Creationists: what prevents you from accepting ToE?

[Debater Slayer]

When a person does not have answers to defend their position, mocking and ridicule are tools to deflect this. Up and down the evolution establishment, such conduct is frequent, as evidenced by some posts in this forum. Worse yet, honest scientists who dare question the ToE are apparently disciplined, losing jobs, etc.(Yes, I know evolutionists deny this, but examine the facts for yourself.) Leading evolutionists claim that anyone who doesn't accept the ToE is either stupid, crazy, or ignorant. All such conduct, despicable as it is, keeps many people from examining the facts for themselves.

I don't think that most people who post here can be considered parts of the "evolution establishment" -- most are laymen, after all; some are just more well-read on certain subjects than others.

Also, care to cite any sources that support your claims? For one, I think that most scientists already accept evolution as a scientific fact, and those who reject it do so on grounds of personal belief. I have yet to hear of any scientist who rejects the Theory of Evolution based on the evidence there is.

 

[johnhanks]

So the mere existence of a house does not prove it had a builder?

Enough with the houses. We're debating biology here, not architecture.

The marvel of a seeing eye, or a hearing ear proves nothing?

Their mere existence proves nothing about how they originated. Various specific features of both point strongly to their having evolved: the back-to-front retina for a start, and the homology between the auditory ossicles and certain bones in the jaws of fish.

That cetacean echolocation does not prove intelligent design?

You tried this one before; I answered it then. "The specialised echolocation abilities of bats and whales have been traced to mutation of a particular gene which in non-echolocating whales remains similar to that of their close terrestrial relatives". Remember?

What about a piece of wood with the name "Mary" carved in it? Ignoring such evidence will not make it go away. I and millions of others find it completely convincing, especially since the ToE cannot explain it satisfactorily.

I don't think anyone here has ever claimed that a piece of wood with the name "Mary" carved in it is the product of evolution.

So how life began is completely irrelevant to whether life evolved or not? Calling it a different theory may satisfy ToE adherents, but it's merely a ploy to ignore the fundamental question at the base of the ToE.

Rusra, I'm not just calling it a different theory. Abiogenesis is a different theory; your insistence to the contrary merely makes you look doctrinaire and ignorant. Argue with abiogenesis by all means, but learn the basics first.

 

[rusra02]

Not just leading evolutionists.

If you deny it, you are at least one of the three.

Thank you for proving my point.

 

[rusra02]

Care to try again?

Presumably, your post was to prove the claim:
"It [the Bible] also says the earth was created on day one and the sun day four."

The Bible does not state the earth was created on day one, nor the sun on day four.
Genesis 1:1 states God created the heavens and the earth "In the beginning", long before the creative periods mentioned in Genesis 1. Such heavens would include the stars, including our sun. Thus, God stated on the first creative day: "Let light come to be." Before this, "there was darkness" upon the earth (verse 2); light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth's surface. During the first creative day, diffused light began to penetrate to the earth, but the source of that light could not be seen on earth. (Genesis 1:3-5)
On day four, "God went on to say: "Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens..and God proceeded to make the two great luminaries..thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth." (Genesis 1:16,17) God created the "expanse" or atmosphere on Day 2. (Genesis 1:6,7) On Day 4, he made the sun, moon, and the stars "to shine upon the earth". "God proceeded to make" them in that they could now be seen from the earth, occupying a new relationship toward earth's surface and atmosphere.

 

[Heathen Hammer]

Thank you for proving my point.

Thank you for repeatedly proving mine

 

[shawn001]

Presumably, your post was to prove the claim:
"It [the Bible] also says the earth was created on day one and the sun day four."

