Calling all Creationists!

[freckles and boo]

I can tell you all day long the sky is purple plaid with red polka dots and green stripes, and call you names if you don't believe me, but that doesn't make it true. Again, I truly believe that the vast majority of people believe evolution is true because it has been yelled from the rooftops for so long. Today, if you question evolution, you're looked upon as something that crawled out of the proverbial primordial sludge.

When you question the methodology of evolutionary theory, you are questioning the scientific method that has given us the vast majority of our medical advances. THAT is why you are look upon as something that crawled out of the primordial sludge. There are gaps in our knowledge of evolution, but that doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bath water. There are scientists working tirelessly on treatments for cancer, but since we don't have every answer yet should we reject all that work as a failure?

 

[Mikelly1221]

When you question the methodology of evolutionary theory, you are questioning the scientific method that has given us the vast majority of our medical advances. THAT is why you are look upon as something that crawled out of the primordial sludge. There are gaps in our knowledge of evolution, but that doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bath water. There are scientists working tirelessly on treatments for cancer, but since we don't have every answer yet should we reject all that work as a failure?

I'm not questioning the methodology-I'm very sure that scientists have reasons for all they do. Again, all I'm asking for is proof to show how they have come to the conclusions they have.

And I have gone back over the links Laura gave us and I'm going to go over one that I missed that might have some answers for me, but I'm sure I'll have more questions.

THAT is why you are look upon as something that crawled out of the primordial sludge.

By the way, you weren't meaning me personally, were you?

 

[Master Mason]

That's nice for you. Have you found that evidence that we've evolved from apes?

It's so funny that people think scientific theories are just waiting to be proven. It's sad indication of how people didn't pay attention in science class.

Nope because I haven't been looking for it. Basically it doesn't matter one way or the other to my life, those that wish to spend there time looking for such a link are free to do so.

And I paid attention in Science class just fine, never got less than an A in any of them. And one of those things I learned was that scientific theorys are our best guess about what is happening, it's what we really think could or does occure. That in and of it's self means we don't know for sure, it's just our best guess.

 

[freckles and boo]

By the way, you weren't meaning me personally, were you?

Only if you were referring to yourself originally.

 

[Master Mason]

When you question the methodology of evolutionary theory, you are questioning the scientific method that has given us the vast majority of our medical advances. THAT is why you are look upon as something that crawled out of the primordial sludge. There are gaps in our knowledge of evolution, but that doesn't mean you throw the baby out with the bath water. There are scientists working tirelessly on treatments for cancer, but since we don't have every answer yet should we reject all that work as a failure?

Nope, but at the same time, we shouldn't be telling folks that we have found the cure for cancer either.

 

[Laura]

Laura, I have read over the links you provided. Thank you for providing them. I read the facts that they listed. I didn't see any reasons for the facts, and I don't need really deep details (I probably couldn't understand them anyway! ). Just something along the lines of: It is a fact that....because in 19whatever we discovered.....(fill in the blanks). What I found were statements that I am not prepared to accept without some proof. Furthermore, I was told in those statements that I was an ignorant, bumbling fool if I didn't believe evolution just because some muckety-muck told me to. (Not in those exact words, of course, but I read between the lines.) Please point me to the studies, tests, archaelogical discoveries, etc.

I can tell you all day long the sky is purple plaid with red polka dots and green stripes, and call you names if you don't believe me, but that doesn't make it true. Again, I truly believe that the vast majority of people believe evolution is true because it has been yelled from the rooftops for so long. Today, if you question evolution, you're looked upon as something that crawled out of the proverbial primordial sludge.

What exactly is it you would like to know? "Studies, tests, archaeological discoveries, etc." is admittedly rather broad, and I'm not an evolutionary biologist or anything.

And I apologize if my use of the word ignorant is offensive, but if people are trying to use grievous misunderstandings of basic scientific principles to argue against a scientific fact, then that is a demonstration of ignorance. And in some cases, it's willful ignorance. Also, many times those who advocate for the young earth idea actually attempt to use science to try and discredit other parts of science, which weakens their arguments. It's not like scientists haven't heard the argument about the second law of thermodynamics, it's that it's one example of how science is misrepresented.

