Evolution is no more science than Creationism is.

[lilithu]

I'll take that to meant that you've lost the argument,

I take it to mean she's tired of arguing with a fence post.

 

[Luke_17:2]

There is so much evidence for evolution that it's not debated anymore! It's the foundational assumption now for every advancement in medicine and every other science. Evolution cannot be compared to religion and when you do that you come across as a complete idiot.

Evolutionists remain convinced even though the atmosphere, population, the moon moving away from the Earth, moon dust, the depletion of ocean based resources; al of these things disprove evolution, and yet they remain convinced. That suggests faith, or religion. I've given plenty evidence against it, and no one has countered it: if it cannot be debated anymore, it's because its credibility is only consistent in the most fanatical memers of the belief.

 

[Luke_17:2]

I take it to mean she's tired of arguing with a fence post.

No one has countered my arguments. Some people have argued, but I it find stubborn, "hold the beachead" type of argument on their part. People have called me ignorant, but they haven't explained how I'm ignorant. I take that to mean that they have an inability to argue because there are no arguments. And notice who's doing the name-calling? My experience has been that the losing side does the name calling only when there is no more convincing arguments on their side.

 

[lilithu]

Evolutionists remain convinced even though the atmosphere, population, the moon moving away from the Earth, moon dust, the depletion of ocean based resources; al of these things disprove evolution, and yet they remain convinced. That suggests faith, or religion. I've given plenty evidence against it, and no one has countered it: if it cannot be debated anymore, it's because its credibility is only consistent in the most fanatical memers of the belief.

You're "evidence" makes as much sense as me saying that "Creationism is wrong because my cat has spots."
Counter that argument please.
Can't?
Well, then that proves I'm right. :areyoucra

As for faith, yes, we all place our faith in something. Some of us just place it in something more well founded.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

Evolutionists remain convinced even though the atmosphere, population, the moon moving away from the Earth, moon dust, the depletion of ocean based resources; al of these things disprove evolution, and yet they remain convinced. That suggests faith, or religion. I've given plenty evidence against it, and no one has countered it: if it cannot be debated anymore, it's because its credibility is only consistent in the most fanatical memers of the belief.

1) There is nothing in astronomy that can singularly disprove evolution because there is nothing in evolutionary theory that requires any one astological fact.

2) Evolution is not debated because every advancement in science upholds the basic tenants of the theory or offers extremely minor corrections.

3) The only challenges to the fundamental theory come from outside of the scientific field on the basis of religious prejudice.

 

[angellous_evangellous]

You're "evidence" makes as much sense as me saying that "Creationism is wrong because my cat has spots."
Counter that argument please.
Can't?
Well, then that proves I'm right. :areyoucra

As for faith, yes, we all place our faith in something. Some of us just place it in something more well founded.

Yes. A basic understanding of logic and debate theory would be very constructive.

Thank God there's a course on RF: How to Debate

 

[fantome profane]

To evolve could mean to change, but most of its meanings imply progression. That is the point of evolution, or didn't you know that? It says that we were originally little bacterias in the primordial soup, then we progressed until be became monkeys, and now we're humans. That is evolution. And it is a direct contradiction to the II Law Thermodynamics.

This is not the theory of evolution! The theory of evolution does not predict that all life forms will evolve into more complex lifeforms! You do not understand or even know what the theory of evolution is! Kent Hovind will never tell you what the theory of evolution actually is! Kent Hovind will only give you misleading information!


(sorry for yelling :sorry1: )

 

[Luke_17:2]

None of you have answered any of my questions. Are you doing this intentionally? To recap:

1. Where did the matter come from that caused the big bang?
2. Why do 3 planets, and 6 moons spin in the opposite direction of the sun?
3. How do you explain the half-life of 1400 years?
4. How do you explain that 80 million years ago, at the rate that it is currently moving away, the moon would have been at tree top level?
5. How do explain the relatively small amount of moon dust on the moon's surface?
6. How do you explain the fact that no missing links have been found? There are around 30,000 missing links, so you'd expect to find some: why haven't we?
7. Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?
You say that creationism is simply religion, whereas evolutionism is based on science. The Bible says in Genesis 1 that all creatures reproduce "after their kind" (no change to another kind, i.e., no transitional forms). So the complete absence of transitional forms in the fossil record supports creationism.
8. Where did all the 90-plus elements come from (iron, barium, calcium, silver, nickel, neon, chlorine, etc)?
9. How do you explain the precision in the design of the elements, with increasing numbers of electrons in orbit around the nucleus?
10. Where did the thousands of compounds we find in the world come from: carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, calcium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid, oxalic acid, chlorophyll, sucrose, hydrogen sulfide, benzene, aluminum silicate, mercaptans, propane, silicon dioxide, boric acid, etc.?
11. How did life develop from non-life?
12. Where did the human emotions, such as love, hate, and jealousy come from?

I added a few, but questions 8-12 came to me as I was writing. So, instead of name-calling, why don't you answer these questions? They all have to do with evolution, so answer them.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Kent Hovind will never tell you what the theory of evolution actually is! Kent Hovind will only give you misleading information!

