Evolution vs Creation

idiot eh?

​

"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet somebody who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked, but I'd rather not consider that)." (Richard Dawkins) first wrote that in a book review in the New York Times in 1989
http://www.secularhumanism.org/library/fi/dawkins_21_3.html

​

his last paragraph discusses the possibility of a fifth category:

"I don't withdraw a word of my initial statement. But I do now think it may have been incomplete. There is perhaps a fifth category, which may belong under "insane" but which can be more sympathetically characterized by a word like tormented, bullied, or brainwashed. Sincere people who are not ignorant, not stupid, and not wicked can be cruelly torn, almost in two, between the massive evidence of science on the one hand, and their understanding of what their holy book tells them on the other. I think this is one of the truly bad things religion can do to a human mind. There is wickedness here, but it is the wickedness of the institution and what it does to a believing victim, not wickedness on the part of the victim himself. The clearest example I know is poignant, even sad, and I shall do it justice in a later article."

... I think a good word for it would be deluded, it would include self delusions and institutionally instigated delusions

Hello, Servent.What you describe is not what anyone believes. There are several threads already going on about Big Bang.The point is that there is a multitude of independent and consistent evidence that the earth is over 4 billion years old, and that all known species (including extinct ones) evolved from a much smaller number of older species. What you like to discuss this evidence? As a former creationist myself, I can assure you that the evidence is quite overwhelming. In fact, I have tried to present just one small piece of the available evidence.Meanwhile there is no, absolutely no, evidence that the earth is less than 10,000 years old, or that there was a global flood in historic times.I (and presumably everyone else here) would love to discuss the evidence with you. Please join the conversation.

quote:

---

How Can Anyone beleive that Billions of years ago an explosion just happened and in resalt we have a fully functional universe.

---

By honestly judging the evidence without any religious presuppositions.

quote:

---

Thats like me saying that if I took my watch and Smashed it in 2000 peices and put it in to a paper bag and Spun it around for billions of years I would have a Fully functional watch.

---

No, you would have a jumbled up assortment of matter, just as we see in the universe. Life is the result of self replicators, so your watch example does not work since it does not reproduce.

quote:

---

Come on we all know that aint gonna happen..... So why should I beleive That this so complex universe was made by sum freek accedent.

---

Because the properties of the universe can be described as the result of non-goal oriented mechanisms. Why do you believe that the universe did not come about as described by scientists? Because of the evidence or because of your religious bias?

YOU Guys ARE SOOOOOOOO WRONG.........AM I THE Only person in this post thing that actualy Knows the truth.....come on Plus if the universe was created by one BIG explosion then every thing in the universe would be spinning in the same Direction. Put it aint pluto spins counter clockwise and several moons spin counter-clockwise so explain this if your so smart

---

~~~Gods Servent~~~

If you are actually serious about this - and its hard to tell - then I am afraid that you DON'T know the truth. The Big Bang wasn't an explosion and even if it was then it is NOT the case that everything would be spinning in the same direction. And it certainly has nothing to do with the direction in which the planets of our Solar System orbit the Sun. That has much more to do with the formation of the Solar System itself and the most important factor there would probably be the Sun's gravity.

Hi Servant, I am not a scientist, so, as you sound like you really know what you are talking about, can you be kind enough to tell me why everything in the universe would be spinning in the same direction? I may be wrong, but the universe is dated to about 14.6 billion years, our solar system is much younger, so Pluto would not exist when the big bang happened. How does this fit in with your theory?Many ThanksBrian.

Hey , Brian ok.... How could a freek accedent place everything in the perfect place.... Like if earth was just a few feet closer to the sun we would get to hott and not be able to servive and if we were any further we would be to cold..... tell me How Dose an explosion do that, and out of all the explosions I have seen in my life I have seen them Create havok and thats it. Also here is some more proof for my caseour sun is gradually shrinking at a steady rate. It is occurring fast enough that, as little as 50,000 years ago, the sun would have been so large that our oceans would boil. In far less time in the past (25,000 years or so), all life on earth would have ceased to existBecause of solar and lunar gravitational drag forces, the spin of the earth (now about 1,000 mph [1,609 kmph]) is gradually slowing down. If our world was billions of years old, it would already have stopped turning. Or, calculating differently, a billion years ago our planet would have been spinning so fastit would have become a pancake. So, either way, our earth cannot be more than a few thousand years oldHere is another Question for you, if there was a Big explosion then why did all the planets stop in our galaxy and they are so evenly spaces. How is this posible?

---

