy, only disproved Young Earth Creationism, indeed not the kind I described above.

 

[GhostWriter16]

I'm NOT a Theistic Evolutionist, but still...

Young Earth Creationism is ridiculous, but at least the proponents understand that evolution is a really, really weird tool for the All Powerful God of the Universe to use. It simply doesn't track. Why would God kill billions of animals as a prelude to Humanity? Why would he allow us to evolve with back problems from being bipedal with a quadrupedal spine, crappy eyes (if good by the standards of all the other half blind mammals), white people with a higher occurrence of schizophrenia and so on?

God believes in Human Exceptionalism (At least if the Christian God exists) and so that doesn't really follow. Do you mourn when a monkey dies? Do monkeys mourn when a monkey dies? Not really.

HOWEVER, its still a wacky tool for the Lord to use because A: Death can't really exist in a perfect world, at least not in my opinion, and B: The Neanderthals were supposedly pretty darn close to human, if not totally human (Not really sure what evolutionists think on this, YECs know that they were actually humans from Germany who had arthritis.)
The idea that everything poofed into existence 6000 years ago makes no scientific sense, but nothing else does from a theological perspective.

@ Chukchi Husky. It's been pointed out again and again that while scientists are scientists, most creationists are preachers by trade. They're excellent at both speechifying and speaking off the cuff, and they often seem more prepared and focused in live debates with scientists. That doesn't mean that they're smarter or more correct, it means that they understand Public Speaking. It's also why scientists prefer to debate in literary journals, where that's irrelevant.

Ummm... between 10 and 45% of the US population believes in YEC, as well as many scientists. Evolution isn't proven by any means.

 

[MobBoss]

Young Earth Creationism is ridiculous, but at least the proponents understand that evolution is a really, really weird tool for the All Powerful God of the Universe to use. It simply doesn't track.

Why?

Why would God kill billions of animals as a prelude to Humanity?

To provide them with fossil fuels as a source of energy of course.

Why would he allow us to evolve with back problems from being bipedal with a quadrupedal spine, crappy eyes (if good by the standards of all the other half blind mammals), white people with a higher occurrence of schizophrenia and so on?

Who said he did? Perhaps those are issues attributed to the sins of the world. Didnt we just see an article recently that say science may indicate that cancer is a man caused issue? I do think we did didnt we?

The idea that everything poofed into existence 6000 years ago makes no scientific sense, but nothing else does from a theological perspective.

Even as a conservative evangelical, I dont really buy into the 6000 year thingy, and generally view that as a miscalculation/misinterpretation of biblical text. I prefer to be able to include evolution into my belief system, as opposed to making it exclusive to it.

 

[warpus]

If God exists, my view is that he had nothing to do with "setting up" evolution. Evolution is just what happens, given life.

 

[Haseri]

Do monkeys mourn when a monkey dies? Not really.

But elephants and crows have been observed to do so.

(Not really sure what evolutionists think on this, YECs know that they were actually humans from Germany who had arthritis.)

You're correct in saying they were something very similar to humans. But they were a different species.

Ummm... between 10 and 45% of the US population believes in YEC

It's a good thing reality doesn't conform to the opinion.

as well as many scientists. Evolution isn't proven by any means.

Both false.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Do monkeys mourn when a monkey dies? Not really.

You say this with some authority. Have you looked into this or are you shooting from the hip on this one?

Or is the idea just too weird for you to consider?

 

[MobBoss]

If God exists, my view is that he had nothing to do with "setting up" evolution. Evolution is just what happens, given life.

Ah...but is it something that he instills in life, or possibly even manages, but nudging it in a certain direction every now and then (kind of like a scientist doing virus research)?

I guess my overall point is, if mankind, at its current level of knowledge, is in the beginning stages of learning how to manipulate evolution and control it, can we not envision such creation being a possibility, if not a probability?

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

A possibility. Not a probability. (if I get the meaning of that as having a significant indication of it having happened right)

 

[Murky]

Ah...but is it something that he instills in life, or possibly even manages, but nudging it in a certain direction every now and then (kind of like a scientist doing virus research)?