How do you know this?

 

[Prometheus]

I'd just like to point out that even if evolution stated organisms must become more complex, which it doesn't and it's merely a by-product, the increasing order in life can be accounted for by the decreasing order of the sun. So no law of thermodynamics is broken.

 

[Luke_17:2]

angellous_evangellous:

You say you're a Christian. Well, I have a bone to pick with you at the judgement seat. I'm sure the Lord would like to know why you're (quite unjustly) rediculing a brother in Christ to non-believers. Doing all this is support of a theory that is a direct contradiction to Genesis.

 

[Luke_17:2]

Actually Prometheus, that is a good point, but how do you account for the Law of Human Collapse? And technological/social advancement does not necessarily have anything to do with biological evolution.

 

[fantome profane]

How do you know this?

From reading your posts. You have conclusively demonstrated that you do not understand the theory of evolution. I have read and heard Hovind speak in the past and I know in many cases you are simply quoting misleading information he has given you.

Ask yourself this, How do you know Kent Hovind is telling you the truth? Why do you place so much faith in this man?



I don’t have much time now, but I will be back and I will go through your list from 1-12. I promise you I will give you complete responses to each one.

 

[Prometheus]

1. Where did the matter come from that caused the big bang?

Perhaps that matter has always existed but in a different form. The thing is we're used to things having causes because we live in the dimension of time. It's theorized that time didn't exist before the big bang, so asking what came before it is really kind of silly. There was no before because there was no time.

The short answer, though, is that we don't know yet. That's still no reason to assume it's a God. That makes no more sense than saying Zeus made lightning when we didn't really know where lightning came from or how it worked.

Besides, if you can say God has always existed, then why can't I say the universe has always existed? If you claim the universe demands a cause, then I can say that God demands a cause as well.

2. Why do 3 planets, and 6 moons spin in the opposite direction of the sun?

The sun isn't the only gravitational force in the system. There have been countless forces acting on these bodies since the beginning of the universe. Why should we assume the sun must have stabilized everything by now?

3. How do you explain the half-life of 1400 years?

Personally, I don't know enough about dating methods to give an intelligent answer to this. I'm pretty sure that if you looked hard enough you could find the answer yourself. If you want to point out that I only have faith that there is an answer, you'd be right. I have faith, also, that if I don't put gas in my car it won't drive. I wouldn't consider myself a member of any kind of religion for believing this, though.

4. How do you explain that 80 million years ago, at the rate that it is currently moving away, the moon would have been at tree top level?

Unlike the speed of light, the moon's motion is not a universal constant. It will change over time and used to move at a different rate.

5. How do explain the relatively small amount of moon dust on the moon's surface?

Erosion? I don't know, but I don't see what this is supposed to prove.

6. How do you explain the fact that no missing links have been found? There are around 30,000 missing links, so you'd expect to find some: why haven't we?

7. Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?

We have found intermediates for many, many creatures thanks to fossilization. However, the chances that a creature will be fossilized when it dies is extremely rare. If you went to a cemetary and dug up some human remains would you expect that they would be beginning to fossilize or rather that they are decaying into dust?

There's no reason to assume we are ever going to find a thousand "missing links" because very few things fossilize. Still, even if we found one missing link, which we have depending on how picky you are, it would give a lot of assurance that evolution is correct. Even if we did find one where you want it to be, you'd demand another and another. Every time we find an intermediary, you want to see what is between us and that. It merely creates another, although smaller, gap. I'm sorry, but you're not going to get every single creature that ever lived to line up in a row for you.

You say that creationism is simply religion, whereas evolutionism is based on science. The Bible says in Genesis 1 that all creatures reproduce "after their kind" (no change to another kind, i.e., no transitional forms). So the complete absence of transitional forms in the fossil record supports creationism.

Where do you think all the breeds of dogs came from? Were they all on Noah's ark?

Actually, they all came from a common ancestor: the wolf. There's DNA evidence to support that as well.

Here's another example. Why are there different races in this world? There are actually nine races of people all with slightly different characteristics. It's no wonder we're different because we evolved in different environments. Given another few million years or so and the differences would have become so numerous that we would be unable to reproduce with eachother. Thus, we'd be different species.

8. Where did all the 90-plus elements come from (iron, barium, calcium, silver, nickel, neon, chlorine, etc)?

9. How do you explain the precision in the design of the elements, with increasing numbers of electrons in orbit around the nucleus?

10. Where did the thousands of compounds we find in the world come from: carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, calcium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid, oxalic acid, chlorophyll, sucrose, hydrogen sulfide, benzene, aluminum silicate, mercaptans, propane, silicon dioxide, boric acid, etc.?

Natural laws of physics caused them to form. As the universe cooled, atoms of different weights and compositions came to be. You'll have to do your own research on this or talk to a physicist since my knowledge is limited. Though I don't see why you have to come to the conclusion that a God did it. I could say it was Zeus that made the elements and you couldn't prove me wrong.

