Calling all Creationists!

[Mikelly1221]

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.

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.

But that's not how evolution is presented, is it? It's presented that the world is a closed system with everything it needed to evolve on its own, without any outside interference. When that is taught, it negates the presense of a Higher Power and makes a religious assumption-that there is no Higher Being that could have possibly created all that we know. And I don't want my child learning religious principles from anyone other than myself or someone I approve of.

 

[Laura]

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..

We are all ignorant of many things, and scientists do not have all the answers to everything. They do not pretend that they do. However, some creationists attempt to explain everything with one answer: the Bible. What we've learned since Darwin has altered the theory of evolution. Darwin thought that evolution was strictly a slow process, we know now that's not the case. When DNA was discovered and the field of genetics was born, evolutionary theory was strengthened and expanded quite a lot.

The scientific method is constructed so that scientists cannot dismiss new findings that might overturn previous ones. Are scientists human? Of course.

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.

I don't know as much as a scientist does (which is why I'm providing links to actual scientists' writings), but that doesn't mean I don't understand what a scientific theory is. Science is not speculation and guesses that come out of nowhere. They must use evidence to support their findings. You can't argue against the scientific method if you don't understand how it works.

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.

Evolution is scientific fact, as well as a theory. There is no "proving" a theory like you can with gravity and an equation.

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.

I don't think you changing your mind by reading findings of non-scientists who misconstrue science makes me lean to your way of thinking. I know perfectly well what many young earth creationists propose, and their findings are generally flawed and easily explained with actual science.

I find it interesting that many people think that evolution threatens their beliefs in God. It doesn't negate God in any way, and many Christians find evolution and Genesis quite compatible.

 

[Master Mason]

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!



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.

And again, if you observe something in a bacteria, and extrapilate it to a human, your making a guess, since humans are not bacteria. If you examine fossils your making a guess as you don't know for sure.

I am not arguing that evolution didn't or doesn't occure, just that it is not a FACT. It is a belief supported by evidence, but a belief none the less.

 

[Mikelly1221]

Only if you were referring to yourself originally.

Nope, not me!

 

[themarquis]

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.

It is very scientific, actually! Scientists are actively engaged in investigating exactly these questions about the big bang -- and have partial answers for all of them, which I invite you to investigate with the help of a local librarian, the internet, or some actual scientists -- and our knowledge grows every day. That's what science is. It's constantly expanding our understanding of the universe around us.

There has never been a moment (and probably never will) where we've figured everything out. It just doesn't work that way! (thankfully so, because the world would be pretty boring if we knew everything). But we strive to get closer to it at every moment. This is what science is.

Personally, I love it! But, if you're not interested in investigating the world around us, you're not interested in thinking critically about ideas, not interested in challenging fixed perceptions and ideologies, then I could see why you (not you personally, a global "you") might be more interested in opening a book that purports to tell you everything you need to know about the universe and simply reading and accepting it, without questioning.

 

[Mikelly1221]

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.

Hey, I'm sure when God created everything it made a big noise, so I'll go with you on that Big Bang Theory! I'm sure it wasn't silent!

 

[Mikelly1221]

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.

The fossil record has changed the way scientists feel about evolution. The fossil record does not support the theory that evolution was a seemless process, but instead shows that there are plenty of gaps and a severe lack of transitional forms. Do we hear about the gaps, as a general rule, in society? In Science 101?

 

[themarquis]

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

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

add a couple hundred million years and stir

Really all you are missing here is time. We see small evolutionary changes over short periods, more significant ones over long periods. We look at the records we have of the past, i.e., the fossil record, and it shows this to us, and the larger the time periods we see, the more change we see. After a few thousand years, we might see a certain kind of whale undergo some small changes (while still being a whale!); look deeper and after a few hundred thousand years, we see something that we might classify as one type or species of whale undergo changes and become a different type of whale. After a few million years (honestly, I'm just guessing on the time period, since I'm not a whale expert ) we might see that the ancestor of a whale is actually a wolf-like carnivore (true!).

Time. That's all you're missing.

Bacteria evolve to become different kinds of bacteria. Wolves evolve into whales. It is all part of the same process. The evolution we see on a tiny scale with bacteria in petri dishes is the same wonderful process that created us.

 

[Laura]

But that's not how evolution is presented, is it? It's presented that the world is a closed system with everything it needed to evolve on its own, without any outside interference. When that is taught, it negates the presense of a Higher Power and makes a religious assumption-that there is no Higher Being that could have possibly created all that we know. And I don't want my child learning religious principles from anyone other than myself or someone I approve of.