~~~Gods Servent~~~

quote:

---

Like if earth was just a few feet closer to the sun we would get to hott and not be able to servive and if we were any further we would be to cold....

---

This is false.The distance between the earth and sun varies by more that a few feet.In January, the earth is at perihelion - the closest to the sun. It is only 91.4 million miles from the sun. In July it is an entire 94.4 million miles from the sun. So, over the course of a year the distance from the earth and the sun changes by 3 million miles. That is almost 16 billion feet - more than a few, wouldn't you say?

ok........maybe I have got my facts a little screwed up on that one.....But awnser my other question I asked you.

Servent, False.http://www.asa3.org/...ronomy-Cosmology/PSCF9-86VanTill.htmlThe sun oscillates with a periodicity of about 80 years. The error that is oft repeated by creationists has been falsified. Essentially an unwarranted extrapolation of the solar shrinkage stage of the cycle gave rise to the myth. The graph above clearly shows the dangers of extrapolation from limited data (the dashed line). The actual data shows a cycle of growth & shrinkage with a stable mean value. False.http://pages.prodigy.com/suna/earth.htmThe earth is slowing down but it amounts to a daytime difference of a few hours. If the earth slows 2.2 secs/100,000 years this roughly equates to a 21 hour day during the Cambrian explosion. It would mean a day length about 10 hours long when the first life appeared. At worst you'll weigh a couple of ounces less at the equator due to centrifugal forces. Because the solar system formed ~5 bya out of a concentration of gas & dust (& relatively regular concentrations of matter, ie .planets is what you would EXPECT), & the universe formed 15 bya.In other words they are unrelated.Mark

---

"Physical Reality of Matchette’s EVOLUTIONARY zero-atom-unit in a transcendental c/e illusion" - Brad McFall

Hi, Servent.I hope that Mark24 answered your questions to your satisfaction.I have a question for you. If the earth is only about 6000 years old, and if each "kind" was specially created, why does the fossil record seem to show that present species evolved from older species?

I'm going to ignore Servent as I believe hes just stirring. Back to the original questions (as basic as I can explain):1. Abiogenesis — How did it start and evolve?
The idea is that the world was an ancient swamp/ocean, different chemical mix to what we see now days. Into that mix lightning proved the energy to join matter together, and all it took was time until the right combinations were made (and we are talking millions of years so there is plenty of time). The famous experiment by Uray/Miller showed that the basic idea worked, when they created amino acids by putting electricty through a chemical mix.2. Evolution — How did animals get upright, how did we go from the seas to land, how and why did we deviate into humans and chimps?
Getting upright appears to be a benefit based on environment, seas to land would have been via anphibian.3. Evidence of an older earth - How can I contradict creationists and what formula is correct in determining it.
4. How do I know Radio carbon dating is accurate in its dating techniques?
#3 and #4 are similar, dating the earth gives us ages back millions of years. One thing to remember is its not carbon dating, there are several dating methods (carbon is the most famous, but argon is also common). Usually scientists will take multiple samples, will test using multiple methods and will compare all the data to come to a conclusion. Carbon dating is only useful for dates back some 50,000 years (still alot older than the young earth creation ideas which say 6000 years), but many of the other dating methods can date back millions of years. Carbon dating doesn't work on sea creatures, but there are millions of samples from all over the world, tested by numerous labs and all come up with dates in the millions of years. The amount of data and cross references is massive. Everything from 40,000 year old frozen mammoths, to fossils (both animal and plant), to 30,000 year old cave paintings, to continental drift, to glacial movement shows the age of the planet to be far older than the 6000 year old number thrown around by YEC.5. How can I prove evolution?
The one thing that always gets me with the creationist arguements are how they don't think to use the arguements against their own belief. "Evolution is only a theory", "You can't prove evolution", "Alot of people don't believe evolution"... all of these statements are exactly the same in reverse, you can't prove creation, creation is only a theory and alot of people don't believe it. We are comparing two competing ideas, evolution uses the evidence to reach a conclusion whereas creation starts with a conclusion and then digs for anything to support it.
One of the main reasons that evolution is a better belief is its flexibility. If a dinosaur was found, or if new creatures are discovered evolution and science will incorporate these and change to adapt to the new data, it doesn't claim to have all the answers, just the best answers with our current knowledge.
Alternatively creation is based on the Biblical account, which is highly suspect to say the least. The Bible itself is not a first hand account (most of the stories were first written hundreds or even thousands of years later), they are written by humans who had their own bias, their own goals and own reasons for writing what they did. Its then translated through numerous languages with bits added and removed based on whoever sponsered the latest version, so that we now have many different versions that differ by tens of thousands of words between each other. We can show a young earth and a global flood are impossible, and these by themselves cast doubt on the Bible. The Bible is one of the least stable platforms to base any arguement on, let alone making it the basis for your way of life.

