The Four Dirty Secrets Against Darwin Evolution

[ChristineM]

It seems as if it's ok for you evolutionists to insult us. But if we say anything like that you cry foul.

Please give an example of how we insult "us"?

Edit Insulting with blatant misrepresentation based on ignorance only shows your own lack of understanding

 

[Subduction Zone]

Others are watching. So it is obvious that no believer in the process of evolution as posited by Darwin and others before and after have explained anything in reference to questions asked. Now I am watching a program about the holocaust and Jews that were killed. There were, of course, others murdered by the Nazi regime. Looking at populations of those countries involved -- very, very, v-e-r-y sad. What does the ToE offer insofar as a hope for the future? That we all die anyway? That's what it seems like insofar as you are concerned. Not sure about those who believe in God AND evolution...

You really shot yourself in the foot with the Nazi reference. Hitler opposed the concept of evolution. Nor was he, and definitely not his country Atheist. Hitler was a theist. He appeared to be his own sort of Christian and the country was no doubt very Christian.

As to hope for the future that is not the job of evolution. It is a rather strange demand. Why don't you ask about gravity offering a hope for the future? Or the Laws of Thermodynamics? That is not the job of those sciences. The job of evolution is only to explain how life got to its current state. And what I find to be odd is that neither you nor @TrueBeliever37 are flat earthers To be consistent you really should be.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It seems as if it's ok for you evolutionists to insult us. But if we say anything like that you cry foul.

How is reality an insult?

 

[YoursTrue]

You really shot yourself in the foot with the Nazi reference. Hitler opposed the concept of evolution. Nor was he, and definitely not his country Atheist. Hitler was a theist. He appeared to be his own sort of Christian and the country was no doubt very Christian.

As to hope for the future that is not the job of evolution. It is a rather strange demand. Why don't you ask about gravity offering a hope for the future? Or the Laws of Thermodynamics? That is not the job of those sciences. The job of evolution is only to explain how life got to its current state. And what I find to be odd is that neither you nor @TrueBeliever37 are flat earthers To be consistent you really should be.

No, I wasn't necessarily referencing evolution in this. Just the sadness of the human attitude and religious belief in many respects.
What is your hope of a future for yourself? Have any? The rest later maybe.

 

[Subduction Zone]

No, I wasn't necessarily referencing evolution in this. Just the sadness of the human attitude and religious belief in many respects.
What is your hope of a future for yourself? Have any? The rest later maybe.

I hope to lead a good and productive life. What else is there to hope for?

 

[YoursTrue]

You really shot yourself in the foot with the Nazi reference. Hitler opposed the concept of evolution. Nor was he, and definitely not his country Atheist. Hitler was a theist. He appeared to be his own sort of Christian and the country was no doubt very Christian.

As to hope for the future that is not the job of evolution. It is a rather strange demand. Why don't you ask about gravity offering a hope for the future? Or the Laws of Thermodynamics? That is not the job of those sciences. The job of evolution is only to explain how life got to its current state. And what I find to be odd is that neither you nor @TrueBeliever37 are flat earthers To be consistent you really should be.

I'm not asking for "evolution's" hope for the future. I've heard things like personally we hope things will get better. (evolve). What hope do you have, or is that idea out of your purview.

I hope to lead a good and productive life. What else is there to hope for?

What does a good and productive life mean to you? Millions and millions of religious people think they are being good and productive when they kill others by command of their country, don't they?
I hope to (1) be forgiven for my sins, known and unknown to me.
(2) to see my parents in a resurrection so they can learn more about God.
(3) to see the earth finally in peace. Forever.
(Revelation 21:1-5)

 

[Subduction Zone]

I'm not asking for "evolution's" hope for the future. I've heard things like personally we hope things will get better. (evolve). What hope do you have, or is that idea out of your purview.

And that is not evolution.

What does a good and productive life mean to you? Millions and millions of religious people think they are being good and productive when they kill others by command of their country, don't they?

Yes, religion, including Christianity, often makes people evil. We see that in the US today.

I hope to (1) be forgiven for my sins, known and unknown to me.

Why would God even need to "forgive" you of sins? This is one of the failures of Christianity. It pretends that you have harmed God somehow. If anything you should be trying to atone for you sins yourself. Do you know what atonement is? It is when you correct the wrongs that you did to others. That beats the heck out of forgiveness. A pretend forgiveness does not make the people that you harmed feel any better.

(2) to see my parents in a resurrection so they can learn more about God.

Ah yes, have you seen the video Kissing Hanks ***? It really applies here.

(3) to see the earth finally in peace. Forever.
(Revelation 21:1-5)

That may never happen. And it might be even worse if it does happen.

 

[Astrophile]

So we have a fossil record for the evolution of the giraffe for instance? Can you point me to any kind of link for that?

If you google on 'giraffe evolution fossil record' you will find nearly two million links.

 

[LuisDantas]

Some people just can't.help reviving dead claims.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

He didn't deceive you. He told you clearly in his word. You just don't believe him.

You are not hearing the argument. If you claim that God deliberately created an earth designed to deceive us into thinking it is old, then that would be an example of God lying to us.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Same from you - response not an answer. Why are you so afraid to tell me what laid the first egg?