The planet isn't a closed system; the sun's rays and objects from outer space interact with us. And there's nothing that science can say about God, really, it can't say that God didn't create the universe. God is supernatural, above nature.

 

[Mikelly1221]

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!



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.

So....what animal exactly did the bacteria turn into? Snake? Rabbit? Eagle? Since watching the bacteria is so much like the real thing, please tell us!

And the fossil record doesn't support Darwin's theory of smooth evolution. There are gaps.

 

[TheGoofster]

It is very scientific, actually! Scientists are actively engaged in investigating exactly these questions about the big bang -- and have partial answers for all of them, which I invite you to investigate with the help of a local librarian, the internet, or some actual scientists -- and our knowledge grows every day. That's what science is. It's constantly expanding our understanding of the universe around us.

There has never been a moment (and probably never will) where we've figured everything out. It just doesn't work that way! (thankfully so, because the world would be pretty boring if we knew everything). But we strive to get closer to it at every moment. This is what science is.

Personally, I love it! But, if you're not interested in investigating the world around us, you're not interested in thinking critically about ideas, not interested in challenging fixed perceptions and ideologies, then I could see why you (not you personally, a global "you") might be more interested in opening a book that purports to tell you everything you need to know about the universe and simply reading and accepting it, without questioning.

Actually I do spend a lot of time researching, reading, searching out what the latest evolutionary theories are (it's something that I'm interested in, so I do spend time looking it up), and let me tell you. There is one thing that doesn't change. They change names, they change the amount of time involved, they change positions, but the one thing that hasn't changed is the simple fact "they don't know"
Evolutionists study the facts that we do know, and try to explain them with theories. Evolution is not true science. It cannot be observed, imitated or tested. Like I said, I don't really care if people want to believe in evolution or whatever other theory they have. It is only a theory. To claim anything else is ignoring the fact that nobody who proposes evolution really knows what happened. But to force feed this mis-information to kids, and tell them that it is the only real explanation is ridiculous.

 

[Laura]

The fossil record has changed the way scientists feel about evolution. The fossil record does not support the theory that evolution was a seemless process, but instead shows that there are plenty of gaps and a severe lack of transitional forms. Do we hear about the gaps, as a general rule, in society? In Science 101?

Oh, evolution isn't a seamless, smooth process and there are gaping holes in the fossil record. Fossils of any living thing are typically hard to find.

 

[TheGoofster]

add a couple hundred million years and stir

Really all you are missing here is time. We see small evolutionary changes over short periods, more significant ones over long periods. We look at the records we have of the past, i.e., the fossil record, and it shows this to us, and the larger the time periods we see, the more change we see. After a few thousand years, we might see a certain kind of whale undergo some small changes (while still being a whale!); look deeper and after a few hundred thousand years, we see something that we might classify as one type or species of whale undergo changes and become a different type of whale. After a few million years (honestly, I'm just guessing on the time period, since I'm not a whale expert ) we might see that the ancestor of a whale is actually a wolf-like carnivore (true!).

Time. That's all you're missing.

Bacteria evolve to become different kinds of bacteria. Wolves evolve into whales. It is all part of the same process. The evolution we see on a tiny scale with bacteria in petri dishes is the same wonderful process that created us.

It is funny that you say that. Time is the evolutionists cure-all. You can't explain something - add time to it. Something goes against the laws we do know - add time to it. Something can't be observed in any form in nature - add time to it.
Time is the reason why evolutionists are so afraid of the young earth theory. If you take away that magic formula (unknown fact + time = new fact) evolution is left without a leg to stand on. I guess that's why every year or so evolution adds a couple of billion years or so to the mix.

 

[Teresa Pitman]

Mikelly, I disagree with you about the attitudes of scientists. I work at a university with quite a few scientists and they are not at all unwilling to admit when they are wrong. Their working lives are devoted to discovering how the world works, and when their hypotheses turn out to be wrong, they are not upset, they see it as an opportunity to learn something new and make new discoveries. Scientists and most of the non-religious people I know don't "believe" in evolution the way you believe in God. It's not a matter of faith. It's as I think I said in my first post - evolution as I understand it makes the most sense in explaining how we got the world we have today. I'll continue to accept/agree with/"believe" that until or unless a better explanation is developed.

I did use dogs as an example of how a species can change, but you've asked to explain the evolution of a number of other species. I'm not able to take the time to explain all of those, but I'm sure that there are scientists who have studied each of these, and could explain to you the entire evolutionary process. There are many volumes of information on just these topics in the university library.