11. How did life develop from non-life?

We still don't know for certain. Just like we don't know with the big bang. Still, as I've said before, why should your "God did it." theory be the default position to take every time you find a gap in human knowledge to squeeze it in?

12. Where did the human emotions, such as love, hate, and jealousy come from?

They are all chemicals, basically. They evolved for survival purposes. We love so that we can reproduce and raise offspring easier. We hate so we can defend ourselves. We have jealousy because our genes are "selfish" and "want" to be the only ones that survive. If another animal has food or a mate you envy it because you want to survive and reproduce in a world of limited resources.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

So, instead of name-calling, why don't you answer these questions?

Because they evince such a depth and breadth of ignorance and confusion that one can only assume its author to be militantly inaccessible to rational discourse and, frankly, not worth the effort.

 

[Luke_17:2]

From reading your posts. You have conclusively demonstrated that you do not understand the theory of evolution.

If you're referring to the misunderstanding of the word "science" it didn't help that some people on your side flip-flopped on the issue about what exactly evolution is.

Can you cite 3 ways in which Hovind has been misleading? I trust the man implicitly because I have an aquaitance with him, and I do not believe he'd lie. I put faith in him because his arguments, when used by himself as well as by me, combined with my own discoveries have proven to shatter an evolutionists argument.

This is my understanding of evolution:

A theory to explain the fact of the existence of all that we see today. However, it's my belief that evolution has been disproven on several points.

The Theory of Evolution (I'll refrain from the questions about the inconsistencies): 15 billion years ago (I believe that's the current date) all matter in the universe condensed into a very small area and the pressure caused it to explode. Issuing forth from the explosion were galaxies, stars, ect. From the stars, planets were formed. And as the planets cooled (moving specifically to Earth now) the hot surface hardened into rock. It rained on the rock for millions of years or so, and formed oceans. From the rocks the rained washed off, and gave sustenance to tiny bacteria. For millions of years the bacteria thrived in this primordial soup, and fish developed. Eventually reptiles, and then mammals. Homo-Sapiens are the latest in the line of ape-like mammals.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This is my understanding of evolution:

A theory to explain the fact of the existence of all that we see today. However, it's my belief that evolution has been disproven on several points.

No, and no - predictably.

 

[Prometheus]

sustenance to tiny bacteria. For millions of years the bacteria thrived in this primordial soup, and fish developed. Eventually reptiles, and then mammals. Homo-Sapiens are the latest in the line of ape-like mammals.

The theory of evolution starts here. Everything else needs to be explained with other theories. Evolution only tells us what happens to life once it's here and does not touch on anything else.

We don't know precisely how life started, but we know it did or we wouldn't be here. If you want to claim it was God then be my guest. All I'm arguing for is what happens to life once it's here.

 

[SERVANTOFSET]

None of you have answered any of my questions. Are you doing this intentionally? To recap:

1. Where did the matter come from that caused the big bang?
2. Why do 3 planets, and 6 moons spin in the opposite direction of the sun?
3. How do you explain the half-life of 1400 years?
4. How do you explain that 80 million years ago, at the rate that it is currently moving away, the moon would have been at tree top level?
5. How do explain the relatively small amount of moon dust on the moon's surface?
6. How do you explain the fact that no missing links have been found? There are around 30,000 missing links, so you'd expect to find some: why haven't we?
7. Where are the trillions of fossils of such true transitional forms?
You say that creationism is simply religion, whereas evolutionism is based on science. The Bible says in Genesis 1 that all creatures reproduce "after their kind" (no change to another kind, i.e., no transitional forms). So the complete absence of transitional forms in the fossil record supports creationism.
8. Where did all the 90-plus elements come from (iron, barium, calcium, silver, nickel, neon, chlorine, etc)?
9. How do you explain the precision in the design of the elements, with increasing numbers of electrons in orbit around the nucleus?
10. Where did the thousands of compounds we find in the world come from: carbon dioxide, sodium chloride, calcium hydroxide, hydrochloric acid, oxalic acid, chlorophyll, sucrose, hydrogen sulfide, benzene, aluminum silicate, mercaptans, propane, silicon dioxide, boric acid, etc.?
11. How did life develop from non-life?
12. Where did the human emotions, such as love, hate, and jealousy come from?

I added a few, but questions 8-12 came to me as I was writing. So, instead of name-calling, why don't you answer these questions? They all have to do with evolution, so answer them.

1. We don't know. But filling that gap with a work of fiction is not science.
2.Expand. why should they not?
3.Could you expand on this please?
4.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moonrec.html
5. the correction factor used to subtract dust originati from the earth was grossly in error and more recent research suggests that the level of moon dust is consistent with evolution.
6.http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional/part1a.html#fish
7.http://www.evolutionpages.com/Eomaia scansoria.htm
8-11. Just because there are times when you cannot say where something is from doesn't mean that you should suggest that God put it there. In the same way if I find £10 in the street, I don't assume that the fairies put it there. I look to find who might have dropped it. Where is the evidence for God?
12. Humans.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

12. Humans.

Attacking rubbish with nonsense is unhelpful.