Originally posted by Lana
I read those links...and I didn't see any evidence FOR creationism/intelligent design, only various things they picked out to use against evolution.
but the creationism theory doesn't say the evolution didn't occur 😑
it only says that there was a 'force' (can't find better word) that has started this process.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Wow Lana..you must be a very quick reader..especially since most of those sites had hundreds of links to other sites..anyway..you've been given evidence. Now show me the missing link...lol...
I am a very quick reader, and very good at sorting out bullshit from something worth reading.
As for the "missing link", it is a term that many scientists (particularly evolutionary biologists) dislike using, because it implies that things occured in a straight, linear line.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6522090/
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2002/Feb/26417.htm
http://www.mrc.ac.uk/index/public-interest/public-news_centre/public-news_list/public-news_27_january_2005.htm
http://www.newsandevents.utoronto.ca/bios/askus4.htm
http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton2.html
http://www.accessexcellence.org/WN/SU/whale.html
Since many people don't seem to realize how exactly evolution works, here is an image from one of the links I've provided that illustrates that it is not, in fact, a straight line, but more like a web.
Originally posted by whobdamandog
Wow Lana..you must be a very quick reader..especially since most of those sites had hundreds of links to other sites..anyway..you've been given evidence. Now show me the missing link...lol...
furthermore, they can backtrace the human origin back to almost 7 million years ago... creationism can't even go back 4000 years in time
Originally posted by yerssot
which part of "missing" forms a difficulty to understand?furthermore, they can backtrace the human origin back to almost 7 million years ago... creationism can't even go back 4000 years in time
Don't you know? Science must have every single damn answer to be credible. Otherwise, it happened because of some outside force 😉
Reading the rebuttals of my post, I have come to a curious conclusion as to the relation between evolutionism and creationism.
The main impression I got from the replies to my post is that science is entirely guesswork, and not a single idea can be proven. Despite the fact that things thrown into the air come back down to the earth, gravity cannot be proven. Despite the fact that eating food keeps us alive, that we get nutrients from absorbing said food cannot be proven. Despite the fact that plants in sunlight grow better than plants in darkness, photosynthesis cannot be proven.
And apparently, evolution can be believed on no evidence whatsoever, while evolutionists practically ask to see God face-to-face before admitting that POSSIBLY, just MAYBE, creationism isn't just a fairytale for idiots and children.
I ask for evidence in favor of evolution, at the same time giving very good, scientific evidence against it. In reply, my request is sidestepped under the guise of quotes from unnamed evolutionists, and my own evidence disregarded as a fool's fancy. I'm willing to accept evidence for evolution, but as is often the case when arguing against evolution, I have yet to see any.
Why the double standard? Why are my beliefs given no credit, while you naturally assume that yours are the absolute concrete truth?
Originally posted by Clovie
but the creationism theory doesn't say the evolution didn't occur 😑
it only says that there was a 'force' (can't find better word) that has started this process.
Straight creationism states that everything was created by god in one week. Which directly contradicts evolution and frankly, is complete crap in my opinion.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
Reading the rebuttals of my post, I have come to a curious conclusion as to the relation between evolutionism and creationism.The main impression I got from the replies to my post is that science is entirely guesswork, and not a single idea can be proven. Despite the fact that things thrown into the air come back down to the earth, gravity cannot be proven. Despite the fact that eating food keeps us alive, that we get nutrients from absorbing said food cannot be proven. Despite the fact that plants in sunlight grow better than plants in darkness, photosynthesis cannot be proven.
And apparently, evolution can be believed on no evidence whatsoever, while evolutionists practically ask to see God face-to-face before admitting that POSSIBLY, just MAYBE, creationism isn't just a fairytale for idiots and children.
I ask for evidence in favor of evolution, at the same time giving very good, scientific evidence against it. In reply, my request is sidestepped under the guise of quotes from unnamed evolutionists, and my own evidence disregarded as a fool's fancy. I'm willing to accept evidence for evolution, but as is often the case when arguing against evolution, I have yet to see any.
Why the double standard? Why are my beliefs given no credit, while you naturally assume that yours are the absolute concrete truth?
Read the links I've just posted.
No, science does not prove that things happen, in the way that most people think of when they think of the word "proof". What it does is find substantial amounts of evidence in favor of a hypothesis. When enough is found, that hypothesis becomes a theory. After a certain point, if there is enough evidence for a theory that there is no other way for it to happen/work, then it becomes a scientific law. Hence the law of gravity. There is mass amounts of evidence for gravity's existence. But no scientist will ever say it to be proven true, because that's not how science works.
As for evolution, there is a large amount of evidence in favor for it, otherwise it wouldn't be a theory.
Frankly, anyone who thinks there's no evidence for evolution needs to open a science textbook.
a scientific theory involves research, testing, observation, calculation...etc.
creationism involves nothing more than "well, the bible said so".
how is it justifiable to pollute science with faith? sure, TECHNICALLY creationism can be called a 'theory' but not a SCIENTIFIC theory.
i wonder, would the world be a better place if every bible on the planet just spontaneously combusted?
its not a compromise to include it, but a submission to idiocy and yet one more step back to the dark ages.
Creationism man, we can get into rights and wrongs, if's and but's all day. But really what it comes down to is....
How the f*ck can you seriously say God created everything in a week? Seriously, how? How in your right mind can you consider it to be true? Capt Fantastic touched on it, but what about dinosaur fossils?
Absolutely ridiculous.
-AC
Originally posted by Lana
Straight creationism states that everything was created by god in one week. Which directly contradicts evolution and frankly, is complete crap in my opinion.
Not necessarily. The Church and many bibles say that the "Seven days" of Genesis fame has a high possibility of simply being part of oral tradition, built up over the hundreds of years before anything was written down.
I personally don't believe the seven days to be literal, but I don't see how evolution can stand scientific scrutiny.
Originally posted by Clovie
but even the church is not agreeing with it 😑
Just because the church finally woke up doesn't mean there aren't still people out there that believe that.
Originally posted by General Kaliero
So if evolution is so "logical and obvious" does it follow the laws of science?
Who the hell said ANYTHING is 'logical and obvious'? That's the thing about science. Stuff isn't handed to you on a silver platter. You have to actually go out and research in order to find answers. Sometimes they won't make sense right away. But that's the thing! If it DOESN'T make sense, you research some more! Maybe you missed something. It doesn't work that if you don't find one specific thing it's wrong. Science is always changing, always researching evidence to support theories and ideas. And if something appears to not work? Then they adjust the theory and keep researching.
Originally posted by Lana
Don't you know? Science must have every single damn answer to be credible. Otherwise, it happened because of some outside force 😉
That's the same rational 'evolutionists' use to shoot down 'creationist' arguments...I love turning your own arguments against you..
Oh yeah..where's the missing link in the "non-linear" line that shows a distinct transition between "APE" and "Man"..oh forget it..let me answer the question for you..THERE ISN'T ONE...LOL..end of debate.