The Armor Games website will be down for maintenance on Monday 10/7/2024
starting at 10:00 AM Pacific time. We apologize for the inconvenience.
Forums → WEPR → Evolutionism or creationism
| 1486 | 258259 |
im just opening this topic so that people can have a NICE, FREINDLY place to talk about their beliefs, i Myself believe in evolutionism
- 1,486 Replies
I believe in Baptist Christianity, and therefore believe in one Supreme loving, yet holy being who created the world. Evolution I believe is an excuse people have created which has little scientific backing, and takes more faith than believing in God's creation to follow. There are many problems with the theory of evolution (what caused the big bang and the perfection of the world)
I believe in Baptist Christianity, and therefore believe in one Supreme loving, yet holy being who created the world. Evolution I believe is an excuse people have created which has little scientific backing, and takes more faith than believing in God's creation to follow. There are many problems with the theory of evolution (what caused the big bang and the perfection of the world)
M4CH - I see far more problems with Creation than with Evolution (I'm not saying that Evolution has no problems, there are always things that need revising and reviewing). Also, how is there little scientific proof? We've provided lots in this thread (common descent, the fossil record, etc).
Kip - Things are evolving! You think it takes a year or two for species to evolve into completely new ones? Its a process of millions of years of gradual adaptations JUST for sub-species to be established.
... If it takes millions of years, and the earth is approximately 6,000 - 8,000 years old, how would everything have developed.
Oh damn. You're one of THEM aren't you? You're a Young Earth Creationist!
Do you know all the branches of science you need to ignore to believe that stuff?
Fluid mechanics, nuclear physics, plate tectonics, Astronomy, Palaeontology... I could go on.
In fact I will - to branches of humanities like History and Linguistics.
How can you maintain the belief that the Earth is only 6000 years old when there is so much evidence to the contrary?
Your'e either an idiot or a troll and i'm not sure which to go with at this point.
Kip - Things are evolving! You think it takes a year or two for species to evolve into completely new ones? Its a process of millions of years of gradual adaptations JUST for sub-species to be established.
??? There is nothing going on ever, do you really think we'll be different millions o years from now? If the sun hasn't blown up by then...
How can you maintain the belief that the Earth is only 6000 years old when there is so much evidence to the contrary?
Probably because omnipotence of God pretty much trumps "scientific evidence"
Have you guys ever LOOKED at any part of the fossil record. A. Cinna - of course we will, scientists have predicted that we may split into two sub-races in the coming 10 million years. And looking at previous species and sub-species we can say that it's a safe bet. B. Nurv - Prove God then you can say that his omnipotence trumps scientific evidence, Ok? Hmm? do you understand that?
Ok thisisnotanalt, then why do things never evolve nowadays?
Things are evolving. It takes a long time for speciation to occur - every generation of an animal that passes by, it's evolving at least a little bit. As long as there's a changing environment to adapt to, evolution is happening. This is all assuming that the Earth is about 4.6 billion years old, which has not been definitively falsified yet - a few of my articles touched on that.
??? There is nothing going on ever, do you really think we'll be different millions o years from now? If the sun hasn't blown up by then...
The Sun has a few billion years left. Also, we will be different, as long as our environment changes. Skin color is a good example of natural selection - hispanics, blacks, whites, etc. all are the same species, it's just that because the races are native to different environments, the amount of pigment in the skin is different so as to reduce the likelihood of adverse effects. The Pygmy people of the rainforests of the congo are also a good example - adults are typically very short, which gives them good agility and more efficiency in radiating body heat.
Genetic diversity itself is not necessarily an evolutionary thing, but the presence of different races proves at the very least that natural selection happens.
Probably because omnipotence of God pretty much trumps "scientific evidence"
If the omnipotence of god was definitely real, it would be counted as scientific evidence. But it cannot be proven or falsified, and therefore isn't counted as a scientific principle or piece of evidence. It can't trump scientific evidence unless we have certainty beyond a reasonable doubt that it's really there, through nonreligious means.
Really no point in deleting my last post guys... What we can't facepalm anymore?
Notice that you took away the part about preconceived notions cause you lost on that point.
OH NOES I decided to not mention it again let's try and pick at that rather then the topic at hand. Actually my asking for evidence kind of covers it anyway. If you can't come to the conclusion independently then clearly saying it was a creator would have to first come from a preconceived notion. For instance let's say there is no random anomalies. It could still be governed by other natural processes. (I'll get to that in a moment) So the rejection of anything random happening still doesn't automatically equal creator.
If you are an evolutionist you have to believe that life came about through random chance. According to evolutionists the first species had to evolve from non-living materials.
Life from non life is not evolution that abiogensis. This is a completely different theory. Which again leads me to ask if you even know the definition of evolution?
As for having to accept abiogenesis first before being able to accept evolution, this is completely false as there are theistic evolutionists. If we were to go from that stand point, what ever deity is believed created the universe and/or life then let things evolve from there. Some would also say that deity nudged things along every so often, but this still leave the acceptance of evolution.
So my rejecting random chances in Life's creation rejects the first species evolving. Why would I think that the first species could not evolve, and then believe that life could evolve randomly after that?
since I already touched on life from non life is not evolution...