Perhaps because we don't know exactly? We know that fish lay eggs, and that land animals evolved from them. Specifically, the armored fish that inhabited the oceans half a billion years ago and were ancestral to all land vertebrates seem to have laid eggs. But it is possible that egg laying goes back before that.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Or a gullibility on the part of those who believe anything presented to them as being factual.

Yes, the Bible can be a problem that way. Luckily we are discussing evolution which is endlessly backed up by evidence. No faith needed.

 

[Valjean]

He didn't deceive you. He told you clearly in his word. You just don't believe him.

Yet his creation belies his word.
Why play such games? Does he enjoy tormenting his people? If he prefers dimwits and toadies, why did he endow so many with the intelligence to perceive the ruse?

Such is the behavior of a child with a magnifying glass, incinerating ants on the sidewalk.

 

[Valjean]

Please repeat your debunk. Where did the simplest cell come from? How did evolution get started to begin with?

You ask questions answerable by anyone familiar with the subject; questions I, myself have addressed right here in RF.
Please familiarize yourself with issues before you present an opinion.

Answers in Genesis and religious sites are not accurate sources of information.

If DNA is assembled by proteins. How is that possible? - when you can't have proteins without DNA.

??? -- Nucleotides can be observed assembling spontaneously in any bio-lab that cares to look. Proteins aren't needed.
Amino acids also form and assemble spontaneously, forming simple proteins. The same is easily observed with lipid bi-layers forming enclosed spheres, no magic involved.

Self-replicating molecules and cellular components are well known, and lifelike, metabolizing, reproducing biotes have been created in the lab -- by biochemists, not deities.

Try to keep up before asking questions that haven't been relevant for 80 years.

Where are all the intermediate/ smooth transitional forms in the fossil record for all the different species?

What's a "smooth, transitional form?" How would it differ from a regular fossil?
Do you mean unicellular organisms with no hard structures? How would such fossilize? We do have the fossilized structures formed by their colonies: corals, stromatolites, &c.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

You are not hearing the argument. If you claim that God deliberately created an earth designed to deceive us into thinking it is old, then that would be an example of God lying to us.

You aren't understanding my response. I didn't say God created the earth with the intent to deceive us into thinking it was old. If God let us know he created things in 6 days, then how is he deceiving us? Adam wouldn't have been a baby the day after he was created or he couldn't even have taken care of himself.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Perhaps because we don't know exactly? We know that fish lay eggs, and that land animals evolved from them. Specifically, the armored fish that inhabited the oceans half a billion years ago and were ancestral to all land vertebrates seem to have laid eggs. But it is possible that egg laying goes back before that.

I didn't realize that you believed in evolution. I thought you believed God created man in his own image as the scripture said.

 

[exchemist]

I didn't realize that you believed in evolution. I thought you believed God created man in his own image as the scripture said.

The two are perfectly compatible, as most Christians have acknowledged for well over a century and a half, if not longer. If you really don’t know how this can be, I can explain.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

The two are perfectly compatible, as most Christians have acknowledged for well over a century and a half, if not longer. If you really don’t know how this can be, I can explain.

Please explain because I don't consider God to have been in an ape creature like form at any time.

 

[exchemist]

Please explain because I don't consider God to have been in an ape creature like form at any time.

Well Man is apelike, whether one considers him an ape or not.

But OK. First of all, I presume you don't think God is an old man with a white beard. After all, Christ was God incarnate in the form of a man, while God is otherwise a spiritual entity, right? So what does "in the image of God" mean, then, since it obviously can't mean God looks physically the same as a man. What it means, surely, is that Man, like God, has rationality and an eternal spiritual component, a soul, that does not have to die with the body. So it's not a statement about the shape of Man's body, but about his inner essence. (Medieval philosophers even speculated about the soul being "infused" at some stage into the growing embryo.)

There's a longer discussion of what the phrase may mean here: Image of God - Wikipedia. It has preoccupied people ever since the dawn of Judaism (and later, Christianity). But note that nowhere does it say people thought it meant God has the same physical shape as a man.

 

[TrueBeliever37]

Well Man is apelike, whether one considers him an ape or not.

But OK. First of all, I presume you don't think God is an old man with a white beard. After all, Christ was God incarnate in the form of a man, while God is otherwise a spiritual entity, right? So what does "in the image of God" mean, then, since it obviously can't mean God looks physically the same as a man. What it means, surely, is that Man, like God, has rationality and an eternal spiritual component, a soul, that does not have to die with the body. So it's not a statement about the shape of Man's body, but about his inner essence. (Medieval philosophers even speculated about the soul being "infused" at some stage into the growing embryo.)

There's a longer discussion of what the phrase may mean here: Image of God - Wikipedia. It has preoccupied people ever since the dawn of Judaism (and later, Christianity). But note that nowhere does it say people thought it meant God has the same physical shape as a man.

I thought you were going to explain the compatibility of the two beliefs.

For me personally the answer is that God knew all things he was going to do from the very beginning. (He had a plan) He knew that at some point out in the future he was going to take on a physical body in order to have blood to shed for man's sin. That body was the image of the invisible God. Without that body you couldn't see him. But anyway, I believe he made man in the image of that body that he planned to take on. He had already made the angels in that image.

Man is made in the image of God. The scripture says the Messiah is the image of the invisible God. To me there is a difference in being made in the image and actually being the image.