The creationism versus evolution debate

how come people still believe in evolution, when ther is so much proof in the world that God created us.
also what are the different veiwpoints and things that you guys believe about jesus and Creation and stuff like that- im curious and this is stuff that I've never thought about deeply before- I know there are different *Christian* veiwpoints and I was just wondering what those are, what are the options to believe and take alook at them laid out in black and white for myself.

Feel free to turn this into a debate- id like it.

Right. Not that I get much into religious talks, as the fundamentalists take over and won't let anyone have a viewpoint but the same as their own, however, I would like to add my viewpoint.

I believe in God, or at least some sort of higher power. I believe he created us, he created the world. I also believe in evolution. My viewpoint is that God works in mysterious ways, but to create all that we are, to create the functioning world around us, he had to create foundations and frameworks upon which to build that world. Its like building a house - you don't simply build the roof before everything else and expect it to stay in place while the walls get built next. So one of the mysterious ways in which he created the world, a framework or foundation in which he created Adam and Eve was through evolution. Remember that God has always existed, and always will - time means nothing to him, so to wait around millions of years for evolution to produce the right result would be nothing to him. Also, I take the 'God created the world in 7 days' thing as a loose interpretation of what happened, rather than a literal - to me I interpret it as 7 stages. Believing the bible literally can be dangerous, in my opinion - its been translated many times from one language to the next, and certain words have changed the meaning they were meant to have.

There is clear evidence Evolution is real (it is NOT disproven). But for it to be real doesn't mean God doesn't exist, and that creation didn't happen - evolution to me is simply a tool God created to help create the world, and to help keep it in order. To me, it makes sense that God is that smart, that clever to forsee the need to create such things as evolution to create a perfect world.

Thats my opinion, anyway. Now, let the fundamentalists take over!

Stef,
Some people only believe in what they see..It is a belief. However, if a person believes in evolution they believe that we were created from micro-organisms that started from water, slowly moved on to land, slowly turned into kinda like a monkey,etc... slowly turned into a human. But I want you to think about this...

Why don't we 'see' this evolution thing going on around us today?
Why don't we 'see' living things in the evolving process right now?
Why don't we 'see' half man half monkey running around in the world?
Why don't we 'see' that evolving process when life first comes out of the water with a tale and starts to look like the begining stages of a monkey?
The evolutionists belief is that all of this evolving takes place over years not overnight.

If this is true we should be able to 'see' this evolution process happening around us right now. Even an evolutionist believes their belief in how humans were created is more powerful than mankind, so this means the evolution thing (if true) is out of mankinds control. So it should still be going on around us today. Just because we are more intelligent as human beings does not take away the evolving life process that an evolutionist believes in.
An evolutionist wants me to believe that at some point mankind stopped the evolving process?? They want me to believe that because we have become a more civilized society that this stops the evolving process and this stops the micro organisms from coming out of the water onto land and starts to walk and slowly turns into a monkey etc...?? I ask an evolutionist these questions and they can't give me the answers. They also can't tell me what body of water to visit so that I may wittness the evolution thing in it's early stages.
Familycoach

Some Christians believe in evolution, too. They see a lot of symbolism in Genesis - and in the rest of the Old Testament, for that matter.

Not that I'm trying to change anyone's belief, but if you believe that Jesus was born off a virgin and raised from the dead after three days, you better explain to yourself why God couldn't have made the world in seven literal days.

'Influenza' is a good example of evolution today. It evolves & mutates so frequently, we can't develop cures fast enough. We can 'see' this evolution happening faster because the lifespan of microscopic organisms, bacteria, viruses, etc. (minutes, hours, days) is significantly shorter than our own (years, decades).

You can't find the ORIGINAL strain of influenza anywhere now, because it couldn't survive, its would-be hosts are now too resistent. Thus, it evolved...

There are several things to consider, and this internet simply isn't big enough to condiser all of them (yes, there are that many). Here are a few things:

Science's job is to explain the world around us, as best it can. It conducts experiments according to the scientific method in order to prove things. The fundamental nature of the scientific method is that it has to be repetable. Therefore, many of the theory's that scientists have are the best explations for phenomena that they observe, but are unable to test via the scientific method. Plate techtonics is a theory; the structure of atoms is a theory; the structure of stars is a theory; evolution as the primary means of man's existence is a theory. The theory of evolution is not perfect; it has many holes, but scientists see it as the best explanation for the given set of circumstances.