 

[Laura]

Nope because I haven't been looking for it. Basically it doesn't matter one way or the other to my life, those that wish to spend there time looking for such a link are free to do so.

And I paid attention in Science class just fine, never got less than an A in any of them. And one of those things I learned was that scientific theorys are our best guess about what is happening, it's what we really think could or does occure. That in and of it's self means we don't know for sure, it's just our best guess.

They're not just random guesses, which is what you're implying. Theories are based on factual evidence. And what you're overlooking is that the theory of evolution does not try to state "this is why evolution exists" because we know it exists, it has been observed. Evolution is a known occurence, we just are still continuing to find out how it works, which is where the theory comes in.

 

[Master Mason]

They're not just random guesses, which is what you're implying. Theories are based on factual evidence. And what you're overlooking is that the theory of evolution does not try to state "this is why evolution exists" because we know it exists, it has been observed. Evolution is a known occurence, we just are still continuing to find out how it works, which is where the theory comes in.

We have observed it??? How did we observe it exactly? Was someone tape delaying the many hundreds of years it takes for something to evolve? We have archaeological evidence, and the best guess interpretations of them. That is what we have.

As I have stated already, I believe that evolution has taken place. However it is not a fact, which is what you keep trying to tell us.

 

[KikiFan]

While I am a Christian I don't take the Bible literally. I believe completely in the theory of evolution, I just happen to believe it was inspired / instigated by a Divine Power.

Thank you Teresa for your response. It does explain your viewpoint. However, in your dog analogy, the various breeds are still dogs. In your mutation analogy, the animal is still the animal. The animal I always think of when I think of mutations is the fish that lives its whole life in a cave and so does not have any eyes. It may produce fish with no eyes as a mutation, but it's still a fish. I think we can all agree that animal life on Earth is incredibly complex and diverse-the odds of all this happening by itself just by chance are astronomical.

We're not talking about a something radically different or silly, like a computer evolving into a human. We're talking about a species that shares 96% of the same DNA. 96% For me, personally, that's pretty conclusive proof that at some point we fell of the same family tree.

LotsofQuestions, could you tell me where I said I was going to "shove religion down children's throats?" What I said was that evolution was given as an alternative explanation to creationism/Intelligent Design. Which religion did I mention? I offered a debate, in typical debate format. So, are there no debates in the scientific world? Finally, creationism/Intelligent Design and evolution attempt to answer the same question: "How did life begin?" They are both valid attempts to answer the question and they both deserve a seat at the table of ideas, not thrust in a corner to be ignored.

Speaking for myself. Creationism is a theory, that is based on religion. I don't want my child learning religious principles from anyone other then myself or someone I approve of. I also respect the fact that not every child sitting in the classroom shares my religious beliefs and they shouldn't be forced to learn it.

 

[Laura]

We have observed it??? How did we observe it exactly? Was someone tape delaying the many hundreds of years it takes for something to evolve? We have archaeological evidence, and the best guess interpretations of them. That is what we have.

As I have stated already, I believe that evolution has taken place. However it is not a fact, which is what you keep trying to tell us.

We have observed evolution. For example, with bacteria and fruit flies (life forms that produce generations rapidly) we have easily observed it. It is true that it is not observable in humans because we evolve too slowly. H. sapiens is not the only species that has evolved.

A good example: MRSA. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Staph evolved so that it is resistant to methicillin.

 

[Mikelly1221]

What exactly is it you would like to know? "Studies, tests, archaeological discoveries, etc." is admittedly rather broad, and I'm not an evolutionary biologist or anything.

And I apologize if my use of the word ignorant is offensive, but if people are trying to use grievous misunderstanding of basic scientific principles to argue against a scientific fact, then that is a demonstration of ignorance. And in some cases, it's willful ignorance. Also, many times those who advocate for the young earth idea actually attempt to use science to try and discredit other parts of science, which weakens their arguments.

The website you sent here: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/search/topicbrowse2.php?topic_id=46

is what I meant. Thank you. Regarding the use of the term "ignorant", I'll be the first to tell you that I don't know everything, there are areas that I am "ignorant" of. That's one thing. But, calling someone "ignorant" in a name-calling way is rude and offensive. I don't think you personally have been rude or offensive at all.

I think both sides of the evolution debate can come across as having "all the answers" and can be very condescending toward the other. Frankly, neither side has all the answers. I believe the Bible is the inspired word of God, and it contains everything we need to fully know God and have a right relationship with him. That doesn't mean He has told us everything He knows...only what we NEED to know. Only in Genesis do we wonder what "day" means. If it says a day, let's take it at face value.

On the other hand, evidence needs to be interpreted, and science has been known to interpret things very wrong...for example, how long did we believe the sun revolved around the earth? The problem with evolution is that I don't believe that anyone is willing to back off their findings even if they find out that they are wrong. If there are findings that refute evolution, I believe the general public will never hear of them. Yes, that sounds conspiracy-theory-ish, but the way people are treated when they question evolution makes me wonder..

 

[Alyssa88]

I do not believe in any creation myths, but I do find them entertaining.

While I admit that science does not have all the answers yet, I think it is much closer than religion is. I think the big bang theory explains a lot more than any creation myth and is more probable.

 

[Master Mason]

We have observed evolution. For example, with bacteria and fruit flies (life forms that produce generations rapidly) we have easily observed it. It is true that it is not observable in humans because we evolve too slowly. H. sapiens is not the only species that has evolved.

A good example: MRSA. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Staph evolved so that it is resistant to methicillin.

And that yet again proves my point. We are taking evidence, and using it to support a theory. Yes they indicate that we are correct in our thinking. However, it is not fact, because we can't observe it happening, we can only guess that we think we did. The guesses may have a high degree of certainty, but they are still guesses none the less. Why can't you just admit that?

 

[TheGoofster]

I find it hard to believe that you understand evolution so well when you quite clearly don't even understand what the definition of a scientific theory is. But you obviously have your beliefs, and I'm not asking you to change them. You've gone searching for things to support your foregone conclusion, and closing your mind to the facts before you, which is not at all scientific.

I'm not afraid of what the Bible says, I just don't see it as a reason to disregard all of the sciences. You might be surprised to find how many scientists are true believers, by the way. As I stated before, I went to Catholic school and was taught that Genesis isn't a literal story. Same story, same religion, but completely different interpretations.

I find it interesting that you tell me that I don't understand what the definition of a scientific theory is when you yourself admit that you haven't studied this much. Basically you are going by what someone has told you, but you've not put the effort of studying it for yourself. I would say that I have a much better understanding of what a scientific theory is based on the time I have invested in studying it.
I was taught evolution as a child. I was taught it as a fact, not something that could even be considered to be false. I believed in evolution for a long time. But as I got old enough to start questioning what I was being taught, I started finding that evolution did a really poor job of answering some of the most basic questions I had. So I started studying more about it, and the more I studied, the less satisfied that I was with the whole thing. It made no sense whatsoever, and everything was based on speculation and guesses. When I started studying more about creation, I found that many of the questions I had were answered very well. I'm not saying that creation has then answer to every question I had, but there was so much more evidence of a designer than there was for a cosmic accident that I was overwhelmed. Yes, creation requires faith, but evolution requires even more faith.

You seem quick to attack anyone who dares suggest that evolution is only a theory, yet almost all honest scientists will quickly tell you the same thing - Evolution is only a theory, and nothing more. Of course there are some web sites that say they "prove" evolution, but if you would take the time to actually see what they are using as proof (and not just read the headlines), you would have to admit that it is only their interpretation of a real fact.

You claim that I have closed my mind to real facts to accept a belief in creation. I'm sorry but I think that shoe fits much better on your foot. I started in the evolution camp. I was taught the same thing you were. I have spent many, many hours looking at both sides of the issue. I have come to my conclusion based on what I believe is the best explanation of the facts we have. I believe that you are very closed to anything that even vaguely threatens your belief in evolution. That's why you seem so offended that people would actually want an open discussion of it in school. Why are you so scared to talk about creation? If evolution were so firmly established as a fact, you should be eager to embrace debate, instead of shrinking away from it.

 

[Laura]

And that yet again proves my point. We are taking evidence, and using it to support a theory. Yes they indicate that we are correct in our thinking. However, it is not fact, because we can't observe it happening, we can only guess that we think we did. The guesses may have a high degree of certainty, but they are still guesses none the less. Why can't you just admit that?

