A well thought-out argument against anti-evolutionists

So, by your simile, even if we can't don't know how evolution works, we should be able to find an evolution? Wow, dude. Just wow.

Cellular fossils? Do you know the conditions needed for fossilization? Large fossils are hard enough to find. By your reasoning every animal that ever lived would die and fossilize, but that's not how it works. The creature would have to die in someway that would protect it's carcass from rot and destruction. Mud is good. Tar pits are good. Solid ground, however, is not good.

However, Cellular evolution can be proven in a week. I've done it. Expose a bacteria culture to certain conditions, and it's characteristics (as a population, not an individual(that's adaptation)) will change.

If evolution didn't exist, there would be no trans-species, because there never would have been speciation. So when you say that evolution does not happen because you don't trip on archaeopteryx fossils, are you insunuating that these animals never existed? If evolution wasn't true, there would not be ANY.

 

Could you post a link to some reliable website that talks about Darwin saying that billions of transitional fossils should be found? Regardless of whether he actually said it or not, that's not true. A small mistake on the part of one man does not, however, invalidate the entire theory. An early physicist thought that the atom was similar to a hard shell with electrons rolling around the outside. He was wrong, of course, but we know that atoms and electrons exist.

 

All of my life in school I was told how we have fossils that date back hundreds of millions of years of every possible creature crawling or walking. Now we are told how rare it is to find a fossil. Even today, they are finding fossils that they claim are 70 million years old. Yet in the same breath they tell us, the only fossils they can't find are the ones that would show the change in species, brought on by evolution. Their should be billions of examples found across the geographic stratum. If not complex, at least simple one celled. Yet nothing, thats what they have found. Nothing. And then you come on this post with lame excueses why they can't find any. They can't find any, because they don't exist. Evolution is a lie that has been pushed from generation to generation. It is a science that is based on an imaginary belief.
In reality, it is science fiction that has becomed acceptable to the none thinking and the gullible. For those who never demand evidence, who believe science has the only truth even when they have no facts. Then Evolution is your religion. Amen.

 

Are you denying that archaeopterys existed?

 

Do you even read my posts?

 

Yeah they do find old fossils. There are enough genetic similarities between species living now to show how they are all related to eachother without going to the fossil record. Just look at how the physical world works in the now to see how it worked in the past. OR do you think God deliberately changes the physical laws of the universe every couple of months just to fuck with peoples heads? I believe God established a natural order and that is what evolutionists are describing. 300 years ago humanity did not have the resources to describe the natural order in as accurate of a manner as they do today.

There are billions of examples across the geographic stratum. There is even an example of evolution right in front of you: it's called a computer (technically it's just the monitor that you are looking at). Human thinking becomes more one with the natural order as understanding of the natural order becomes deeper.

Man's knowledge of the natural order leads to a greater unity with God.

 

"We believe that there is a considerable gap in the neo-Darwinian theory of evolution, and we believe this gap to be of such a nature that it cannot be bridged within the current conception of biology." - M.P. Schutzenberger, Mathematical Challenges in the Neo-Darwinian Interpretation of Evolution (1967), pp. 73-75 (an adress given at the Wistar Institute of Anatomy and Biology Symposium).

 

Archaeopteryx did exist, and according to Dr. Alan Feduccia, a world authority on birds at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and an evolutionist himself, said: "Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth-bound, feathered dinosaur. But it's not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of 'paleobabble' is going to change that.''
The fact that it had some features in common with reptiles means simply it had some features in common with reptiles-not that it evolved. And even if you want to believe this is a missing link, there should be thousands of fossils showing its progression over millions of years. Yet like every other find there is always the full species, but not a trace of anything inbetween, or any kind of progression in the fossil record.

 

OK, so we can find fossils from every time period but the fossils that should number in the billions that would prove evolution, those fossils that would also be spread over every time period, those fossils just missed the right times to become fossils. Just those fossils. Just the billions of fossils that would show trans species. Only those fossils missed the right time to become fossils.
TALK ABOUT A STRING OF BAD LUCK. MILLIONS OF YEARS AND THEY JUST MISSED THE RIGHT TIME EVERY TIME TO BECOME A FOSSILS. EVERY TIME THE SPECIES CHANGED THEY KEPT MISSING THE RIGHT TIME. WOW.