If you think about it for a second, I think you'll realize that mutations are not rare at all. Consider the dogs again. Each of the differences between (say) an old English sheepdog and a chihuahua is the result of a mutation. So one has very long hair, the other has very short hair. One has bulging eyes, one has deep-set eyes. One has a distinctive colour pattern to the fur, the other has different skin colours. And so on, including internal mutations that we can't see that are required to support bodies of such different sizes. Multiply that by the number of different species and all the mutations involved in creating each of those, and you'll see how many are happening all the time! The people who bred these different species didn't create the mutations, they simply took advantage of them and sped up the process of change by deliberately breeding dogs that had the qualities they wanted. But the mutations - the things that made the dogs different from the wolves they started from - all happened naturally.

This should also answer your question about most mutations being harmful. Some are. Some are harmful in one environment and not in another. Sickle cell anemia is one example. If you get one chromosome for sickle cell anemia, you will be mildly ill but you will also be protected from malaria. So this is actually a positive mutation if you are living in an area where malaria is dangerous. It's not so positive if you live where malaria isn't a problem, and if you have a child with someone else who also carries the sickle cell gene, and that child inherits both genes and develops serious sickle cell anemia.

But as you can see from the various mutations in the dog breeds, many of them are not harmful at all. Many will be neutral (such as the ones that determine the colour of the dog's fur). And some, in a particular environment, will be helpful - will let the animal live longer and have more offspring (in the case of dog breeders, the ones that make the animal more suitable for the breeder's goals).

Teresa

 

[TheGoofster]

Oh, evolution isn't a seamless, smooth process and there are gaping holes in the fossil record. Fossils of any living thing are typically hard to find.

Actually there are millions upon millions of fossils in the earth. There are fossils of pretty much every known creature. In fact the only thing that there aren't fossils of are the "missing links" that evolution needs so badly.

 

[Mikelly1221]

The scientific method is constructed so that scientists cannot dismiss new findings that might overturn previous ones. Are scientists human? Of course.

Why in the world not?!?!? Isn't that misleading??


BTW: We're cross-posting! See my posts on the fossil record!

 

[themarquis]

So....what animal exactly did the bacteria turn into? Snake? Rabbit? Eagle? Since watching the bacteria is so much like the real thing, please tell us!

And the fossil record doesn't support Darwin's theory of smooth evolution. There are gaps.

A bacteria doesn't turn into a snake or rabbit overnight! Actual Here is a great image for you that might explain a bit about what the lineage is between different looking living things . Remember -- add time and stir!

Although I'm happy to TRY to answer some of your queries about evolution, it does seem like you are missing a fundamental grasp of what evolution actually is or how it works . Regardless of whether you end up believing it or not, it makes sense to do some research so you have a general idea of what scientist are talking about when they say evolution, right! That's why I'd suggest some of the wonderful resources available online. For example, wikipedia can be a good place to start for very general research. There is also a great site through the university of california berkely, written by real scientists, at http://evolution.berkeley.edu/.

Good luck and happy reading! Let me know if you want to talk more about it when we're all on the same page

 

[Mikelly1221]

Bacteria evolve to become different kinds of bacteria. Wolves evolve into whales. It is all part of the same process. The evolution we see on a tiny scale with bacteria in petri dishes is the same wonderful process that created us.

Actually according to the website I was directed to, whales are more closely related to hummingbirds, but even that was contradicted on the final chart.

 

[TheGoofster]

A bacteria doesn't turn into a snake or rabbit overnight! Actual Here is a great image for you that might explain a bit about what the lineage is between different looking living things . Remember -- add time and stir!

Although I'm happy to TRY to answer some of your queries about evolution, it does seem like you are missing a fundamental grasp of what evolution actually is or how it works . Regardless of whether you end up believing it or not, it makes sense to do some research so you have a general idea of what scientist are talking about when they say evolution, right! That's why I'd suggest some of the wonderful resources available online. For example, wikipedia can be a good place to start for very general research. There is also a great site through the university of california berkely, written by real scientists, at http://evolution.berkeley.edu/.

Good luck and happy reading! Let me know if you want to talk more about it when we're all on the same page

Uhm, you forgot something on your tree - inorganic mud to single cell bacteria. Don't forget that evolution claims that organic life came from inorganic material.
Also you might want to point out where all the fossils of the links between these evolutionary steps are.
This is a very pretty tree that many textbooks have, unfortunately the only place you will find such a tree is just there - in the text books.

 

[Mikelly1221]

The planet isn't a closed system; the sun's rays and objects from outer space interact with us. And there's nothing that science can say about God, really, it can't say that God didn't create the universe. God is supernatural, above nature.

Actually, by not allowing informed, intelligent debate, that's exactly what they are doing. Every idea is allowed except the one that says God created it all. Look at the outcry when a debate between the two sides is mentioned!