Proves your point? We have observed evolution, you apparently thought we haven't. Archaeological evidence is also evidence. What is the alternative explanation for the fossil record?

For the umpteenth time, in the world of science evolution is a fact, and the theory of evolution explains how evolution works. There are some things that can be known.

 

[Master Mason]

Proves your point? We have observed evolution, you apparently thought we haven't. Archaeological evidence is also evidence. What is the alternative explanation for the fossil record?

For the umpteenth time, in the world of science evolution is a fact, and the theory of evolution explains how evolution works. There are some things that can be known.

And for the Upteenth time + 1, it is not a fact it is a best guess.

 

[TheGoofster]

I do not believe in any creation myths, but I do find them entertaining.

While I admit that science does not have all the answers yet, I think it is much closer than religion is. I think the big bang theory explains a lot more than any creation myth and is more probable.

That's interesting seeing that nobody can even begin to explain the big bang.
Where did the space dust come from that formed the big bang? What caused the dust to come together? Where did the energy come from that bound the dust together? Where did the heat come form that the dust ball generated? where did the energy come from that caused this dust ball to spin? Where did the energy come from that caused this dust ball to explode?

I would think that answering a few basic questions like this would be a priority of evolution, if not a requirement. So far the only answers I've heard are:
we don't know but were sure it happened
we don't know but were sure it happened
we don't know but were sure it happened
we don't know but were sure it happened
we don't know but were sure it happened
we don't know but were sure it happened

Sounds like a great theory to me. Very scientific.

 

[themarquis]

We have observed it??? How did we observe it exactly?

Yes! We have observed it! Scientists observe evolution in action all the time when they study bacteria, which breed much much faster than us or any animals. If we want to see it in animals and humans, we have to look at much larger time periods, but in fact we do see it and it has been studied -- it just happens much more slowly!

Was someone tape delaying the many hundreds of years it takes for something to evolve?

Yes! This "tape delay" is called the fossil record And it doesn't span "hundreds" of years. Try millions and hundreds of millions of year.

 

[Mikelly1221]

We have observed evolution. For example, with bacteria and fruit flies (life forms that produce generations rapidly) we have easily observed it. It is true that it is not observable in humans because we evolve too slowly. H. sapiens is not the only species that has evolved.

A good example: MRSA. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus. Staph evolved so that it is resistant to methicillin.

But they are still fruit flies! They didn't turn into leopards!

They are still bacteria-they didn't turn into bats!

 

[TheGoofster]

Proves your point? We have observed evolution, you apparently thought we haven't. Archaeological evidence is also evidence. What is the alternative explanation for the fossil record?

For the umpteenth time, in the world of science evolution is a fact, and the theory of evolution explains how evolution works. There are some things that can be known.

Do you even know how a fossil forms? Not too long ago there were millions of buffalo in the great plains. Now they are pretty much all gone. So how many fossils of buffalos do we have? I'm not familiar with any, but perhaps there might be one or two. Why not.
Very simply because a fossil is only formed when a creature is wrapped suddenly in a substance that will prevent the decaying process (usually mud). Do you realize that there are hundreds of millions of fossils in the earth. Now two things can explain that.
1) there were a lot of clumsy critters that kept falling into mud to be fossilized.
or
2) a catastrophe happened that caused this huge number of fossils.

the Bible states that a few thousand years ago, God sent a flood to destroy the world and most of the creatures on it. Guess what, the Genesis flood easily accounts for all of the fossils.

Did you know that near the top of Mount Everest they have found thousands of seashells, and fossilized sea creatures? How can you explain that? The Biblical account of the flood easily explains it. Evolution has no explanation for it.

I'm sure that you would like to use fossils of cavemen. Unfortunately every single "man" - Neanderthal, cro-magnon, Lucy... has either been proven to be false (and in some cases deliberate fraud), or is so sketchy as to be a joke (finding one part of the creature in one location, and another 500 yards away). I don't think you would read it, but there's a book called "Bones of contention" that gives a very clear explanation for each and every one of these "missing links" (of course it's only creationist propaganda though).

Few things help prove the creationist theory as much as do fossils.