 

campbell there are holes in creationism too, obviously more. Yet, youre letting your feelings and bias get in the way of realizing which theory is more reasonable.
"a science based on imaginary belief"
1. An allpowerful being created the cow, the dog, the fish, the ape, and the human as they are to this day, millions of years after the world was created.
2. Conditions on Earth enabled an extremely basic life form to change and improve over millions of years.
Which seems more like a fable? Like someone said earlier, change is a natural facet of life. Humans adapted and improved--from cavemen to modern day science. The earth rotates, continents drift, the weather changes--things change over time, what makes species any different?
I have a few questions about creationsim,
Where do dinosaurs fit into the creationist theory?
Why are certain species only found on certain continents and no others when Noah's story had all life contained on the same ship, which landed at one spot?

please provide any credible evidence that supports creation as described in the bible.

 

Many have been found. Certain religious groups have trouble accepting observable facts when they contradict their beliefs.

Tell us your version of how people got here and we'll discuss it.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/benton2.html

http://anthro.palomar.edu/homo/homo_1.htm

 

Sure, God's guiding hand is in our lives, planting a thought here, a seed there, etc. But there is a natural order that God established, and to completely deny the theory of evolution and instead claim that Jewish fables are the truth is to deny the natural order as one of the Good works of God.

You publically deny God's hand in many things. You claim to speak the truth while spreading abominable lies. I do not deny that what you do is part of God's plan, for it is, but you are a liar and false prophet that follows after the desires of your own heart rather than God's.

 

My feelings have nothing to do with what I believe. The real evidence is on the side of the Bible if anyone actually took the time to study it. Evolution has no evidence. Just Cheer Leaders. And 150 years of failure to find the missing links. Not even one trans-species was ever found. It takes more faith to believe in Evolution that it takes for me to believe in the Bible. And the Bible has evidence that I can see with my own eyes. The Jews return to Israel has started God's count down. Like I said, you would have to actually read the Bible to understand that.

 

Religious groups should stay out of the science area. I think it was a mistake for them to try to play on the same field as science and has put them in a defensive position. Initially it sounded good to raise contention points about scienctific theory based on religious views, but when it came time to defend creationism, it ran into trouble.

Religious groups trying to dabble with science has lowered religion in a way to a laboratory setting. I don't think it has done anything good for religion in general, in that religous beliefs have now become subject to the same objective judgments as science. This is something that creationists didn't think thoroughly about and didn't anticipate before they went on this campaign. It's much like painting oneself into a corner.

All in all, it's a very small group of people in the U.S. who are supporting the creationist view. Even within that group, it's the same half dozen writers that are seen on the web, with the rest doing cut and paste.

The creationist movement uses an approach very similar to those groups who claim that the Apollo missions were all faked. They raise what they perceive as inconsistencies in all of the documentation that showed people went to the Moon. No matter how much evidence one can provide about the Apollo mission, there is always someone who will point out just one more perceived inconsistency and try to use that to claim that the missions were all faked.

 

campbell you have yet to provide any strong evidence that supports creationism. Stop dodging the issue and provide bible verses and credible sources.

 

Here's a recent find of dinosaur eggs within the mother and how it might relate to modern birds. What a great thing science is. There's always the joy of new discoveries.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/04/15/dinosauregg/index.html

"The dinosaur was an oviraptorosaurian, a subgroup of theropods, and probably stood 10 to 13 feet tall when it lived 65 million to 100 million years ago, Sato said.

Theropods, (which means "fierce footed") were carnivorous, bipedal reptiles believed to be the ancestors of modern birds. The clues provided by the Chinese discovery suggest that the dinosaur had a reproductive system with some similarities to ancient reptiles and some to modern birds.

Like crocodiles and some other modern reptiles, this dinosaur had two ovaries and oviducts. But unlike crocodiles, which lay an average of 50 eggs at a time, the dinosaur had the birdlike characteristic of producing one larger, shelled egg at a time."

 

I think it is a big mistake when people start to think of Evolution as a Science.
And maybe that is the reason Colin Patterson who is the senior paleontologist at the British Museum of Natural History in London made this statement. "It seems to me that the theoretical framework (of evolutionary theory) has very little impact on the actual progress of the work in biological research. In a way some aspects of Darwinism and of neo-Darwinism seem to me to have held back the progress of science."
What I am finding more and more are those who are trying to hide the truth of the inconsistencies which make up the fragel foundations of evolution.

 

I don't believe in dodging issues, and the only time I do not respond is when the time factor enters the picture. Evolution states that dinosaurs died off 70 million years ago, yet in the Book of Job chapter 40 verses 15 through 19 and chapter 41 verses 1 through 34 describes living dinosaurs. Which I find interesting, because that Book is only about 3,000 years old.

 

What a wonderful book the Bible is when it speaks of living Dinosaurs in the book of job. Chapters 40 15-19 and chapters 41 1-34. And to think that book is only 3,000 years old.

 

If you want to know how we got here just read the first book of the Bible. God has made the wisdom of this world foolishness. Thats in the Bible to.