Next, Faith is a gift of the Holy Spirit. 'To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it has not been given.' (Mt 13:11) As Christians, we cannot judge people because they don't believe, but we must love them in patience and kindness, and by our witness, put them in a position were they might come to believe (1 Cor 13:4; Jn 13:34, 35). We need to let the Holy Spirit act in us, in all things, so that in all things we do, others might see the loving nature of God. If we argue, we need to argue for the truth, not merely to win the arguement. People will be more likely to listen if they know you are listening to them.

There is much, much more, but I don't have the time or the space.

I suggest anyone looking for proof of creation and disproof of evolution start with http://www.answersingenesis.org/ they have some good information.

I'm not saying God _couldn't_ have created the world in 7 literal days, I just don't believe he did create it in 7 literal days. God is an all powerful being, of course he could have - I just don't believe that it was, in fact, only 7 days.

Evolution is all around us, you can see it every day - it never stops, even though Man has supposedly evolved to a civilized being & society, doesn't mean we've stopped evolving. You can see evolution in humans today - the difference between a Mother and her daughter, between siblings. If you look at microorganisms, just liek captainassasin has said, you can see that evolution happening much faster. The common cold is another good example of evolution - it is constantly evolving into new strains.

I went to a Catholic school, and my Physics teacher was a Marist Brother. Most highly religious people tend to shirk science and not have anything to do with it, yet here was someone who was not only highly religious but had a PHD in (Nuclear?) Physics. One day I asked him about it, and he told me how he'd gone through all the sciences, had become an astronomer, and finally entered the Physics realm, looking for God out in the stars, and in the smallest Atom. And he found God in each and every one of those things, in the smallest atom and how it reacts with all of it around it, how there was evidence of a design so clever it can only have been created by God. Science had proven to him that there was a God - and that Science is simply us trying to understand God's complex design and how he made everything work. An example, through his work with astronomy he managed to correlate stuff mentioned in the bible with acutal astrological occurences, and perhaps most tellingly, he managed to deduce that there was in fact a bright star that would have appeared in the sky just as noted in the Bible with Jesus' birth - except that it wasn't 2007 years ago, it was 2010 - which is understandable since the measurement of years was a Roman thing, and being put in place many years later its understandable they might have been a few years out.

Which is why I don't believe the world _was_ created in only 7 days, but was instead 7 stages or 'ages' if you will - science has shown us that the world was most likely created over millions of years, with various stages occuring. Like I said, time is of no importance to God. And to believe that doesn't mean I can't believe in God or all the rest of it, even though my beliefs may not sit well with you.

My beliefs, thats the way they are - and thats the way they'll stay.

Stef, evolution and belief in God are not exclusive of each other. When Darwin (credited for discovering evolution) was doing his observations, he believed in God. Many naturalists are Christians or believe in some religion.

I know it’s humbling and hard to accept that, we, the dominating species on earth have evolved from “lower” species, but the evidence is overwhelming that we have.

Our DNA and that of a Chimpanzee’s are 98.6% identical. DNA controls our molecular development (among many other things) into a species. I think that alone is tremendous evidence that we must be related.

Many “missing links” have been found; meaning that there were many species, who are now extinct for over a hundred thousand years, that lived between the time of our common relative with the apes and modern man.

Evolution is a very slow process. Life started around 4 BILLION years ago. That is a length of time beyond our comprehension. You can’t watch your cat and expect to see him evolving, however, if you put a population of white butterflies in a forest where all the trees are black and he will be conspicuous to predators, he will evolve within a relatively few generations into a darker color moth, because with each generation the darker shades (which occur do to genetic mutations) will be more likely to survive to reproduce. An experiment has been done to verify this. As someone else answered, viruses and other microbes can evolve quickly because their life spans are so short making it possible for changes from one generation to the next to happen in a relatively short period of time.

