Creationists: Why is Evolution Bad Science?

The others have done a great job of addressing your points. But I'd like to add a couple points.Evolution is not a road with one population dying out and the next population taking over. Instead, it is far more like branches of a tree. When a new species evolves, it quite often lives alongside other related species and even along side the parent species. It's not a relay race with the older handing the baton to the newer.Let me take one example that is near and dear to all of us, modern humans. If we look around we find that Homo Sapiens and Neanderthal, two closely related species descended from a common ancestor, lived concurrently for most of history. In fact, the two overlapped for at least 40,000 years. But they are only part of the story. There are other close relatives, chimps and bonobos, that are also living right along side us today. All of us can trace our heritage back to the same common ancestor but we are all separate species, and three of the four are still living today.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You said... In fact, at least once, homo sapiens almost did die out. It was a very, very close thing. Sometime, about 70-75,000 years ago, there was a nearly world-wide catastrophy. Right now, the best evidence points to a major volcanic eruption, most likely Mount Toba, in Indonesia. It was one of the largest eruptions in history and led to a 1000 years of Ice Age and worse conditions. During that time, things changed so quickly that almost all mankind died out.It is very possible for things to change more rapidly than a population can evolve. This happens all the time. When that happens, that population does die off. They become extinct. And that is as true for humans as for every other species out there.For some more information on the bottleneck and Mout Toba check out... Volcanic Winter from the Bradshaw Foundation and Mout Toba Volcano.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Absolutely correct. The evidence seems to be quite clear that there was a bottleneck and that the African populations were not as greatly reduced. In addition, this is also supported by the DNA studies from other primates in Africa.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

I'm agreeing with you. Yes, the studies of both human and primate DNA from African samples do not show the recent bottle neck.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Just once I would love to see you logically defend even one of your assertions. Or answer any one of the questions that have been put to you by a half dozen or so different people.Several times you have fallen back onto the old "undisputed" argument. Whether or not something is undisputed or disputed has nothing to do with whether or not it's true. People can dispute the relevance of the fossil record, but that does not make it go away or lessen its worth. Well, yes it does. And this is a very important point and one I'm glad you brought up. The fact that we share so much DNA with bananas proves that both we and bananas shared a common ancestor. And that is one of the strong arguments for evolution. If we suddenly saw something new created, Creationists would win hands down. But until they can show Creation happening, they have no argument. Evolutionists can show evolution happening. Creationists have never been able to show Creation happening. Samo-samo. What is kind? I have never seen a Creationist define kind. They can't, and if they do, they will lose the argument that very day.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

The creator forget how?Almeyda, show Creation happening. Should be simple.But it should be a new kind. Otherwise I'm afraid folk might think it was only Micro-evolution.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

TOE does not mention or deal with origins or how life first originated. Evolution is the body of observations include both older fossil evidence (as well as casts and impressions). The TOE is the explanation of how things happened.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Evolution is actually two different things. One is a collection of observations. We can look at the animals around us and see that they are quite different. Even pretty similar ones seem to vary widely. This was seen and noted long, long ago. The big question was, "what were the mechanisims that caused such variety?"Two giants, Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace both came up with a mechanism that explained how all that variety came about. They did so independantly, and about the same time. The mechanism they described, almost 150 years ago now, was Natural Selection.Since then, the theory that came to be known as the Theory of Evolution has stood up remarkably well. It has and still is challenged and as we learn more, it will change to explain the observations, the new information, that is found.But it does not deal with how life began. It simply describes and explains what we see. And it does so in a way far superior to Creation.While many people claim that creation cannot happen by natural processes, it is only a matter of time until that is simply proven wrong. It will happen. Already, it has been possible to build most of the basic amino acids. The rest will follow in time.But even that will have no effect on the TOE. It simply does not deal with Origin.Creation can only be accepted by denying all of the physical evidence around us.I have asked you several times about where the stars are located. That is important. If they really are where they seem to be, then there has been billions and billions of years for evolution to take place.But the issue of stars is important for yet another reason. If the stars are really where they appear to be, then we can say that the rules we see around us, things like the rate of decay for various elements, things like the speed or light, things like the force of gravity, things like the way the four forces interact, have remaind constant over those billions and billions of years.Given those two things, the stars are really where they seem to be, and the rules have remained constant, all of the other observations fall in line.The Earth is old.Many species have died out over the years.There was an order and progression.Homo Sapiens is a late comer and just recently showed up.That change happened.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Sorry, but again, you have things catawhompus.Evolution is Science. It does not deal with the origin or purpose of life.Creationism is religion. It REQUIRES the existence and intervention of GOD.Big difference.If you say that GOD is the origin of life, it changes nothing related to the TOE. Remove GOD and insert chance and it changes nothing related to the TOE.But if you remove GOD from Creationism, just what is left?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You did read this thread and this one?There is a lot of evidence out there.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Again, from the evidence, we know that there was a time when there were no land animals. There were plants and animals in the seas. Then, again based on the evidence, we find plants on land but no evidence of animals. At thta time, what the record shows, is plants on land and both plants and animals in the seas.The evidence shows:marine plants ------> land plants
marine animals
marine animals -----> land animalsThe reason that most folk assume that was the trend and notmarine plants -----> land plants -----> land animalsis that the early examples of land animals that have been found seem very similar to the marine animals of the period and not at all like the land plants of the period.The initial evolution between plant and animal was at a very simple stage. We have not found anything like an example of a complex plant that evolved into a complex animal. In fact what is predicted is something that is not quite either, something plant like in many features but animal like in others.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Actually, most folk are pretty careful to separate what they claim are facts from what is theory.There are some things that are FACT.

• that the earth is billions of years old.
• that the universe is tens of billions of years old.
• that evolution happened.
• that the record shows that early life was very primative.
• that the makeup of life on the earth has changed over time.

Then there are the explanations. The explanations are theories. They are our best effort so far in explaning the FACTS that are seen. There is the Theory of Evolution which so far is the best explanation for the FACT of evolution. But it is always refered to as a theory.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

You once again show why Biblical Creationists are simply marginal and hardly worth bothering with. First, almost everything you say in that is not only wrong, it's just repetition of the classic nonsense regurgitated by almost all Biblical Creationists. The Theory of Evolution was the result of all the evidence, it came after the evidence, not before; and it changes as new evidence is discovered.That is why Science works and Biblical Creationism will ALWAYS be wrong. It was wrong when it was first made up, and it will be wrong 1000 years in the future.jar listed some facts:

quote:

---

There are some things that are FACT.

​

that the earth is billions of years old.

​

that the universe is tens of billions of years old.

​

that evolution happened.

​

that the record shows that early life was very primative.

​

that the makeup of life on the earth has changed over time.

---

to which romajc replied: The fact that you can't see how they can be shown as fact is simply an example of your ignorance. That can be cured. All you need is the evidence and the ability to think critically and you will understand how those things can be shown to be FACT. Fortunately, you've come to the right place to get the information to cure your ignorance.So you have a few options:

• you can make use of the information and people here and learn.
• you can cut and run.
• you can shut your ears, sing LaaLaa and wilfully ignore the evidence available.

It's up to you.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion