Why do some scientists reject evolution?

[InformedIgnorance]

That is just what I was pointing out FearGod, that a nonstandard use of the term is applied

 

[outhouse]

Did you watch and understand the eductional video.

You havnt posted anything at all educational.

Only theoogical driven pseudoscience, which doesnt have a single thing to do with a real education.

 

[dust1n]

i don't respond to silly comments and i don't blame you to be confused and huffy after showing how ignorant you were in both natural and supernatural issues.

i have said it and i am saying it again that i understood why you can believe that random mutations can invent a concious human being in natural means.

And i also know that you won't understand what i am saying or what i am trying to say but i wonder how you were able to understand that the unconscious nature with a simple cell organisms have made such a wonderful world.:bonk:

if you are interested to understand,then watch this movie

[youtube]Up-0E4Qetfg[/youtube]
100 Reasons Why Evolution is So Stupid - YouTube

The guy in the video is a charlatan. I know, because he is from my home town and I'm familiar with him. I'll tell ya what.. tonight. I'll grab a little beer, and I will down the list and address all 100 reasons, because I'm already that certain they are wrong. Look forward to it.

 

[FunctionalAtheist]

Jumping in here from page one. He says it himself;

In my mind, however,

I.e. his rejection of a natural origin of life is based on his subjective evaluation of the evidence, by his own admission. He has abandoned objectivity. Furthermore, he gives no analysis of what has led him to this conclusion, only a feeble appeal to the idea that he has examined all the evidence. What evidence has he examined? How has it fallen short? Blah blah blah!

The following is a quote from genetic scientist Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig:
"My empirical research in genetics and my studies of biological subjects such as physiology and morphology bring me face-to-face with the enormous and often unfathomable complexities of life. My study of these topics has reinforced my conviction that life, even the most basic forms of life, must have an intelligent origin.

The scientific community is well aware of the complexity found in life. But these fascinating facts are generally presented in a strong evolutionary context. In my mind, however, the arguments against the Bible account of creation fall apart when subjected to scientific scrutiny. I have examined such arguments over decades. After much careful study of living things and consideration of the way the laws governing the universe seem perfectly adjusted so that life on earth can exist, I am compelled to believe in a Creator."​

 

[dust1n]

Actually, scratch what I said. I'm going out to drink tonight!

 

[Falvlun]

The following is a quote from genetic scientist Wolf-Ekkehard Lonnig:
"My empirical research in genetics and my studies of biological subjects such as physiology and morphology bring me face-to-face with the enormous and often unfathomable complexities of life. My study of these topics has reinforced my conviction that life, even the most basic forms of life, must have an intelligent origin.

The scientific community is well aware of the complexity found in life. But these fascinating facts are generally presented in a strong evolutionary context. In my mind, however, the arguments against the Bible account of creation fall apart when subjected to scientific scrutiny. I have examined such arguments over decades. After much careful study of living things and consideration of the way the laws governing the universe seem perfectly adjusted so that life on earth can exist, I am compelled to believe in a Creator."​

I bolded and put in blue the part that caught my eye. I have not read this thread, but I did do a search to see if this quote has been offered as a rebuttal, and I did not see it, so:


"Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!" ~Douglas Adams

Lonnig makes the same mistake the puddle makes. It is a very easy mistake to make.

But as the puddle demonstrates, there is another reasonable answer to explain why the universe is so perfectly adapted to life:
It is because life is adapted to the universe. Not the other way around.

Just like the hole was not made to fit the puddle, the puddle was made to fit the hole. Life formed according to the natural laws of the universe, so of course the natural laws of the universe will "fit" life-- because life formed to fit those laws.

 

[Daemon Sophic]

I got this one Dust1n

i don't respond to silly comments and i don't blame you to be confused and huffy after showing how ignorant you were in both natural and supernatural issues.

i have said it and i am saying it again that i understood why you can believe that random mutations can invent a concious human being in natural means.

And i also know that you won't understand what i am saying or what i am trying to say but i wonder how you were able to understand that the unconscious nature with a simple cell organisms have made such a wonderful world.:bonk:

if you are interested to understand,then watch this movie

[youtube]Up-0E4Qetfg[/youtube]
100 Reasons Why Evolution is So Stupid - YouTube

I watched for several of his 'points'. Each one took about 1 minute of search to show it as false. Without going into any ad hominem attacks against this individual, I will say that I found an easier technique than going point by point, via this well referenced (as opposed to his own theorums) site. Have fun. How Good are those Young-Earth Arguments

 

[rusra02]

When I read some posts by Rusra02 and some others, I can immediately see that the Jehovah's Witnesses organization's discouragement of higher education is alive and well among its followers. I am also concern about the effect that it is having on the followers, albeit seemingly without their knowledge.

