[_ Old Earth _] Questions For Evolutionists

[Featherbop]

so please tell me WHO MADE GOD!!

No one. You aren't going to be taken seriously by theists if you continue to insist that God was "made".

I dont have faith, because no one knows who made god. NO ONE!

Why do you continue to insist that God had to be made? God is not matter/energy, unlike the universe.....Therefore, He is not subject to it's laws.

i know how cells were built, scientists know how planets and stars are built.

Really? Tell me the methods God used to create them then.

the bible says that god did it, science says otherwise

Science says that God did not create the universe?

religion has heresay, a book that has been re-edited tons of times, and the end answer is always "you cant understand because you dont have faith"

That isn't the only answer. I also hear "Because you are ignorant.", or "Because you don't want to understand."

well ill tell you this. Science made my computer, science protected me from smallpox. I have yet to see god do anything for me, that cant be explained by science.

So you are saying that God cannot use science, or if He does it doesn't count as something God did?

 

[huj05]

yes, i guess that god can create "miracles" by making cells divide. and i guess its gods "miricale" that makes the flu adapt to its surroundings so we cant completely cure it.

I dont understand that if God can exist forever and ever, than why cant atoms? why do atoms have to be created by something that existed forever?
(substitute atoms for energy, matter, or what have you)

God is not matter/energy, unlike the universe.....Therefore, He is not subject to it's laws.

I swear, i read part of the bible that said that humans are created in a likeness of god. To me, i woudl assume that would probably mean with some of the same building blocks. So why he would create us out of something totally diffrent, than the same stuff that he was created out of, formed through, magically appeared through whatever.



The biggest question here. If god has always been, and we know the universe is billions of years old, Why did it take god SO LONG to make his "finest" creation? because he is all knowing he should have done it first thing correct?

Really? Tell me the methods God used to create them then.

lets see,

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. And the earth had no form. It was empty, covered with darkness and water. Then the Spirit of God hovered over the water, and God said, "Let there be light," and there was light. God saw that the light was good.

Then He divided the light from the darkness. God called the light "day", and the darkness he called "night." And the evening and the morning were the first day.

god used speech.

Science says that God did not create the universe?

so far god hasnt won a battle over science yet. Science proved evolution, science proved creationism wrong (atleast of humans) science has proved the earth to be older than the bible claims. I have yet to see the bible prove something that science hasnt proven wrong (besides there are people. and there are animals ect)

calling me ignorant when i provide fact, and u solely provide something from a disputed text, is irrelevant. I will be the first to admit, I HAVE been proven wrong by christians on a few occasions. I will admit that, They used logic, and proved me wrong, or proved that my view was misguided. They were christians that tried to teach and reach out, not throw names.

srry if i seem rude, I am truly not trying to be. I am just trying to make a point that i dont come here to tell you you are wrong, until you begin to throw around facts that seem irelevnat.

 

[Justice]

You guys are cute but you proved my point. For the TRUE evolutionist the word THEORY does NOT fit into their vocabulary. That's requires a strong faith.

What?? Where have we not acknowledged that it's not a theory? Hmmm?? We seem to be saying that you jokers twist the word theory to mean something it doesn't.

Strong faith? Evolution requires no faith, science has nothing to do with faith.

Men picking up tiny bones and telling you that this is your ancestry requires heaps of faith. A picture is worth a 1000 words so they'll even provide drawings based on a few bones, doesn't that also require faith???

As far as me being the "highest echelon of scientific and philosophical thought", not hardly. But unlike you my philosophical thought process has NOT resulted in name calling. This "joker" is not wasting time on your hahahaha's and insults. Maybe we can talk when you grow up.

Justice

 

[Asimov]

Men picking up tiny bones and telling you that this is your ancestry requires heaps of faith. A picture is worth a 1000 words so they'll even provide drawings based on a few bones, doesn't that also require faith???

Ah, okay. Well, good thing that doesn't happen! Your straw-man of science is interesting, but kind of false! Nice try.