This is one part you seem to be hung up on. The processes of evolution aren't entirely random. They are governed by environmental changes and natural selection.
Okay, can you first please present your evidence that evolution exists? Furthermore, I thought this was supposed to be
Okay... Along with some refutes on creation.
29+ Cases for Macroevolution
An Account of a Debate with a Creationist
An Account of the 1993 Creation Conference
All About Archaeopteryx
Ancient Molecules and Modern Myths
Arachaeopteryx: Answering the Challenge of the Fossil Record
Are Mutations Harmful?
Attributing False Attributes to Thermodynamics
Bombadier Beetles and the Argument of Design
The 'Burdick Print'
Creationism and the Platypus
Creationist Arguments: Java Man
Creationist Arguments: The Monkey Quote
Creationist Arguments: Neandertals
Creationist Arguments: Peking Man
A Creationist Exposed: Gish
Creationist Whppoers
Creationists and Pithecanthropines
The Creation Research Society's Creed
Darwin's Black Box: Irredicule Complexity or Irrepoducible Irreducibility?
Digit Numbering and Limb Development
Dino Blood Redux
Dinosaur Footprints in Coal
Dinosaur Valley State Park
Do Human Tracks Occur in the Kayenta of Arizona?
Debate: Edwards vs. Aguillard
Entropy, Disorder and Life
Evidence for Evolution
The Evolution of Improved Fitness
The Evolution of the Woodpecker's Tongue
Five Major Misconceptions About Evolution
Fossil Hominids: The Evidence for Evolution
Fossil Hominids: Lucy
Genetic Algorithims and Evolutionary Computation
Geologic References in the Paluxy Controversy
How Good are those Young Earth Arguments: A Close Look at Dr. Hovind's List of Young-Earth Arguments and Other Claims
Horse Evolution: Hyrocatherium and Hyrax
IRC Graduate School Catalogue and List of Publications
Images of Neandertals
Information Theory and Creationism: Spetner and Biological Information
Jury-Rigged Design
Kansas Evolution Hearings
Lucy's Knee Joint
A Matter of Degree: Carl Baugh's Alleged Credentials
Observed Instances of Speciation
On Archaeopteryx, Astronomers and Forgery
On the Heels of Dinosaurs
The Origin of Whales and the Power of Independent Evidence
An Overview of Dinosaur Tracking
Peking Man and Homo erectus
Plaigiarised Errors and Molecular Genetics
Publish or Perish: Some Published Works on Biochemical Evolution
A Response to Ashby Camps 'Critique'
Response to Casey Luskin
A Response to Wayne Jackson
Review: Bones of Contention
A Review of IRC's Impact Article 151
A Review of NBC's 'The Mysterious Origins of Man'
Review: Science of Today and the Problems of Genesis
Review: The Image of God
Sauropods, Elephants,Weightlifters
Sea-Monster or Shark?
Scientific Creationism and Error
Scientists Challenge Claim for 60,000 year old Mungo DNA
The Second Law of Thermodynamics, Evolution and Probability
Suspicious Creationist Credentials
A Tale of Two Teeth
The Taylor Site 'Man Tracks'
Ted Holden's Frequent Questions Answered
Ted Holden's World
The Texas Dinosaur/'Man Track' Controversy
Transitional Vertevrate Fossils FAQ
A Visit to the IRC Museum
Lets Test Them: Evolution vs. Creationism
Irrefutable Proof of Evolution- Part 1 (mtDNA, ERVs, Fusion)
Proof of Evolution - Part 2 (Summation)
Proof of Evolution - Part 3 (Atavisms and Fossils- censored)
How Evolution Works- Introduction (Part I)
How Evolution Works- Forces (Part 2)
How Evolution Works Part 3- DNA
How Evolution Works Part 4- Mutations
How Evolution Works Part 5- Natural Selection
How Evolution Works 6- The Constraints of Evolution
How Evolution Works 7: Speciation
Evidence for Evolution, Part I
Evidence for Evolution, Part II
Evidence for Evolution, Part III
Evolution IS a Blind Watchmaker
The Evolution of the Flagellum
Evolution of the Bombardier Beetle
How Evolution Causes an Increase in Information, Part I
How Evolution Causes an Increase in Information, Part II
Now besides trying to blow holes in other theories can you provide evidence for creation? (asking count #7 ...just from myself)
Evolution I believe is an excuse people have created which has little scientific backing,
^See links above fro the little scientific backing the theory has, and there is more then that as well.
If it takes millions of years, and the earth is approximately 6,000 - 8,000 years old, how would everything have developed.
Actually closest estimate indicates around 4.6 billion years.
Even some human civilizations are older then your stated age of the eErth which is why some theists have pushed the date up to as much as 12,000 years.
This is a little off-topic, but is there anything on page 111? I can't see anything and after reading 110 and 112 I think I missed some.
Sorry for the double post, I can see page 11 now.
There are many problems with the theory of evolution (what caused the big bang and the perfection of the world)
The Theory of Evolution has nothing to do with the Big Bang, and the world is far from perfect.
If it takes millions of years, and the earth is approximately 6,000 - 8,000 years old, how would everything have developed.
So what are dinosaur bones? And other fossils more than 8000 years old? And what about the fact that human remains have been found that are way older than 8000 years?
Thread is locked!