We humans have a huge ego and it’s difficult for us to realize that we are a part of all life on earth and not something totally apart from it, but if you think about it, doesn’t it seem impossible that we are not connected in some way to other life on earth?

I’m not saying don’t believe in God, but just trust your reason as well as your faith. Does it make sense for God to give us a brain (or evolve one for us) and then expect us not to use it? Remember, Islamic extremism and all of its horrendous consequence grew out of blind faith or an exploitation of it.

Be well, keep questioning and God bless.

I don't have a clue how mulititudes of people can really believe that, when the evidence is all around us to the contrary, just shows how good Satan is at his job, I reckon.

Amen to that Silverwings

Sometimes I wish I was ignorant too... but then I think...

*applauds captainassassin's last post, as provocative as it is*

stef_the_mess, further to your funmail question of 'whats a fundamentalist' -silverwings (and mealw's, by agreeing with silverwings) most recent comments are good examples of people who appear to be fundamentalists, and unwilling or unable to see another persons viewpoint. I can see where silverwings and mealw are coming from - I personally don't agree, but I don't condemn them for having different views. Whereas, according to Silverwings, just because I don't see things her way, I must have been got to by Satan.

I think none of you are being fair on each other.

I believe God didnt have anything to do wiht evolution, that evolutuion is a myth, and come on, we share like 52% of our DNA with a BANANA! and NOBODY'S going to go say we evolved from that!

I agree with silverwings.
Satan's made it his purpose in life to make sure none of us believe what we are suposed to believe, do im sorry danbob, but your going to hafta tag me as a fundamentalist, too, if thats how you term people.

and I think you are overreacting a little-

are any people actually cndemning your point of veiw?
they are just stating that they believe something else that isnt what you believe.

The Bible says we were made in the image of God, reffering to the fact that we can think *properly*, at the level that we do.

why would God just make us like monkeys? THEY sure dont think at the same level!!!
Plus if He's so great (which he is), why not just skip a step and make us as we are today(or were supposed ot be? cause each new generation has a few more bits of missing information in their DNA)? Thats smarter!

Our buddy the big CA here is confusing evolution with mutation.

mutation takes AWAY information in DNA. Never has there been a case of mutation adding to DNA. Where is the info going to come from?

The cap has a gr8 sense of humour though- when its directed in the right direction...

Re: scientists agree evolution is the best way to explain the world. check out the website I've posted at the end of my post- its archives show so many discoveries and confirmations by secular scientists even, and they all fit within what we know of the world today.

familycoach and silverwings--u are now on mi list of friends, buddies!

rnealw- please post something!

BTW if some of you guys found the title of my Q a little offensive, it got changed- it was SUPPOSED to be Creation vs Evolution debate. but thats editing for you.

http://www.CreationOnTheWeb.com.au (capitals)

so bye-bye, take care, and God bless yas
till we meet again

-stef

Ok one of the key issues of evolution is the age of the earth.
Each year, water and winds erode about 20 billion tons of dirt and rock from the continents and deposit it in the ocean.6 This material accumulates as loose sediment on the hard basaltic (lava-formed) rock of the ocean floor. The average depth of all the sediment in the whole ocean is less than 400 meters.7 The main way known to remove the sediment from the ocean floor is by plate tectonic subduction. That is, sea floor slides slowly (a few cm/year) beneath the continents, taking some sediment with it. According to secular scientific literature, that process presently removes only 1 billion tons per year.7 As far as anyone knows, the other 19 billion tons per year simply accumulate. At that rate, erosion would deposit the present mass of sediment in less than 12 million years. Yet according to evolutionary theory, erosion and plate subduction have been going on as long as the oceans have existed, an alleged three billion years. If that were so, the rates above imply that the oceans would be massively choked with sediment dozens of kilometers deep. An alternative (creationist) explanation is that erosion from the waters of the Genesis flood running off the continents deposited the present amount of sediment within a short time about 5,000 years ago. - Answersingenesis

I guess it’s impossible for us to bring an unbiased mind to any question and look at the facts as they are. You can’t answer this question without doing research into how life works. Many answers here show ignorance of natural science and a reliance on their religious indoctrination instead of open-minded investigation to give them answers to life’s most basic questions. This kind of thinking, or lack of it, brought us the inquisition and the crusades. It wasn’t that many years ago that the Catholic Church conceded that Galileo was right and that the earth is not the center of the universe. Religious fervor has also given us Islamic fundamentalism, which is totally intolerant of any other believes in God and that anyone who doesn’t think as they do should be murdered.