As far as me being the "highest echelon of scientific and philosophical thought", not hardly. But unlike you my philosophical thought process has NOT resulted in name calling. This "joker" is not wasting time on your hahahaha's and insults. Maybe we can talk when you grow up.

Justice

Actually, I said Ray Comfort was, so unless you're Ray Comfort, it doesn't apply to you...although it's a little disignenuous to quote yourself.

 

[spiritfilled7]

Asimov I would like to ask you a question. You try to disprove what justice is pointing out from the infallible inherent word of God. So my question is where is your proof? Don't just give me a common answer because I would like to know how you prove evolution. Oh and yes atheism does apply. To deny that God exists is saying he did not create the earth, and to deny Gods creation is denying His omnipotence. So asimov what is the view of one who does not speak the truth.

 

[huj05]

i can prove evolution.(not myself, but i can tell you how to if you have TONS and TONS of money)

get a bunch of single cell organisms, all of the same type. make sure you get a whole load of them.

then split them into 9 even groups.

put 1 group in warmth
1 in cold
1 in a dry climate
1 in wet
1 near a microwave
sneeze on one
add a drop of milk to one
put one in the dark
put one in a room with a glad plug in fan

then after idunno, 1 week, 1 month, it can varie, compare specimens from each. they will all be diffrent in ways (some may have died)

that is a very crude example of what scientists do. scientists have proven evolution, can prove it again and again and again.

The ability to prove it in humans is limited however, do to the fact that we dont reproduce fast enough.

single cells can reproduce trillions of times before a human can, and each of its offspring can do it too. 1trillion ^ 1trillion is such a huge number, you are bound to eventually see a change.

 

[Asimov]

You try to disprove what justice is pointing out from the infallible inherent word of God.

What is justice pointing out?

So my question is where is your proof?

Proof for what?

Don't just give me a common answer because I would like to know how you prove evolution.

I don't prove evolution. Science isn't proof, it's using logic and reason.

Oh and yes atheism does apply. To deny that God exists is saying he did not create the earth, and to deny Gods creation is denying His omnipotence. So asimov what is the view of one who does not speak the truth.

Evolution does not say anything about whether or not God created the earth/universe/life. Evolution is merely a process that is observable, testable, repeatable, and can make predictions. As for my veracity, why don't YOU point out what my lies are before you make insubstantiated statements.

 

[spiritfilled7]

In what accounts has evolution been observable and testable?

 

[Asimov]

In what accounts has evolution been observable and testable?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html
http://talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/sec ... peciations

Some of the most studied organisms in all of genetics are the Drosophila species, which are commonly known as fruitflies. Many Drosophila speciation events have been extensively documented since the seventies. Speciation in Drosophila has occurred by spatial separation, by habitat specialization in the same location, by change in courtship behavior, by disruptive natural selection, and by bottlenecking populations (founder-flush experiments), among other mechanisms.

 

[Featherbop]

I dont understand that if God can exist forever and ever, than why cant atoms?

Apples and oranges. That's like saying "If humans are intelligent, why can't trees be intelligent?" You get what I'm saying...

Some things you say are....strange...to say the least...

why do atoms have to be created by something that existed forever?

Well, they've been created by no one else....kinda narrows it down....

I swear, i read part of the bible that said that humans are created in a likeness of god. To me, i woudl assume that would probably mean with some of the same building blocks.

Why?

So why he would create us out of something totally diffrent, than the same stuff that he was created out of, formed through, magically appeared through whatever.

what

The biggest question here. If god has always been, and we know the universe is billions of years old, Why did it take god SO LONG to make his "finest" creation?

I'll assume that is true for a minute. Would it really be "So long" for God's existence? And why would it matter?

because he is all knowing he should have done it first thing correct?

Why?

so far god hasnt won a battle over science yet.

Didn't know a battle was going on. Maybe some people try to drag God into a made up battle?

Science proved evolution

I thought science doesn't "prove" anything...

science proved creationism wrong

First of all, just in case you didn't know, creationism is just the beleif that God created the universe. Second of all, I've never seen any evidence that goes against God, Creation, etc. And this goes back to my question: How has science proven that God didn't create the universe. And lastly, creationism comes in many forms(Literal Genesis creationism, Proggresive Creationism, Evolutionary Creationism, etc.") Are you saying all have been disproven, or just one in particular?

calling me ignorant when i provide fact

Well, I do think you are ignorant about some things, particularly God ansd creation/creationism. And much you have provided is not factual, just bizzare misconceptions, unsubstanciated opinion, and the like.

I will be the first to admit, I HAVE been proven wrong by christians on a few occasions. I will admit that, They used logic, and proved me wrong, or proved that my view was misguided. They were christians that tried to teach and reach out, not throw names.

I think they are in for many more victories. I have some advice for you: If you don't understand something, ask questions and research. Don't say things without first thinking about your statements a great deal. No harshness intended. And I apologize if I 'threw names' at you.

srry if i seem rude, I am truly not trying to be.

Apology accepted.

 

[huj05]

well, my thing about building blocks.
if i were a cook, and i watched someone make a sandwich with bread, lettuce and ham, and i wanted to make a sandwich that is in representation, maybe it would be crackers with ham and lettuce. because, crackers and bread have many of the same properties and were made from wheat (grain whatever) I wouldnt use tomatoe slices inplace of bread, because, well, thats not like.
Idunno, i think that way, if you dont, ehh no biggie, i can see where your coming from.

I do try to research some things. Some things that confuse me i ask q;s on(check my thread about teh time of christ's crucifiction)

trees cant be "intelligent" because they dont have a central nervous system, or a brain. :P but good analogy.


symatics on teh creation of elements.

now, if i search a room, from top to bottom, and make the claim "there is no elephant in this room" there could still be an elephant, maybe i didnt find it yet. bah, that is messed up, I heard it before, use dit before, i cant quote it exactly. now im feeling rather stupid. so onto something i can defend.

If you knew all the answers to a test. Why would you answer any of them wrong?
if god knows all the answers to life. and the universe, why doesnt he do it right? (there are obviously flaws in humans and in nature, that arent caused by sin)

What i meant by "science proved creationism wrong" is the general concept that humans all derived solely from adam and eve. Not that the world was created ect, because, frankly we dont know. YOu can go for the more mystical aproach, i prefer to stick to science, its a matter of opinion.

 

[Heidi]

People without the Holy Spirit are stuck in their fallible minds. They also have no choice but to believe other fallible minds. But Christians who have the Holy Spirit in them have both a fallible human mind and the Holy Spirit which is infallible. Thus, people without the Holy Spirit have no choice but to put their faith in other fallible minds like scientists. They then will be let down every time scientists change their minds which is in every generation. The theory of evolution is rapdily fading away as fast as the theories in the 19th century. 2 leading evolutional scientists just came out and conceded that the "missing links" were simply too hard to get past. I predict that in the next century, the "caveman" theory will be considered as archaic and superstitious as Zeus now is. ANYTHING man-made is fallible and temporal. It's only a matter of time before it crumbles. What's too bad is that many people have to wait for "accredited scientists" to tell them what is true and what is false instead of thinking it through by themselves. All anyone has to do is go to a zoo and see what apes breed. The truth can only be found in reality, not in the imagination.

 

[huj05]

. They then will be let down every time scientists change their minds which is in every generation.

hence the reason teh bible is rewritten so many times :/

scinece finds an error and fixes it.
christianity finds an error and fixes it.

If god made humans in a replication of his perfect self, then why would we need him to make decisions?

 

[Chupacabra]

Heidi, I feel exactly the opposite way. You see, science changes when evidence changes. It's flexible. This flexibility allows it to stay up to date and to replace obsolete ideas. Religion, on the other hand, is more slow in its adaptations and typically ebarrasses itself periodically when the ridiculousness of many of its claims is exposed. Perhaps we may look back on certain scientists as being quaint, but because science is an ongoing process and does not purport infallibility, it is ridged religions like Christianity that are seen as incorrect as time progresses.

