ForumsWEPREvolution

22 5377
Stickjesus
offline
Stickjesus
166 posts
Nomad

Evolution has basically been disproved. Scientists are putting more and more research into proving evolution is real but the more work they put in the more evidence they have to the contrary. I will just take one concept which disproves evolution.
There are all these pretty pictures of prehistoric monkey leading up to man. You've all seen it. Did you know that they don't have any evidence to prove that happened. Not a single scrap. They have bones of prehistoric monkey and bones of prehistoric man and yet they don't have a single bone leading from one to the other. For a process that takes millions of years to happen it sure doesn't leave any evidence of it. Heres a timeline of what they actually have.
Monkey--------------?---------------Man
Can't you see the heaps of information there proving evolution is true. Now people, don't get any misconceptions here. I am not trying to convert anyone to any other religion. I am just saying to anyone who believes in evolution should take a look at the cold hard facts before putting their whole lifes belief into it.
If anyone would like me to give them any more information as regard disproving evolution don't hesitate to ask. I have way more proof than just this, its just I don't really feel like wrtiting a novel right at the moment.

  • 22 Replies
necromancer
offline
necromancer
750 posts
Peasant

There is an overwhelming wall of evidence for evolution that Creationism cannot climb. And they actually do have linking fossil evidence.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/timeline/0f0dab976edd7664d2a520c6d8837e42.png
1e +06 years = 1 million years

Is that enough evidence for you to show the chain from chimpanzees. We have found the fossils of everyone of those hominids. Not to mention the fact that they have been dated at about 7 million years, which blows apart the Bible's 5000 years.

What other evidence do you have?

Also there are already threads like this. :P

Stickjesus
offline
Stickjesus
166 posts
Nomad

All they have is theoretical evidence. BTW you would think that if there were fossils that there would be way more. There is no cold hard facts.

Strop
offline
Strop
10,817 posts
Bard

Compare:

Evolution has basically been disproved. Scientists are putting more and more research into proving evolution is real but the more work they put in the more evidence they have to the contrary.


with

All they have is theoretical evidence...There is no cold hard facts.


Therein lies the problem with your argument.

If anybody would like me to rehash my blow-by-blow criticism of the challenges to evolutionary theory, I'll post it, but at this point in time I'm way more than nose-deep up the crack of my thesis, so it might take a bit.
Stickjesus
offline
Stickjesus
166 posts
Nomad

Also I have two more points. The bible does not say anything about 5000 years. When Adam and Eve ate the apple god gave them man a 6000 year ban from the garden of edan. Also the 6000 year part was the 6000 years of man. Of coarse there was time before that, how else would you explain dinosaurs.

Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,014 posts
Shepherd

This topic already exists, but I have to ask something. How do you take the fact that we share 99% of our DNA with apes? I mean I am not a scientist, but that says something to me.

Stickjesus
offline
Stickjesus
166 posts
Nomad

What I mean is that everything the scientists base these so called facts is on very shaky ground. Everything they tell us is a very small amount of what they actually know.

Strop
offline
Strop
10,817 posts
Bard

Ooh!

Of coarse there was time before that, how else would you explain dinosaurs.


I actually specifically dealt with this...so now I'll approach it from the flip side of the coin- how would you interpret these verses?

And God said, Let the waters bring forth abundantly the moving creature that hath life, and fowl that may fly above the earth in the open firmament of heaven. And God created great whales, and every living creature that moveth, which the waters brought forth abundantly, after their kind, and every winged fowl after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God blessed them, saying, Be fruitful, and multiply, and fill the waters in the seas, and let fowl multiply in the earth. And the evening and the morning were the fifth day. And God said, Let the earth bring forth the living creature after his kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth after his kind: and it was so. And God made the beast of the earth after his kind, and cattle after their kind, and every thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind: and God saw that it was good. And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness: and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth. So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.


-Genesis 1:20-27 (KJV)

As you can see, the process of creation appears to take place over "six days", the latter two days being that of life as we know it. In a separate thread, I specifically cited several interpretations of this either supporting or rejecting that the dinosaurs once roamed the Earth (re: 'behemoth', but all almost invariably rejecting that dinosaurs lived "several million years" before man ever did on the grounds that all living creatures were apparently created 'simultaeneously' ...or at least over the course of two days. That is to say that these sources I cited either denied the existence of dinosaurs or they claimed that dinosaurs coexisted with man in more-or-less man's current state (as an organism).

So here we come to the conundrum of interpretation of 'time' and its inconsistency, and its implications. The methods that give the evidence that dinosaurs lived long before man ever did are consistent with the methods that give the evidence that man has lived for much much longer than "6000 years".

How would you respond to that?
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,014 posts
Shepherd

I still don't see your point. Strop presents it very well... your argument is a logical fallacy.

woody_7007
offline
woody_7007
2,662 posts
Peasant

Anyone who doesnt belive in evolution is clearly a moron. I am not trying to be rude but it really annoys me when people are so blind to facts and things that have been proved. Charles Darwin wrote the origin of the species in the 19th century and persuaded the majority of the thinking western world to belive in evolution. If he was able to do that back then with just a book and no modern scientific methods then i wonder how much more proof there is now. Especially when religion was much more prevalent back then aswell.

Strop
offline
Strop
10,817 posts
Bard

What I mean is that everything the scientists base these so called facts is on very shaky ground. Everything they tell us is a very small amount of what they actually know.


Ah, I think your issue is that you're mistaking the descriptive process of science for its common misinterpretations. Not many people actually understand what science really is.

'Science' never purported to create 'cold hard facts', so much as build cases based on evidence that lends itself to a compelling interpretation of 'justified belief beyond reasonable doubt'. If researchers were to find evidence that is directly contrary to their theory, then we would have to consider whether to reject or refine our theories. However, no such evidence has been found to reject the general principles of evolution as a whole, as derived from the so-called Darwinian principles.
necromancer
offline
necromancer
750 posts
Peasant

All they have is theoretical evidence. BTW you would think that if there were fossils that there would be way more. There is no cold hard facts.

So many hundreds of fossils only constitutes theoretical evidence? In any type of court of law, the jury would surely convict off of that evidence as compared to the amount you have, only the Bible. Second fossils are incredibly rare and are unlikely to occur in transitional fossils as those occur in a small area and there are only a handful of those organisms. See this.

Also, I have two more points. The Bible does not say anything about 5,000 years. When Adam and Eve ate the apple God gave man a 6,000 year ban from the garden of Eden. Also the 6,000 years were the 6,000 years of man. Of course there was time before that, how else would you explain dinosaurs?
(spelling and grammar corrected)

I thought the Bible explicitly said God created the Earth in seven days which would leave the dinosaurs with one day to themselves, not much time. Sorry, I erred, Bible historians put the Earth's beginning at about 5,000 B.C.E. which is still disproved by uranium-238 dating which puts the Earth's beginnings at 4.6 billion years ago.
Stickjesus
offline
Stickjesus
166 posts
Nomad

They quite obviously weren't real days. The term day could have meant 10trilion years for all we know. We don't even know if all the days were the same length.

Strop
offline
Strop
10,817 posts
Bard

We don't even know if all the days were the same length.


Hooray! Finally somebody (who presumably believes in the truth of the Bible) who can say this with a straight face!

Sorry, I erred, Bible historians put the Earth's beginning at about 5,000 B.C.E.


Well, not all. Though certainly quite a few took a few leaves out of James Ussher's book!

Modern Christian apologetics (for the love of God, why?) has generally dispensed with arguing from this stance.
Asherlee
offline
Asherlee
5,014 posts
Shepherd

So, it is fair for you to stand on your wobble table of Biblical facts, but science can't hold a candle to the wind?

necromancer
offline
necromancer
750 posts
Peasant

@stickjesus- A day is one rotation of the Earth about its axis which lasts exactly twenty-four hours. I could only see this argument holding for before God created the Earth once it was made, a day is twenty four hours long. Also, if evolution is wrong yet the Earth is old, how do new species come into being? I imagine God atop of a cloud, creating new animals, and punting them down to the Earth, which makes no sense at all.

Showing 1-15 of 22