The Bible does not state the earth was created on day one, nor the sun on day four.
Genesis 1:1 states God created the heavens and the earth "In the beginning", long before the creative periods mentioned in Genesis 1. Such heavens would include the stars, including our sun. Thus, God stated on the first creative day: "Let light come to be." Before this, "there was darkness" upon the earth (verse 2); light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth's surface. During the first creative day, diffused light began to penetrate to the earth, but the source of that light could not be seen on earth. (Genesis 1:3-5)
On day four, "God went on to say: "Let luminaries come to be in the expanse of the heavens..and God proceeded to make the two great luminaries..thus God put them in the expanse of the heavens to shine upon the earth." (Genesis 1:16,17) God created the "expanse" or atmosphere on Day 2. (Genesis 1:6,7) On Day 4, he made the sun, moon, and the stars "to shine upon the earth". "God proceeded to make" them in that they could now be seen from the earth, occupying a new relationship toward earth's surface and atmosphere.

You know the sumerian creation is almost exactly the genesis creation and a different religion. Are they right too?


"The Bible does not state the earth was created on day one, nor the sun on day four."

yes it does as was shown to you.

The sun and stars didn't just pop into existence they evolved and we can see them evolving. There is a progression to the whole universe evolving we have and can observe.


"Before this, "there was darkness" upon the earth (verse 2); light from the already existing sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth's surface."

Wow, YOUR not only rewriting the bible, but also all of cosmology and astronomy yourself based on your opinion and belief.

"sun was somehow prevented from reaching the earth's surface"

explain this process?

"On Day 4, he made the sun, moon, and the stars "to shine upon the earth". "

You contradict yourself even here.

KJV


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was[a] on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters.
3 Then God said, “Let there be light”; and there was light. 4 And God saw the light, that it was good; and God divided the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light Day, and the darkness He called Night. So the evening and the morning were the first day.

Then God said, “Let there be lights in the firmament of the heavens to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs and seasons, and for days and years; 15 and let them be for lights in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth”; and it was so. 16 Then God made two great lights: the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night. He made the stars also. 17 God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light on the earth, 18 and to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness. And God saw that it was good. 19 So the evening and the morning were the fourth day.

Genesis 1 NKJV - The History of Creation - In the - Bible Gateway

We know our sun ignited around 5 billion years ago and how the solar system formed. We can also see new stars being born and new solar systems and even new planets.

Why are they all those craters on the moon, mar, mercury, the earth, venus?
rusra02, you don't get astronomy, cosmology, biology, or have a clue.

This is a "picutre of the oldest light in the universe" before any stars or galaxies existed at all. Everything has evolved from that point on, the heavy elements, stars galaxies and life.

Life has evolved in stages from single cells to before reptiles to reptiles and then to mammals and then to us. Its a done deal, you just don't get it all.

WMAP 1 Year Mission Results Press Release

http://cosmos.lbl.gov/Images/resizenowmap.jpg

http://sos.noaa.gov/images/Solar_System/wmap.jpg

The air your breathing is because of biological evolution and cynobacteria that evolved the process of photosynthesis and gave us the oxygen atmophere we have today. The earths atmophere has evolved even.

 

[shawn001]

Rusra, we have a spacecraft orbiting the moon right now called the lunar reconnaissance orbiter and taking very detailed images and scientific information. Check them out.


How the Moon Evolved - Video Guided Tour

From epic asteroid bombardment and lava flow to man landing on its surface, the Moon has a rich and violent history. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is uncovering a treasure trove of knowledge on the past and present state of Luna.


[youtube]TuHasBN-U1c[/youtube]
How the Moon Evolved - Video Guided Tour - YouTube

 

[rusra02]

The Bible says that "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." The heavens includes our sun as well as the billions of galaxies only recently discovered. As to when God created the heavens and the earth, the Bible simply says "in the beginning". Thus the estimated dates for the age of the universe could be correct, or maybe not. In either case, these dates do not prove the Bible wrong.
The first creative day and subsequent days relate God's preparation of the earth, not his creation of it. As to your claims that the air we breathe is the result of "biological evolution", there is absolutely no proof of such a claim. If you choose to believe blind chance is responsible for life in all it's forms, so be it. I find such a belief both unscientific and unreasonable.
Finally, Sumerian creation legends have nothing in common with the Bible. The contention that they do is, in fact, a legend.

 

[F0uad]

My 5 Points

1. I would say is there any ''Solid Proof'' that HUMAN-EVOLUTION happened or only theory's
(animal Evolution can be true it has nothing against my religion).

2. If my Religion is shown to be wrong on many ''Subjects'' with many proof and evidence you still have to argue ''God'' (Theist vs Atheism)

3. You have to proof how everything came to being for example if the masses of energy exploded what caused them to explode (big-bang) because ''Science cannot contradict Science'' you cannot have a cause without effect or vice versa.

4. How would you argue your Purpose in live and Moral standings if Atheism can only be divined as Individualism

5. If believing that Nothing creating something (what contradicts science as i mentioned) and therefore we have a chance of 1 to the 124 Power of being what we are (without taking our own earth in-counted). Instead having a HUGE chance of a Being(something) that created something with special un-natural powers.

 

[tumbleweed41]

My 5 Points

1. I would say is there any ''Solid Proof'' that HUMAN-EVOLUTION happened or only theory's
(animal Evolution can be true it has nothing against my religion).

All genetic and anthropological evidence leads to the conclusion of biological evolution, for all living creatures. This is what is known as a Scientific Theory, not to be confused with the colloquial use of the word theory.
A Scientific Theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon tested hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Scientific Theories as a whole are considered "facts of nature", such as germ theory, the theory of special relativity, and the theory of gravity.

2. If my Religion is shown to be wrong on many ''Subjects'' with many proof and evidence you still have to argue ''God'' (Theist vs Atheism)

No, there are many theists who accept the facts of biological evolution as the mechanism God used to bring about the diversity of life we have today. One can believe in God without accepting that the 4000 year old writings of men attempting to understand God are literally and historically true. One can accept that there is no historical validity in a worldwide flood, and still appreciate the lesson told in the story.

3. You have to proof how everything came to being for example if the masses of energy exploded what caused them to explode (big-bang) because ''Science cannot contradict Science'' you cannot have a cause without effect or vice versa.

This really has nothing to do with biological evolution. It is just an ontological argument for the existence of a deity. But for the record, cause and effect fails at a subatomic and quantum level. It cannot be shown that cause is necessary, but that does not discount that there may be a cause.

4. How would you argue your Purpose in live and Moral standings if Atheism can only be divined as Individualism

Again, nothing to do with biological evolution. However, as a deist, I find it fascinating when one feels that a divine authority is necessary for an ethical and moral life. But that is a topic for another thread.

5. If believing that Nothing creating something (what contradicts science as i mentioned) and therefore we have a chance of 1 to the 124 Power of being what we are (without taking our own earth in-counted). Instead having a HUGE chance of a Being(something) that created something with special un-natural powers.

As I pointed out above, cause cannot be shown to be necessary. However, this does not prove that there is no cause. So one can believe in God without rejecting the natural reality of our universe. Again, unrelated to biological evolution and for another thread.

 

[shawn001]

The Bible says that "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth." The heavens includes our sun as well as the billions of galaxies only recently discovered. As to when God created the heavens and the earth, the Bible simply says "in the beginning". Thus the estimated dates for the age of the universe could be correct, or maybe not. In either case, these dates do not prove the Bible wrong.
The first creative day and subsequent days relate God's preparation of the earth, not his creation of it. As to your claims that the air we breathe is the result of "biological evolution", there is absolutely no proof of such a claim. If you choose to believe blind chance is responsible for life in all it's forms, so be it. I find such a belief both unscientific and unreasonable.
Finally, Sumerian creation legends have nothing in common with the Bible. The contention that they do is, in fact, a legend.

Wow Rusra, you have some issues here for sure.

"The heavens includes our sun as well as the billions of galaxies only recently discovered"

In the late 1920's by Edward Hubble. Its now 2012


"As to your claims that the air we breathe is the result of "biological evolution", there is absolutely no proof of such a claim."

There is a ton of evidence, you just don't know it. because you know nothing about the formation of the solar system and early earth and planets.

Introduction to the Cyanobacteria


Architects of earth's atmosphere

"The oxygen atmosphere that we depend on was generated by numerous cyanobacteria during the Archaean and Proterozoic Eras. Before that time, the atmosphere had a very different chemistry, unsuitable for life as we know it today."

