Creationist Friendly Q&A

"If god created man from dirt, why are there still dirt around?"

I disagree.I think a technical answer would be a lot more intimidating than the one I gave.For example, you answered

quote:

---

Firstly, humans are actually primates, just as monkeys and apes are. To say that monkeys should not be around is saying that humans should not be around either.

​

Secondly, the relationship between species is much like that found in your own family. Apes, monkeys, and humans (ie all primates) share a common ancestor just as you and your cousins share a common ancestor, your grandparents. Some primates species will be more distantly related than others, just as you have cousins that are more distantly related than others.

​

Thirdly, evolution does not follow a ladder like progression. Instead, the pattern of evolution looks like a bush. Every individual of one species does not become another species over time. Instead, a sub-group of a species branches off from the larger population to become a new species. It would be expected that at some point the parent species and the daughter species would be in existence at the same time. This usually does not occur for long periods of time, but it does occur for longer time periods on occasion.

---

While your answer is simple and right to the point, I feel like it is simple and right to the point to someone that already has dealt with evolution before.If we are dealing with someone that genuinely don't know why monkeys are still here IFF we decended from them, the best way to answer such question is to point out the sillyness of such logic. A technical will do more damage than good. If someone really takes this question seriously (which by the way I've seen this question/argument a kazillion times before), you really think he is going to understand anything you wrote up there?I still think the best way to answer the "why are there monkeys..." question is the answer I gave. It's non-intimidating and it uses the exact same line of logic that the person used. I think it would be more creo-friendly if you try to avoid the technical parts as much as possible. They don't have any science background. To someone like you, who is well versed in the theory itself, it must seem insulting if you were to get what I said. However, you are not the creo and trying to point out the silliness behind the logic of the question is noninsulting at all.I'm rambling, aren't I?

I agree completely. This is why we need to answer from individual to individual. Questions reveal the questioners' preconceived notions.For example, I would give a much more detail answer to someone who asks something like "if evolution is true then why do we have so little fossil record of human evolution?" than someone who asks something like "if we descended from monkeys then how come current monkeys aren't evolving?"I don't think it is fair to treat everyone the same way. Some will undoubtedly already know some of the basics required. Others will know zippo about science.

And so they should. Think of it as a nudge on the back for them to realize that there is a much bigger world out there.Again, I would not give such an answer to a question that seem more thought out than that. Thank goodness I'm not an educator.

---

People, please look at the Style Guide for EvC thread by Sylas. Pay particular attention to step 3.SURGEON GENERAL'S WARNING: Refusal to use the search engine may cause brain cancer.