Why don't some people like being created?

[gnostic]

The ToE says a lot of things without any science to back it up, such as "allowing us to grasp concepts as time and morality".

Are you saying that biology and other sub-fields of biology are NOT "science"?

Biology more than other fields of science (not just human anatomy, like botany, zoology) back up evolution.

DNA and genetic science support evolution.

One thing that evolution doesn't involve, is morality. No science knowledge involved morality.

I have to ask you something. Have you study any science subject before?

Did any of them (like mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc) involve morality? If they don't involve morality in the teaching, then why should evolution involve morality?

Morality is a totally different type of school of knowledge. Understanding the mechanics of evolution, or any other scientific field, don't require morality.

 

[UnTheist]

I like it, the idea of my family being a special creation thousands of years ago, and being related to every other living human on the planet.

Why don't some people like this concept?

The second part isn't in dispute, but the idea that we are a special creation thousands of years ago simply isn't true. Maybe that's why some people don't like it.

 

[Gabethewiking]

Originally Posted by man of faith
The ToE says a lot of things without any science to back it up, such as "allowing us to grasp concepts as time and morality".

Could you give some examples of this, perhaps some references?

 

[LittleNipper]

The second part isn't in dispute, but the idea that we are a special creation thousands of years ago simply isn't true. Maybe that's why some people don't like it.

Why isn't it true?

 

[Commoner]

Why isn't it true?

One reason is because of the time frame. We've been around for a lot longer than a couple thousand years. Secondly, it is because we know we have evolved rather than just "popped" into existence.

 

[Gabethewiking]

Why don't some people like being created?

Well, back to the topic at hand, I got a confession to make.
The real reason I do not like being Created is that I do not want to. I am angry at God so I deny him and I want to be able to do whatever I want without having to feel guilty about it, I want to be able to kill and rape, use drugs (cigarettes and alcohol not counted) and burn down houses, I feel this ANGER when people tell me I am Created by God Almighty and I do not WANT to give him respect I am to arrogant.

Oh, and I want to eat babies too.

 

[sonofskeptish]

Well, back to the topic at hand, I got a confession to make.
The real reason I do not like being Created is that I do not want to. I am angry at God so I deny him and I want to be able to do whatever I want without having to feel guilty about it, I want to be able to kill and rape, use drugs (cigarettes and alcohol not counted) and burn down houses, I feel this ANGER when people tell me I am Created by God Almighty and I do not WANT to give him respect I am to arrogant.

Oh, and I want to eat babies too.

Don't forget, we like to drowned kittens too.

 

[UnTheist]

Why isn't it true?

the evidence shows otherwise

 

[sonofskeptish]

Joking aside, what is the creationist alternative explanation for each of these areas of evidence supporting evolution (one line per point please):

1. Fossils
2. Transitional Forms and Intermediate Stages in Descendants
3. Homologies and Common Structures
4. Comparative and Historic Anatomy
5. Developmental Biology (ancestral traits during embryonic development)
6. Cellular Evidence (e.g. plant and animal cell similarities)
7. Molecular Evidence (DNA, RNA and genes that link all life on earth)
8. Relative (strata layer location) and Numerical (radioactive decay) Dating (of fossils)
9. Effects of Geography Species Isolation, Ecological Adaption, Natural Selection
10. Real life examples by observation and experiment (dogs, guppies, bacteria, agriculture, etc.)

 

[Gabethewiking]

As you wont get any proper response, I do it.

1. Fossils

Dead animals do not reproduce.

2. Transitional Forms and Intermediate Stages in Descendants

Missing links, prove it.

3. Homologies and Common Structures

Complicated words, not a valid question.

4. Comparative and Historic Anatomy

Humans always been Humans not apes or dogs.

5. Developmental Biology (ancestral traits during embryonic development)

Current, not past, not valid in contemporary light is it?

6. Cellular Evidence (e.g. plant and animal cell similarities)

Maybe you are a Cactus, but I am not.

7. Molecular Evidence (DNA, RNA and genes that link all life on earth)

Current, not past. Once again not valid.

8. Relative (strata layer location) and Numerical (radioactive decay) Dating

Rocks not Alive. Radioactive dating is false.

9. Geography Species Isolation, Ecological Adaption, Natural Selection

Current not past, how related?

10. Real life examples by observation and experiment (dogs, guppies, bacteria, agriculture, etc.)

Dogs never given birth to birds or monkeys never given birth to humans.
No 'CrocoDucks' here.

QED.

 

[dust1n]

Why isn't it true?

Because nothing suggests it is. Nothing at all, other than a book, used as a political indoctrination for multiple centuries; which is based solely on dogma and tithing.

 

[Super Saiya Jinn]

I like it, the idea of my family being a special creation thousands of years ago, and being related to every other living human on the planet.

Why don't some people like this concept?

Us "Evolutionists" as some call us, believe we are related to every Human on the planet too, as well as every other creature.
However it sounds very arrogant and ugly to say that we are somehow above other creatures on the planet, not to mention that it makes no sense...

Why do other apes look so similar to us?
Why do we share DNA with every other creature on the planet, if we are somehow special?
Again, it makes no sense....

 

[thehurticus]

We don't like it because its not plausible. We see adaptation every day in even the most complicated organisms. We've seen evolution even in as short a time as a couple hundred years in humans. There is scientific evidence, there is half life dating, there is constant mutation recorded every day. Now weigh that against a good feeling that you have in your heart. It just doesn't add up. Compare a book and a good feeling against thousands of plausible theory's supported by science that suggest evolution and see what you come up with.

 

[Autodidact]

Why isn't it true?

Because the strong evidence indicates that we descended from hominid ancestors over the last several million years, and emerged as a separate species several hundred thousand years ago.

 

[Anti-thesisofreason]

Well I kind of like being "in charge" of all other life forms if you will.

I'd like to see you tell a hungry lion that as it eye's you up for dinner and your standing in the open savanah without a rifle or other weapon for your personal protection.

Tell that to an angry mother bear as you stand between it and it's offspring.

 

[Autodidact]

I'd like to see you tell a hungry lion that as it eye's you up for dinner and your standing in the open savanah without a rifle or other weapon for your personal protection.

Tell that to an angry mother bear as you stand between it and it's offspring.

Or, for that matter, to a MRSA staph bacteria.

 

[Anti-thesisofreason]

Or, for that matter, to a MRSA staph bacteria.

Yep that too. I was going to list a whole bunch of other things that pop the bubble of "control over" idea but I was hoping I could get away with just a couple . . . however I highly doubt it.

 

[Man of Faith]

I'd like to see you tell a hungry lion that as it eye's you up for dinner and your standing in the open savanah without a rifle or other weapon for your personal protection.

Tell that to an angry mother bear as you stand between it and it's offspring.

Being able to defeat them doesn't have any bearing on being in charge of them. Check out a zoo lately?

 

[Man of Faith]

Are you saying that biology and other sub-fields of biology are NOT "science"?

Biology more than other fields of science (not just human anatomy, like botany, zoology) back up evolution.

DNA and genetic science support evolution.

One thing that evolution doesn't involve, is morality. No science knowledge involved morality.

I have to ask you something. Have you study any science subject before?

Did any of them (like mathematics, physics, chemistry, biology, geology, etc) involve morality? If they don't involve morality in the teaching, then why should evolution involve morality?

Morality is a totally different type of school of knowledge. Understanding the mechanics of evolution, or any other scientific field, don't require morality.

I am saying confidently that common descent does not follow the scientific method, therefore is not science.

 

[Man of Faith]

but the idea that we are a special creation thousands of years ago simply isn't true.

Can you show me the scientific experiment that gave you that knowledge?