Introduction to the Cyanobacteria


"Finally, Sumerian creation legends have nothing in common with the Bible. The contention that they do is, in fact, a legend"

yes they do.


Comparing two creation stories: from
Genesis and Babylonian pagan sources



Comparing the Genesis and Babylonian stories of creation

 

[shawn001]

Rusra

So we would have to throw out all of the known fundemental sciences, plate tectonics,gravity, astronomy, cosmology, biology and all others and completely dismiss the entire fossil record, especially geology and what we have obersed and know as facts, that make up scientific theories. We would have to throw out the five mass extintion events on earth. We know the solar system is around 5 billion years old, we know how old the sun and planets are, how they formed by stellar accreation, just like the billions of stars we can see forming right now with the hubble space telescope. We know the elements your made from came from super nova star explaosions billions of years ago. In fact our solar system is recycled material. We have pictures of the universe evolving before ANY stars existed or galaxies.

you might want to watch just this new information on the moon from the new LRO. With craters billions of years old. All of the rocky planets and our moon have massive crater impacts from the formation of the solar system.

How the Moon Evolved - Video Guided Tour

From epic asteroid bombardment and lava flow to man landing on its surface, the Moon has a rich and violent history. The Lunar Reconnaissance Orbiter is uncovering a treasure trove of knowledge on the past and present state of Luna.




[youtube]TuHasBN-U1c[/youtube]
How the Moon Evolved - Video Guided Tour - YouTube


So are you saying the earth was created in six days? That anyone believes this in 2012 is way beyond me and the massive amount of evidence in all the sciences, that can dimiss the earth being created in six days with no problem what so ever.

 

[F0uad]

All genetic and anthropological evidence leads to the conclusion of biological evolution, for all living creatures. This is what is known as a Scientific Theory, not to be confused with the colloquial use of the word theory.
A Scientific Theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon tested hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. Scientific Theories as a whole are considered "facts of nature", such as germ theory, the theory of special relativity, and the theory of gravity.



No, there are many theists who accept the facts of biological evolution as the mechanism God used to bring about the diversity of life we have today. One can believe in God without accepting that the 4000 year old writings of men attempting to understand God are literally and historically true. One can accept that there is no historical validity in a worldwide flood, and still appreciate the lesson told in the story.



This really has nothing to do with biological evolution. It is just an ontological argument for the existence of a deity. But for the record, cause and effect fails at a subatomic and quantum level. It cannot be shown that cause is necessary, but that does not discount that there may be a cause.



Again, nothing to do with biological evolution. However, as a deist, I find it fascinating when one feels that a divine authority is necessary for an ethical and moral life. But that is a topic for another thread.


As I pointed out above, cause cannot be shown to be necessary. However, this does not prove that there is no cause. So one can believe in God without rejecting the natural reality of our universe. Again, unrelated to biological evolution and for another thread.

Hehehe.. I was just bringing forth my own points i can go further in detail if wanted.


I know that science is called a Theory on many things what seems false and i can agree on it for example on gravity and other evolutions, but it never showed ''Proofed'' that Humans did evolve they simply broth forth a possibility.

World-Wide-Flood? Your taking things of the bible aren't you.. I'm not a Christian i do not have that kind of concept of god as people portrait him as a Santa-Claus.

Causality will be a big factor on how you look into live if you pre-date it back to the BB, Second Law of Thermodynamics clearly mentions this in more details and therefore cannot contradict what ''Evolutionist'' claim to be science. (Science contradicting science) anyway i will go in detail later on but as you see i do not know much of Evolution of Bio but rather i am looking into the Theist vs Atheism arguments.

If you want i can make some arguments in favour of Theism but i rather do it on a diferrent thread or true personal messages.

 

[shawn001]

"but it never showed ''Proofed'' that Humans did evolve"

yes it has and its tied into the big bang and stellar and planetary evolution.

 

[tumbleweed41]

Hehehe.. I was just bringing forth my own points i can go further in detail if wanted.