I was brought up very religious and I know how difficult it is, or even impossible, to start thinking for yourself so I know I’m wasting my key strokes here, but maybe someone will start questioning at the risk of being a Heretic.

I've already got that covered...

And its working too. As a result, there are:

- People who like me & the way I think
- People who dislike me BUT like the way I think
- People who hate me & condemn me to hell, because they're idiots

All in all I've made good progress.

captainassassin: Who cares if they condemn you to hell? Satan offers nachos, where most would only offer breadsticks! (Thank you Jhonen Vasquez!)

An excellent resource for combating denialism of all types, including evolution denialism, is the denialism blog. It also covers why engaging with denialists isn't a good idea in the first place - people who are uninterested in finding out the facts, but only in propogating their own, discredited view of things are not going to be dissuaded by a well reasoned argument. Instead, it only draws more attention to their arguments.

Actually, I have more respect for fundamentalists (as long as they're not also evangelists, that is) than for Christians who try so hard to harmonize the Bible with what they've learned in science classes. The latter reminds me of atheists who mock religious beliefs and somehow manage to believe in ghosts.

Lucky for me I don't crave your respect then, isn't it xiigzag!

Now that the Fundamentalists have well and truly taken over, I'm outie on this topic.

Who said they've taken over? They're usually backing away on their heels, violently swinging their bibles... and missing...

Actually I think you got hardening of the heart from that swinging Bible.

I'd just like to add to this that NO scientist thinks humans evolved from monkeys. That's a common misconception.

They believe we evolved from a common ancestor, which is now gone.

Yes, but creationists find THAT to be absurd also...

'We human beings? Closely related on the genetic level to... monkeys? RUBBISH! That's ridiculous! We have... God... and stuff...'

Spoken like a true atheist.

I know, I know your not an atheist your Agnostic. . . .

First, it's 'you're.'

Second, what do you mean 'spoken like a true atheist?'

Hey I'm from Texas. . . We like to wreck havic on the english language. . . .
Second. . . . . It's an inside joke. . . Texan to Texan. If your not from Texas. . .don't worry about it. . . .

...I am... and I don't see your point.

...and what does 'mocking' have to with Atheism?

Anyone can mock anything.

I know your smarter than that Captain. . . You were Mocking the Creationist.

...which has WHAT to do with calling me an atheist? ...in Texas?

...which has WHAT to do with calling me an atheist? ...in Texas?

* sighs* shaking head. . . . Calls monkey in. . . .

...and that's an inside joke... how?

...and that's an inside joke... how?

Listen, I definetly believe in God and believe that the Bible is the only 100% truth in the world. I believe in Creation and have entertained the Evolution 'Theory' but have come to the conclusion that it is a lie which was made-up by Charles Darwin who himself admitted that if there was no 'Missing Links' found in the Fossil Record, then the whole Theory should be dismissed.
Besides,the Bible says that there was no death before Adam and Eves sin, therefore Evolution can not be considered by any Bible believing Christian.
And I also believe that this Earth is only about 6,000 years old. The Geology and fossils where created by the global flood.
The reason that it seems that we evolved from smaller organisms is because those organisms lie deeper in the 'older strata'.

1st. The smaller organisms where the first to get killed by the Flood. Larger organisms survived a bit longer and finally the larger and best swimmers died. That is how the layers of fossils laid down.

2nd. Different kinds of sedements settle at different rates. That is why there are layers of different kind of rock. All about the same age, really.

3rd. There are fossils of trees penetrating verticaly through many of these layers. Even upside-down trees! A tree can not survive millions of years to support the theory of gradually building layers of strata.

4th. If the earth were billions of years old, then billions of years ago, the Sun would have been many times the size at it is now and the earth would have burn it up.

On and on and on...many Science textbooks teach us non-tested, unobservable theories as if they were facts.
Evolution is really a Theory and Not a Science, it is more of a religion based on faith in ideas.

The Big Bang:
Gases do NOT condense in a vaccuum.

I could go on and on.
There are a lot of Great Videos on You-Tube covering this. Search for 'Kent Hovind' or 'Dr. Dino'. Also Ken Ham.

All of these “arguments” can be easily refuted; for one thing, carbon dating (a well tested scientific method reverified over many years) proves that the earth is billions and not thousands of years old. The big flood explanation simply doesn’t hold up to even the most superficial investigation.

Any kind of open-minded research leads to the conclusion that all life on earth is related and that we should treat all life with respect accordingly.

If you want to replace reason with blind faith that is your choice, but to me going though life with the attitude that my mind is made up don’t confuse me with facts leads to electing an irresponsible, stupid, self serving president like George Bush.

I know trying to reason with a creationist is like trying to turn a stone into a frog, but readers, especially young ones, must be encouraged to seek the truth in spite of powerful indoctrination that may have received.

because people are stubborn and beleive what they want to beleive.

end of story.

*ding ding ding*

I'm a Christian (evangleical but not fundamentalist) and I'm delighted to recommend a website I found yesterday - Answers in Creation. It's for Christians like me who have spent our lives wondering, 'What's the big deal? God made the universe and humans via the Big Bang and evolution - why are the rest of you getting so worked up about either creation OR evolution?'

http://www.answersincreation.org/
I actually like this one better.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/

Thank you Flossheal. One can keep their faith and still strive to understand the world as many scientists have done since man began to wonder. On some issues you must simply separate religion from science.

Hey some one mentioned Carbon dating. . . . well it's failible
http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/carbondating.html
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2676
or
How the carbon clock works
Carbon has unique properties that are essential for life on earth. Familiar to us as the black substance in charred wood, as diamonds, and the graphite in ‘lead’ pencils, carbon comes in several forms, or isotopes. One rare form has atoms that are 14 times as heavy as hydrogen atoms: carbon-14, or 14C, or radiocarbon.

Carbon-14 is made when cosmic rays knock neutrons out of atomic nuclei in the upper atmosphere. These displaced neutrons, now moving fast, hit ordinary nitrogen (14N) at lower altitudes, converting it into 14C. Unlike common carbon (12C), 14C is unstable and slowly decays, changing it back to nitrogen and releasing energy. This instability makes it radioactive.

Ordinary carbon (12C) is found in the carbon dioxide (CO2) in the air, which is taken up by plants, which in turn are eaten by animals. So a bone, or a leaf or a tree, or even a piece of wooden furniture, contains carbon. When the 14C has been formed, like ordinary carbon (12C), it combines with oxygen to give carbon dioxide (14CO2), and so it also gets cycled through the cells of plants and animals.

We can take a sample of air, count how many 12C atoms there are for every 14C atom, and calculate the 14C/12C ratio. Because 14C is so well mixed up with 12C, we expect to find that this ratio is the same if we sample a leaf from a tree, or a part of your body.

In living things, although 14C atoms are constantly changing back to 14N, they are still exchanging carbon with their surroundings, so the mixture remains about the same as in the atmosphere. However, as soon as a plant or animal dies, the 14C atoms which decay are no longer replaced, so the amount of 14C in that once-living thing decreases as time goes on. In other words, the 14C/12C ratio gets smaller. So, we have a ‘clock’ which starts ticking the moment something dies.

Obviously, this works only for things which were once living. It cannot be used to date volcanic rocks, for example.

The rate of decay of 14C is such that half of an amount will convert back to 14N in 5,730 years (plus or minus 40 years). This is the ‘half-life.’ So, in two half-lives, or 11,460 years, only one-quarter will be left. Thus, if the amount of 14C relative to 12C in a sample is one-quarter of that in living organisms at present, then it has a theoretical age of 11,460 years. Anything over about 50,000 years old, should theoretically have no detectable 14C left. That is why radiocarbon dating cannot give millions of years. In fact, if a sample contains 14C, it is good evidence that it is not millions of years old.