I guess my overall point is, if mankind, at its current level of knowledge, is in the beginning stages of learning how to manipulate evolution and control it, can we not envision such creation being a possibility, if not a probability?

I agree with the basic idea if that we can create life(in a lab), then life could have been created. That doesn't necessarily mean that "God did it" though.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Domination, I found only a short reference to a scene in Great Migrations, I haven't seen the whole thing myself.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/video/mig...ographic-12071543&tab=9482931&section=8865284

 

[Traitorfish]

Ummm... between 10 and 45% of the US population believes in YEC, as well as many scientists. Evolution isn't proven by any means.

Neither of those sentences has anything at all to do with the other.

 

[Atlas14]

Why?

Because fossils and radiometric dating show that life on earth is much older than 6,000 years old.

 

[El_Machinae]

edit: nm

But elephants and crows have been observed to do so.

I have heard of chimps mourning. I've not heard of crows mourning.

 

[carlosMM]

God suffers from a dilemma; he must allow the Devil and sin in general to exist for a variety of reasons:

and there goes the omnipotent god.....

1. The Devil is just as much one of his children as us, and thus, he cannot be smote

uh, why? bye bye omnipotence.

1a. That not touching upon if the Devil isn't really pure evil and is a more sympathetic version who merely screwed up or is an agent of God

hm, what became of the fallen angel crap?

2. God's love is manifest in free will.

Plenty of suffering in individuals, human and non-human, choice and free will play no role. God is a sadist.

Choice without choices isn't choice at all. By allowing sin to exist, he gives us not only free will, but choices in how to exercise it.

to the deteriment of thrid parties, such as new or unborns. Oops!

What would be the point if he only made it possible to do good? He allows us to be as righteous, amoral, or downright despicable as we please. ...but he also reminds us we'll be held accountable in the end.

There would be no point, and thank you for disproving the Christian omnipotent benevolent god!

3. God allows suffering to exist to respect the free will of humanity.

again, to the detriment of innocents. As I said: a sadist! And why do apologists have to repeat themselves all the time?

All events in society, more or less, are the results of temptations and how we act on them. Or at least, that's what I heard from my Pentecostal-raised mother. I suppose it kind of ties in with the theme of free will being of the utmost importance. Perhaps God imbued us with the power to develop governments and inalienable rights so as to take care of the suffering that he himself could not, lest he violate free will?

if god was omnipotent he could block all evil that makes innocents suffer. if god was omnipotent and chose not to do so, god would be a sadist, and not benevolent. thank you for disproving the Christian omnipotent, benevolent god!
>>OMG I have caught it!

3a. Allowing suffering to exist also serves as a temptation. People can crack under the pressure. But God rewards those whose faith and hope prevents them from succumbing to sin.

bis repetitia non placent! ter repetitia.... let's not go there. see above instead.

 

[Miles Teg]

Who said he did? Perhaps those are issues attributed to the sins of the world. Didnt we just see an article recently that say science may indicate that cancer is a man caused issue? I do think we did didnt we?

So Sin causes cancer, childhood diseases and so forth? Sounds sketchy.

Ummm... between 10 and 45% of the US population believes in YEC, as well as many scientists. Evolution isn't proven by any means.

Dom, you are familiar with Project Steve, right? If not, allow me to explain it. Creationists like yourself often create lists of scientists that have "rejected" evolution. The problem is that these lists are comparably small, send out vaguely worded statements (all scientists believe that Darwin's theories should be subject to due criticism and assessment, that doesn't mean they oppose modern biology), accept "scientists" who haven't practiced for decades or got their credentials from diploma mills, and often just add names to lists wholesale.

Project Steve is a project by the NSCE to gather a list of scientists who support the statement that the observed fact of evolution, and the Theory of Evolution drawn from it, is critical to modern biology, and all organisms are linked by common descent. These people are all properly informed of what they were agreeing to, and have to be real scientists with real degrees.

The catch? This is just the list of those scientists with the first name "Steve", or a variant thereof (Stephanies are allowed). As of current counting, they have 1100+ names. For the record, the Discovery Institute was able to dredge up about 100 names total, and using the looser standards discussed above.