Creationists: Why is Evolution Bad Science?

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

Given that evolution is a biotic theory, what you have here is essentially a contradiction in terms.

I Wrote - The whole point of evolutionary theory is to prove origins & life by pure science and natural proccesesMr Jack wrote

quote:

---

The "point" of evolutionary theory is exactly the same as the point of any other scientific theory: to provide the best explanation of the evidence.

---

I could have sworn Darwin brought up his theory to disprove the need of a creator,designer,higher being when it came to the topic of life and origins.This message has been edited by almeyda, 06-11-2004 01:58 AM

Really ? On what basis would you claim this ?Please bear in mind this quote from the 6th Edition of _The Origin of Species_ (end of Chapter 15)

quote:

---

There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several
powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved.

---

Almeyda, The formation of larger & more complex molecules from less complex ones that may ultimately be co-opted by metabolism & self replicators. In which case the word "evolution" isn't biological evolution by definition, it becomes a general term like cosmological evolution, personal evolution, etc.As crashfrog points out, this is a contradiction in terms. The ToE deals with biological evolution, not prebiological evolution.I think confusion arises because life can defined in different ways. If we define life as also having metabolism, then there is a potential area where something analogous to NS occurs to the self replicator before metabolism appears. But by definition it's still not biological evolution. Assuming self replication precedes metabolism, of course.Now, perhaps, just once, you would be so good as to answer some of my questions from my last post, & maybe you'll learn something from the logical contradiction you place yourself in. ".....Or are you saying we can't study atomic theory without firstly rejecting god outright, & assuming the Big Bang? You can't have it both ways. In both cases it is possible to study evolution & sub-atomic particles without knowledge of where they came from. So again, abiogenesis is not a logically irremovable part of evolutionary theory."Thank you.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

I always assumed evolution was the theory in explaining life and origins by pure natural processes. Am i mistaken?.

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

But how is the ToE supposed to stand tall as a theory if the origin of life according to natural processes cannot be explained and are deemed by many as impossible?.

The ToE is the theory of evolution. More specifically biological evolution.Can rocks evolve? Can sea water evolve? No. Is anything not alive "biological"? No!The ToE we are talking about is NOT the "other" ToE. That is, it is not the theory of everthing that the physicists are talking about. It is the theory of how biological entities can change over time.It doesn't need to explain anything else, it isn't trying to and it wasn't formulated in the first place to do so.It does an excellent job of what it does do. For that reason it can "stand tall".This message has been edited by NosyNed, 06-16-2004 02:02 AM

The origin of life is outside the scope of evolutionary theory. So it makes absolutely no difference to evolutionary theory whether or not it can be explained. It is a complete irrelevance.On the other hand nobody says that General Relativity or Quantum Mechanics are no good even though under certain very extreme conditions they disagree and one or both has to be wrong. (I don't want to give an exaggerated sense of the problem - it is important to Cosmology but almost everything else can continue to use current theory, just as for many uses we still rely Newtonian theory rather than GR. Nevertheless at least one of the theories fails to apply to a situation it is meant to cover - even if that situation is very, very, rare).

Almeyda, You are, it explains the diversity of life, not origins. That's what everyone has been trying to explain to you.Mark

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world; those that understand binary, & those that don't

almeyda, You don't need to know somethings origin in order to know that it exists. It would be nice, & is a perfectly valid follow on question, but not necessary. You accept all other science without needing to know why or how, don't you? Why/how of gravity is not required to be answered in order to accept gravitational theory. Why/how did fundamental particles come to be is not necessary to be answered in order to accept the existence of fundamental particles.MarkThis message has been edited by mark24, 06-16-2004 04:57 AM

It's worth noting that the origin of life is outside the scope of evolution not because biologists are sneakily trying to hide their dirty laundry from creationists, but because origins of life research studies different data, using different techniques, and is carried out by different people. Evolution is the province of biology, while the origin of life is part of chemistry (with maybe a little geophysics thrown in).

Almeyda, what if we all said:
"Right on, God started all life on earth" ?How would that change one single thing about the ToE? Show your logic.

I believe the only reason creationists eschew evolution is because evolution omits God in its application. There is a fearfulness that they will offend God if they dignify evolution with an open mind.
That is very sad and very stupid. When the universe happened, science happened, evolution happened. All these things should be embraced by the Christian, for all these things are a gift from a God who has given the earth and its mysteries into our dominion. And enough 'stuff' to keep us searching for a long long time.