[_ Old Earth _] Why is evolutioln promoted?

[Late_Cretaceous]

Do scientists really know that evolution is a lie, or are they just stupid?

How come physicists don't tell biologists that evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics?

Why do many major universities have departments of "evolutionary biology" or "evolution and ecology"?

Do evolutionists have an agenda?

Do people who promote the lie actually believe in it, even though there is so much evidence agianst it, and that the average high school dropout can tell how unscientific it is?

Are evolutionists less moral then YEC's?

 

[Drew]

Oh no, here we go again..... :roll:

I am no biologist, but I believe I have knowledge of physics. The argument that evolution violates the laws of thermodynamics is repeatedly made yet it is manifestly false. I will address this in two ways. The normal response to this argument is to point out that the 2nd law of thermodynamics applies to closed systems and that the earth is an open system - it receives low entropy sunlight.

However, we need to be careful, the second law also applies to open systems - but not in the form that creationists use it. Simply put (at least for now), the only systems in which entropy must increase are closed systems. The second law does have something to say about open systems (like the Earth) but its application to open system does not mandate that entropy must increase in such systems. And this is precisely what the YEC will argue - that evolution is impossible in light of the second law.

This is simply not true - the laws of thermodynamics in no way render evolution impossible.

 

[Quath]

A few statistics I remember seeing.

If you look at all scientists across all fields, 95% if them believe the theory of evolution is correct and about half of the scientists are religious.

If you look at just scientists in geology and biology, it was something like 99.8% believe in evolution.

Basically, evolution is the simpliest explanation for all what we see. Even people that believe in God tend to believe in evolution if they look at the data.

The only agenda scientists have is to come up with the best model of the world we live in. They delight in proving old insihjts wrong and wish to be in the books for showing some great new understanding. So if YEC was correct, then the evidence should be around to support it.

Quath

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Here are a few more questions.

Do creationists ACTUALLY THINK that evolutionists believe:

* the "first cell" just popped into existance?
* that "it all came about by chance"?
* that "nothing turned itself into something"?
* that evolution can be used as an excuse for all sorts of depraved behaviour?

These allegations (strawmen actually) are often posed by creationists (TEC to be specific) against evolutionists in an attempt to discredit the theory.

SO my real - fundamental - quesiton is : Just how stupid do you think us evolutionists are? Do you reall think that we are so dumb that we can't see these supposed fallacies in ToE?

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

This is simply not true - the laws of thermodynamics in no way render evolution impossible.

I understand that completely, but is it not totally absurd that many creationsts spout that nonsense without realizing that - if somthing was so scientifically unsound as they claim it would never get published in peer reviewed literature.

 

[Drew]

I understand that completely, but is it not totally absurd that many creationsts spout that nonsense without realizing that - if somthing was so scientifically unsound as they claim it would never get published in peer reviewed literature.

Not following you dude.....Can you please rephrase?

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

My point is that most, if not all, creationist attempts to villify evolutionists are... well stupid. Seriously, they are absurd. They try to paint this picture that evolutionists subscribe to notions that defy logic. This is done in an attempt to attack people who accept the reality of evolution rather then the theory of evolution itself. They create strawman arguements and then say "look how stupid evolutionists must be to believe this crap". I guess it they can't discredit the theory, they try to discredit those who accept it.

In the end it is only themselves that are made to look foolish, not the evolutionists.

My question is: Do YEC's really think that evolutionists are as stupid as they attempt to portray? And how can they justify being so dishonest?

 

[reznwerks]

late

Is "Late Cret" pro evolution or pro ID?

 

[Drew]

Re: late

Is "Late Cret" pro evolution or pro ID?

Aren't you assuming that one cannot be both? One can claim that the laws of physics and the initial conditions of the universe were designed and also believe that "unguided" evolution gave rise to life.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Re: late

Aren't you assuming that one cannot be both? One can claim that the laws of physics and the initial conditions of the universe were designed and also believe that "unguided" evolution gave rise to life.

Yeah, what he said.

 

[Dave...]

Do scientists really know that evolution is a lie, or are they just stupid?

Evolution was thought up as an alternative to the Bible. That is why it apposes the Bible every step of the way.

It's just another way of "removing the ten commandments". Out of sight, out of mind. Then conscience doesn't get in the way of sin as much.

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Do scientists really know that evolution is a lie, or are they just stupid?