 

[Asimov]

People without the Holy Spirit are stuck in their fallible minds. They also have no choice but to believe other fallible minds. But Christians who have the Holy Spirit in them have both a fallible human mind and the Holy Spirit which is infallible. Thus, people without the Holy Spirit have no choice but to put their faith in other fallible minds like scientists. They then will be let down every time scientists change their minds which is in every generation. The theory of evolution is rapdily fading away as fast as the theories in the 19th century. 2 leading evolutional scientists just came out and conceded that the "missing links" were simply too hard to get past. I predict that in the next century, the "caveman" theory will be considered as archaic and superstitious as Zeus now is. ANYTHING man-made is fallible and temporal. It's only a matter of time before it crumbles. What's too bad is that many people have to wait for "accredited scientists" to tell them what is true and what is false instead of thinking it through by themselves. All anyone has to do is go to a zoo and see what apes breed. The truth can only be found in reality, not in the imagination.

Ga-huuuck!! Ye shoooore hit da nail on dems der head, heidi!! Weeeeellll, oil bee durned if I ain't tickled pink. Lemme go get mah rope and lynch me one-a dem scienteests!!

 

[Heidi]

I found these questions By Dr. Kent Hovind. I could not find a link for the listed questions. The source is --- The Evidence Bible By Ray Comfort:

1. Where did the space for the universe come from?

Nothing to do with evolution

2. Where did matter come form?

Nothing to do with evolution.
[quote:4fb4f]
3. Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
4. How did matter get so perfectly organized?
5. Where did the energy come from to do the organizing?
6. When, where, why, and how did life come from dead matter?

Nothing to do with evolution.

7. When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
8. With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
9. Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kind since this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)

How about this:
Eukaryote group A has high reproduction rate, B has low reproduction rate. Both groups have similar environments, both groups have a limited mortality. Sudden change in temperature occurs and 40% of both groups die off. Group A is still much larger and survives because it has a large enough sustainable pop. Group B is almost entirely gone, Group B quickly dies off because it cannot reproduce faster than its death rate. Group A goes on to sire all further life on planet. Evolution has occured here, A has been selected for its greater ability to survive.

10. How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)

Strawman. Been dealt with before.

11. Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?

Possible? Yes. Is there any reason to believe in a creator? None produced so far. Evidence shows common ancestor. So common ancestor it is.

12. Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?

Change in environments produces pressure to select. Genetic mutation provides an amount of new information to be chosen for or simply forgotten as time goes on. Environmental change-> change in species-> repeat ad infinitum = Evolution

13. When, where, why, and how did:
a) Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two- and three- celled intermediates?)
b) Single-celled animals evolve?
c) Fish change to amphibians?
d) Amphibians change to reptiles?
e) Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes, reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc, are all very different!) How did the intermediate forms live?
14. When, where, why, how, and from what did:
a) Whales evolve?
b) Sea horses evolve?
c) Bats evolve?
d) Eyes evolve?
e) Ears evolve?
f) Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws. etc, evolve?

Get a bloody biology textbook and do some research on your own. Don't be lazy.

15. Which evolved first (how, and how long, did it work without the others)?
a) The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body's resistance to it's own digestive juice (stomach, intestines etc.)?
b) The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce?
c) The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them. the throat. or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs?
d) DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts?
e) The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose?
f) The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants?
g) The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones?
h) The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system?
i) The immune system or the need for it?

Dr. Kent Hovind goes on to state --- The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well-meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man's questions about the universe. Evolution is not a good theory --- it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science.

Here his site --- http://www.drdino.com/Ministry/250k/index.jsp

Dr. Hovind's has offered $250,000 since 1990 to anyone who can give any empirical evidence (scientific proof) for evolution.