I know that science is called a Theory on many things what seems false and i can agree on it for example on gravity and other evolutions, but it never showed ''Proofed'' that Humans did evolve they simply broth forth a possibility.

World-Wide-Flood? Your taking things of the bible aren't you.. I'm not a Christian i do not have that kind of concept of god as people portrait him as a Santa-Claus.

Causality will be a big factor on how you look into live if you pre-date it back to the BB, Second Law of Thermodynamics clearly mentions this in more details and therefore cannot contradict what ''Evolutionist'' claim to be science. (Science contradicting science) anyway i will go in detail later on but as you see i do not know much of Evolution of Bio but rather i am looking into the Theist vs Atheism arguments.

If you want i can make some arguments in favour of Theism but i rather do it on a diferrent thread or true personal messages.

• The Second Law of Thermodynamics applies to closed systems so has nothing to do with biological evolution. As for the Big Bang, that is a state of extremely low entropy that has increased over time.
• Causality cannot be shown at the sub-atomic and quantum levels. Particles appear or disappear for no apparent reason.

But for the purposes of this thread. Lets stick to biological evolution and the Theory of Evolution.

As per the OP, what is it specifically that prevents you from accepting biological evolution, particularly of humans?

 

[F0uad]

"but it never showed ''Proofed'' that Humans did evolve"

yes it has and its tied into the big bang and stellar and planetary evolution.

Can you show me that its been proven?

The second sentence was a typical add-on what had nothing to do with it :no:

 

[shawn001]

Can you show me that its been proven?

The second sentence was a typical add-on what had nothing to do with it :no:

Billions of facts support the scientific theory of evolution.

For one

"Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving
A comprehensive scan of the human genome finds that hundreds of our genes have undergone positive natural selection during the past 10,000 years of human evolution.

Hundreds of Human Genes Still Evolving | LiveScience


"The second sentence was a typical add-on what had nothing to do with it "

That is because you don't know why it has something to do with it. It most certainly does have something to do with it. Its like saying you can make a recipe, without the ingredients.

What element is life on earth made from?

 

[shawn001]

The new human evolution website from the new 20+ million dollar museam hall at the smithsonian.

Evidence of Evolution
Scientists have discovered a wealth of evidence concerning human evolution, and this evidence comes in many forms. Thousands of human fossils enable researchers and students to study the changes that occurred in brain and body size, locomotion, diet, and other aspects regarding the way of life of early human species over the past 6 million years. Millions of stone tools, figurines and paintings, footprints, and other traces of human behavior in the prehistoric record tell about where and how early humans lived and when certain technological innovations were invented. Study of human genetics show how closely related we are to other primates – in fact, how connected we are with all other organisms – and can indicate the prehistoric migrations of our species, Homo sapiens, all over the world. Advances in the dating of fossils and artifacts help determine the age of those remains, which contributes to the big picture of when different milestones in becoming human evolved.

Exciting scientific discoveries continually add to the broader and deeper public knowledge of human evolution. Find out about the latest evidence in our What’s Hot in Human Origins section.
Behavior
Explore the evidence of early human behavior—from ancient footprints to stone tools and the earliest symbols and art – along with similarities and differences in the behavior of other primate species.
3D Collection
Explore our 3D collection of fossils and artifacts.
Human Fossils
From skeletons to teeth, early human fossils have been found of more than 6,000 individuals. Look into our digital 3-D collection and learn about fossil human species.
Genetics
Our genes offer evidence of how closely we are related to one another – and of our species’ connection with all other organisms.
Dating
The layers that contain fossils and archeological clues can be dated by more than a dozen techniques that use the basic principles of physics, chemistry, and Earth sciences. Some techniques can even estimate the age of the ancient teeth and bones directly. Advances in dating have made human evolution very exciting!