Evolution was thought up as an alternative to the Bible. That is why it apposes the Bible every step of the way.

It's just another way of "removing the ten commandments". Out of sight, out of mind. Then conscience doesn't get in the way of sin as much.

Evolution was "thought up" as a way to describe observations made from biodiversity. It is not an alternative to the bible any more then any other scientific thoery is. How does evolution "oppose" the bible? Allele frequency changes are somehow against the bible????? Excuse me? How do you come to that conclusion.

 

[SyntaxVorlon]

The force is strong with this one.

 

[reznwerks]

discovered

Do scientists really know that evolution is a lie, or are they just stupid?

Evolution was thought up as an alternative to the Bible. That is why it apposes the Bible every step of the way.
There weren't people getting out of bed every day wondering how can we come up with stuff to contradict the bible. LOL Evolution was discovered as a process that was observed and the evidence overwhelming supports it.

It's just another way of "removing the ten commandments". Out of sight, out of mind. Then conscience doesn't get in the way of sin as much.
Not really. Many civilizations got along quite well and mirror many of our laws and moral without the Ten Commandments. Of the ten there are only three that are really important of which any society adheres too. No society condones murder, theft, or violates the rules of family whatever they may be. Yes polygamy works and has rules for conduct. The rest don't really matter. Honor thy father and mother while nice is not critical but is acknowleded in all societies, Keep holy the lords day? Its nice for day off and most societies make sure that a day off is had by all. Paying homage to an invisible God? I never saw the wrath of God for not obeying. As I said before the Ten Commandments brought nothing new to the table as all those statutes were already known and practiced the the middle east. Do a check on Hammurabies code.

 

[Heidi]

Evolution was thought up to give human explanations to the unseen instead of attributing creation to God himself, period. But unfortunately, human reasoning is always fallible and imperfect & doesn't understand the unseen. That's why there are so many contradictions in the theory of evolution and most importantly, zero proof, only speculation. ;-)

 

[Late_Cretaceous]

Heidi, you are mixing up evolution with atheism.

I accept evolution, yet am not an athiest.

 

[Dave...]

Evolution was "thought up" as a way to describe observations made from biodiversity. It is not an alternative to the bible any more then any other scientific thoery is. How does evolution "oppose" the bible? Allele frequency changes are somehow against the bible????? Excuse me? How do you come to that conclusion.

I thought that you knew about evolution. See my posts on the first page of "evolution is hostile to reason" thread in this forum.

Do creationists ACTUALLY THINK that evolutionists believe:

* the "first cell" just popped into existance?
* that "it all came about by chance"?
* that "nothing turned itself into something"?
* that evolution can be used as an excuse for all sorts of depraved behaviour?

Use this forum to see what evolutionists believe. You may be surprised. Although, their religious philosophies called evolution may not have evolved at the same rate as yours did. ;-)

 

[Barbarian]

Dave has a lot of odd ideas about what evolution is. Not his fault. He's been badly indoctrinated by AIG, Gish, etc.

 

[Heidi]

Heidi, you are mixing up evolution with atheism.

I accept evolution, yet am not an athiest.

Oh, so evolutionists believe that God created man? :o That's what the bible says. Do you believe the bible? Jesus did. So who is your God?

 

[Heidi]

Evolution was "thought up" as a way to describe observations made from biodiversity. It is not an alternative to the bible any more then any other scientific thoery is. How does evolution "oppose" the bible? Allele frequency changes are somehow against the bible????? Excuse me? How do you come to that conclusion.

I thought that you knew about evolution. See my posts on the first page of "evolution is hostile to reason" thread in this forum.

[quote:82d7f]Do creationists ACTUALLY THINK that evolutionists believe:

* the "first cell" just popped into existance?
* that "it all came about by chance"?
* that "nothing turned itself into something"?
* that evolution can be used as an excuse for all sorts of depraved behaviour?

Use this forum to see what evolutionists believe. You may be surprised. Although, their religious philosophies called evolution may not have evolved at the same rate as yours did. ;-)[/quote:82d7f]

I have heard as many different opinions from evolutionists about what evolution is as there are evolutionists on this forum! It all boils down to thinking that man was not created the way the bible says he was but that he "evolved" from a primate. And so far, that theory has been to shown to be an impossibility. Evolutionists have not proven how the DNA of a primate can suddenly and spontaneouly produce DNA of a different primate called a "homonid". That has not happened since recorded history in any species! It's all a "what if".