Many Jws have been to colleges and universities. If by "higher education" you mean the teaching of unproven theories as fact, you don't need a degree to see the fallacy in that. It is IMO, as the Bible says, "falsely called knowledge", by persons blinded by propaganda. Jw's are very concerned about the effects of this false teaching of evolution upon those believing it. (1Timothy 6:20)

 

[johnhanks]

If by "higher education" you mean the teaching of unproven theories as fact, you don't need a degree to see the fallacy in that.

Nor do you need a degree (just elementary scientific literacy) to understand that scientific theories are never proven. Proof is for mathematics.

All you need, in fact, to sustain the jw view of evolution is a steadfast refusal to examine any of the vast amount of evidence for evolution or to understand anything of the biology behind it. Keep fending off the education, rusra!

(Oh, and I don't recall reading your defence of Dr. Lönnig's "arguments" against evolution, following the critique in post 14. Have I missed it?)

 

[rusra02]

I bolded and put in blue the part that caught my eye. I have not read this thread, but I did do a search to see if this quote has been offered as a rebuttal, and I did not see it, so:


"Imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, "This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!" ~Douglas Adams

Lonnig makes the same mistake the puddle makes. It is a very easy mistake to make.

But as the puddle demonstrates, there is another reasonable answer to explain why the universe is so perfectly adapted to life:
It is because life is adapted to the universe. Not the other way around.

Just like the hole was not made to fit the puddle, the puddle was made to fit the hole. Life formed according to the natural laws of the universe, so of course the natural laws of the universe will "fit" life-- because life formed to fit those laws.

I never have heard a puddle speak. And, BTW, those natural laws, and the universe itself, had to come from somewhere. The Bible tells us where natural laws come from and where the universe comes from. Evolution has no answers to these questions. And I do not personally buy evolutionists response that it does not matter. It matters.

 

[ImmortalFlame]

I never have heard a puddle speak. And, BTW, those natural laws, and the universe itself, had to come from somewhere. The Bible tells us where natural laws come from and where the universe comes from.

So does almost every other religious or mythological text throughout most of human history. What matters is what claim is supported by the evidence, and no evidence exists that the Biblical account of creation is accurate.

Evolution has no answers to these questions. And I do not personally buy evolutionists response that it does not matter. It matters.

Evolution isn't trying to. It is a theory which explains the complexity of biological systems and the process of speciation. It has as much to do with the origin of natural laws as baking has to do with rocket science.

 

[secret2]

...those natural laws, and the universe itself, had to come from somewhere.

Because your armchair science says so? Why the heck does it have to come from somewhere?

 

[WyattDerp]

I never have heard a puddle speak.

Dude. You wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes with Jesus. Shape up.

 

[averageJOE]

To answer the question of the OP...because they begin their studies with a religious bias and hold that bias throughout.

 

[Me Myself]

I never have heard a puddle speak. And, BTW, those natural laws, and the universe itself, had to come from somewhere. The Bible tells us where natural laws come from and where the universe comes from. Evolution has no answers to these questions. And I do not personally buy evolutionists response that it does not matter. It matters.

The Cosmogony of Hesiod tells us too. There are a lot of texts that play wild guessing about from where does the universe and its laws come from.

Science at least is honest enough to say "we aint sure yet, these are some hypothesis and we keep looking"

 

[rusra02]

Because your armchair science says so? Why the heck does it have to come from somewhere?

Because living things do not come into existence without a source or progenitor, with the unique exception of the Source of all life, God. (Psalm 36:9) The concept of spontaneous generation was refuted long years ago.

 

[rusra02]

Dude. You wouldn't have lasted 5 minutes with Jesus. Shape up.

Care to elaborate on your cryptic message?

 

[Me Myself]

Because living things do not come into existence without a source or progenitor, with the unique exception of the Source of all life, God. (Psalm 36:9) The concept of spontaneous generation was refuted long years ago.

I cold quote the Hesiod to say we come from Rea. What makes you think I will view Psalms any differently than how you would view that?

 

[rusra02]

To answer the question of the OP...because they begin their studies with a religious bias and hold that bias throughout.

The same can be said for evolutionists, who accept a theory without serious question and hold that bias throughout. And how do you account for non-religious scientists who do not support the theory?

 

[rusra02]

I cold quote the Hesiod to say we come from Rea. What makes you think I will view Psalms any differently than how you would view that?

My point was that living things do not come into existence except through other living things of like nature. The Bible points to the ultimate Source of all life.