Human Evolution by The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

One Species, Living Worldwide
The billions of human beings living today all belong to one species: Homo sapiens.
As in all species, there is variation among individual human beings, from size and shape to skin tone and eye color. But we are much more alike than we are different. We are, in fact, remarkably similar. The DNA of all human beings living today is 99.9% alike.
We all have roots extending back 200,000 years to the emergence of the first modern humans in Africa, and back more than 6 million years to the evolution of the earliest human species in Africa. This amazing story of adaptation and survival is written in the language of our genes, in every cell of our bodies—as well as in the fossil and behavioral evidence.
This ancient heritage is yours.
Explore the origins of modern humans in Africa about 200,000 years ago and celebrate our species’ epic journey around the world in this video: "One Species, Living Worldwide."
http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/genetics/one-species-living- worldwide


New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution

Homo sapiens originated in Africa 150,000 years ago and began to migrate 55,000 to 60,000 years ago. It is thought he arrived in Australia around 45,000 years before present (BP). Australia was, at the time, already colonised by homo erectus. This dispersal, from Africa to Australia through Arabia, Asia and the Malay peninsula, could have occurred at a rate of 1km per year. (Credit: Image courtesy of University Of Cambridge)
New Research Confirms 'Out Of Africa' Theory Of Human Evolution

DNA Agrees With All the Other Science: Darwin Was Right
Molecular biologist Sean Carroll shows how evolution happens, one snippet of DNA at a time


One of the great triumphs of modern evolutionary science, evo devo addresses many of the key questions that were unanswerable when Charles Darwin published On the Origin of Species in 1859, and Carroll has become a leader in this nascent field. Now a professor of molecular biology and genetics at the University of Wisconsin, he continues to decode the genes that control life’s physical forms and to explore how mutations in those genes drive evolutionary change. These days, Carroll also devotes increasing energy to telling the public about his field’s remarkable discoveries through a series of books—Endless Forms Most Beautiful, The Making of the Fittest, and the brand-new Remarkable Creatures. He spoke with DISCOVER senior editor Pamela Weintraub about what his work has taught him about Darwin, the nature of evolution, and how life really works.
It has been 150 years since Charles Darwin proposed his theory of evolution in On the Origin of Species, yet in some ways the concept of evolution seems more controversial than ever today. Why do you think that is?

It is a cultural issue, not a scientific one. On the science side our confidence grows yearly because we see independent lines of evidence converge. What we’ve learned from the fossil record is confirmed by the DNA record and confirmed again by embryology. But people have been raised to disbelieve evolution and to hold other ideas more precious than this knowledge. At the same time, we routinely rely on DNA to convict and exonerate criminals. We rely on DNA science for things like paternity. We rely on DNA science in the clinic to weigh our disease risks or maybe even to look at prognoses for things like cancer. DNA science surrounds us, but in this one realm we seem unwilling to accept its facts. Juries are willing to put people to death based upon the variations in DNA, but they’re not willing to understand the mechanism that creates that variation and shapes what makes humans different from other things. It’s a blindness. I think this is a phase that we’ll eventually get through. Other countries have come to peace with DNA. I don’t know how many decades or centuries it’s going to take us.
DNA Agrees With All the Other Science: Darwin Was Right | Evolution | DISCOVER Magazine


They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To
Our species—and individual races—have recently made big evolutionary changes to adjust to new pressures.

They Don't Make Homo Sapiens Like They Used To | Human Evolution | DISCOVER Magazine


a joint statement of IAP by 68 national and international science academies lists as established scientific fact that Earth is approximately 4.6 billion years old and has undergone continual change; that life, according to the evidence of earliest fossils, appeared on Earth at least 3.8 billion years ago and has subsequently taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve; and that the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicates their common primordial origin

 

[garrydons]

Sorry to say that up to this very moment I am not convinced that humans came from a certain family of monkeys. No offense, there might be humans who has resemblance of a monkey but still they are not monkey. Humans are very distinct from animals.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

Sorry to say that up to this very moment I am not convinced that humans came from a certain family of monkeys.

Evolution doesn't say that. Go and read what evolution actually says about what humans evolved from and then come back.

No offense, there might be humans who has resemblance of a monkey but still they are not monkey. Humans are very distinct from animals.

No, we're not - because we are animals by definition. What else could we possibly be?