Wow you've just dug up, the oldest, most rigorously refuted creationist site on the internet. Good job at providing new content justice. Why not come up with a dazzling new argument from the 1840's while you're at it?[/quote:4fb4f]

It doesn't appear the evolution answer much, does it? The only thing it does is to attempt to prove that man is nothing more than a mutation or accident. It also shows disrespect for God, His creation and that our ansestors are no better than apes. That is what evolutionists fight so hard to prove. I'm sorry you have such little value for your gifts and abilities. Maybe you should visit your ancestors in the zoo to find your roots. But all you'll see is that they've gone back to exchanging their alleged human offspring now for other apes. I guess they just got tired of breeding higher forms of life.

 

[Asimov]

It doesn't appear the evolution answer much, does it?

What did you think it was supposed to answer? The question to life, the universe, and everything?

The only thing it does is to attempt to prove that man is nothing more than a mutation or accident.

False statement. Evolution doesn't discount God.

It also shows disrespect for God, His creation and that our ansestors are no better than apes.

No it doesn't, how is it disrespect to state that we are animals who happen to have a higher intelligence level than them? Knowing that, or you being that doesn't make you any less human, or any less intelligent.

That is what evolutionists fight so hard to prove.

What a load. Evolution does not equal atheism.

I'm sorry you have such little value for your gifts and abilities.

I'm sorry you have such contempt and arrogance for other life that you would think it an insult to be related to them.

Maybe you should visit your ancestors in the zoo to find your roots. But all you'll see is that they've gone back to exchanging their alleged human offspring now for other apes. I guess they just got tired of breeding higher forms of life.

Ok...let me clarify this for you, considering you seem to have busted a circuit in your head.

definition of an ape:

Any of various large, tailless Old World primates of the family Pongidae, including the chimpanzee, gorilla, gibbon, and orangutan.

(this is from dictionary.com, so if anyone has a better definition, then supply it please).

Humans are apes. The term "ape" is not a scientific classification of animals, it's merely a generalization of a number of species of animal within a given sub-family.

Humans are primates, we share certain characteristics and genetic qualities within the order primates that classify us in this way.

Humans are mammals, we share certain characteristics and genetic qualities within the class that classify us in this way.

Humans are chordates. We share certain characteristics and genetic qualities within the class that classify us in this way.

Humans are animals. We share certain characteristics and genetic qualities within the kingdom that classify us in this way.

Humans share a common ancestor with all primates, who in turn share a common ancestor with all mammals, who in turn share a common ancestor with all chordates, who in turn share a common ancestor with all animals, which in turn shares a common ancestor with all life.

Nowhere does it say God does not exist.

Nowhere does it say humans are not special.

Nowhere does it say that humans could not have been a special creation.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi, I feel exactly the opposite way. You see, science changes when evidence changes. It's flexible. This flexibility allows it to stay up to date and to replace obsolete ideas. Religion, on the other hand, is more slow in its adaptations and typically ebarrasses itself periodically when the ridiculousness of many of its claims is exposed. Perhaps we may look back on certain scientists as being quaint, but because science is an ongoing process and does not purport infallibility, it is ridged religions like Christianity that are seen as incorrect as time progresses.

So what you're saying is that today's correct theories replace yesterday's incorrect theories. Is that right? So which science do you believe? Today's science or tomorrow's science that corrects today's science?

 

[Sara929]

Lazy --- Please, I pre- typed the questions since I could not find a link: Since you think you have all the answers why haven't you guys collected the $250,000???

I think Darwin chased too many butterflies and watched too many tadpoles sprout legs.

My friend, please be very careful with Hovind and his reasoning. I'm not questioning him being a Christian, but when someone professes to be sharing the truth and knowningly lies and deceives his audience to promote the kingdom of God.... many warning flags must go up.

 

[huj05]

umm, alot of the world, basically most of it, besides fundies, and some other hardcore christians, believe evolution occurs. why?

because it does!

science and religion are both like jigsaw puzzles.

science has 1 billion pieces, that are tiny, and all the same color. It will take a dang long time to assemble it.

religion is like a puzle where each piece can connect to every piece, so, you can assmble it, if it doesnt look right, you can switch it around, untl you get the one you want. regardless if its hte same as the one on the box cover