However, things are not quite so simple. First, plants discriminate against carbon dioxide containing 14C. That is, they take up less than would be expected and so they test older than they really are. Furthermore, different types of plants discriminate differently. This also has to be corrected for.2

Second, the ratio of 14C/12C in the atmosphere has not been constant—for example, it was higher before the industrial era when the massive burning of fossil fuels released a lot of carbon dioxide that was depleted in 14C. This would make things which died at that time appear older in terms of carbon dating. Then there was a rise in 14CO2 with the advent of atmospheric testing of atomic bombs in the 1950s.3 This would make things carbon-dated from that time appear younger than their true age.

Measurement of 14C in historically dated objects (e.g., seeds in the graves of historically dated tombs) enables the level of 14C in the atmosphere at that time to be estimated, and so partial calibration of the ‘clock’ is possible. Accordingly, carbon dating carefully applied to items from historical times can be useful. However, even with such historical calibration, archaeologists do not regard 14C dates as absolute because of frequent anomalies. They rely more on dating methods that link into historical records.

Outside the range of recorded history, calibration of the 14C clock is not possible.4

Other factors affecting carbon dating
The amount of cosmic rays penetrating the earth’s atmosphere affects the amount of 14C produced and therefore dating the system. The amount of cosmic rays reaching the earth varies with the sun’s activity, and with the earth's passage through magnetic clouds as the solar system travels around the Milky Way galaxy.

The strength of the earth’s magnetic field affects the amount of cosmic rays entering the atmosphere. A stronger magnetic field deflects more cosmic rays away from the earth. Overall, the energy of the earth’s magnetic field has been decreasing,5 so more 14C is being produced now than in the past. This will make old things look older than they really are.

Also, the Genesis flood would have greatly upset the carbon balance. The flood buried a huge amount of carbon, which became coal, oil, etc., lowering the total 12C in the biosphere (including the atmosphere—plants regrowing after the flood absorb CO2, which is not replaced by the decay of the buried vegetation). Total 14C is also proportionately lowered at this time, but whereas no terrestrial process generates any more 12C, 14C is continually being produced, and at a rate which does not depend on carbon levels (it comes from nitrogen). Therefore, the 14C/12C ratio in plants/animals/the atmosphere before the flood had to be lower than what it is now.

Unless this effect (which is additional to the magnetic field issue just discussed) were corrected for, carbon dating of fossils formed in the flood would give ages much older than the true ages.

Creationist researchers have suggested that dates of 35,000 - 45,000 years should be re-calibrated to the biblical date of the flood.6 Such a re-calibration makes sense of anomalous data from carbon dating—for example, very discordant ‘dates’ for different parts of a frozen musk ox carcass from Alaska and an inordinately slow rate of accumulation of ground sloth dung pellets in the older layers of a cave where the layers were carbon dated.7

Also, volcanoes emit much CO2 depleted in 14C. Since the flood was accompanied by much volcanism, fossils formed in the early post-flood period would give radiocarbon ages older than they really are.

In summary, the carbon-14 method, when corrected for the effects of the flood, can give useful results, but needs to be applied carefully. It does not give dates of millions of years and when corrected properly fits well with the biblical flood.

There was no flood that covered the whole earth, so any argument based on a mythical flood in unfounded. The dinosaurs roomed the earth 250 to 65 million years ago and this has been verified by multiple dating methods.

I am not going to continue to arguing against the absurd premise that the earth is only 6 thousand years old, because anyone who believes that is not open to rational arguments.

I'm resending my last posting because it didn't get on the site.

There is some evidence of a flood in the Middle East thousands of years ago, but it did not come close to covering the whole earth, so arguments based a mythical flood are unfounded. Carbon atomic life is a very reliable method of dating for many objects. One age fact is that it has been proven though multiple methods that the dinosaurs walked the earth about 250 to 65 million years ago.

Believing that the world is 6 thousand years old is Ok as a religious believe, but it can be refuted in many many ways when investigated. I’m not going to continue to argue against religious beliefs.

You believe the flood never took place and I believe without a doubt it did so whats the problem? I have a right to my beliefs as you have a right to yours. I will not sway you as you will not sway me. If you do not want to argue religious beliefs vs, Science why did you post it under RELIGION?
Oh I don't really care to argue that the world isn't over 6000 years old either it only get people blood pressure up.