Welcome to the madhouse, "Servant",I've corrected some spelling and grammar in quoted extracts to be a bit more readable. Don't take offence at this, I don't mean it as an insult. Actually, the orbit of the Earth around the Sun is not a perfect circle, and the distance to the Sun already varies by about five million kilometres every year. See this link. Note that this makes almost no difference to seasonal temperatures, which depend on the angle we are to the Sun in different hemispheres. Long term global temperatures have a strong dependence on the how light and heat is reflected and absorbed and retained, and this can vary considerably over long time periods for a number of reasons. Distance from the Sun does not have as much effect as you think.There is a habitable zone for distance from the Sun within which life as we know it could plausibly exist, but it is many millions of miles wide; not a few feet. The habitable zone is considered to extend almost as far inwards as Venus, and then out beyond Mars. The cause of extreme temperatures on Venus and Mars is not simply distance, but also the ability of the atmosphere to retain heat. The question is addressed in the Ask the Space Scientist archive; he suggests that the habitable zone is roughly in the range 80 to 200 million miles from the Sun. This is only an estimate, but broadly similar to estimates by other authorities. This also is untrue. The size of the Sun does not change steadily, but oscillates slightly over time spans of about eighty years. Long term rates of change are nowhere near what you suggest. If anything, the Sun may even be expanding very slightly over the last few decades, but it is hard to measure since the Sun does not have a well defined boundary.A good discussion of this matter is available at The Legend of the Shrinking Sun, by Christian astronomer Howard Van Till. This is another common error. The spin of the Earth is indeed slowing due to tidal interactions with the Moon. As a result, the length of the day is increasing by about 1.5 milliseconds every century. In a billion years, this adds up to about four hours. That is, a billion years ago the rotation would be roughly 20% faster, and a day would be about 20 hours long. This assumes a uniform rate of change, which is not valid. The rate of slowing varies over time, depending mainly on the shape of oceans and continents. Even so, the estimate is not bad, and is fairly close to independent fossil evidence from corals, which imply that 370 million years ago the day was about 22 hours long. Planet formation has nothing to do with the explosion of the big bang. Planets are not evenly spaced at all; as you move out from the Sun the separation distance increases dramatically. Planets did not stop in the galaxy. Galaxies are far older than the solar system. Our solar system condensed from a nebula within the galaxy something like 5 billion years ago.You are in an awkward position, "Servant". People you trust have been telling you things that are just not true. You won't be able to sort it all out for yourself immediately; but do make the effort to check out some of the details of these claims.The conclusion of the article by Howard van Till that I cited above is worth thinking about. (I have abbreviated as indicated; follow the link for the whole thing.) The errors you are making here are obviously not your own errors. You are repeating factually incorrect material from others. Your screen name suggests you are a Christian; it will help to remember that claims about habitable zones and rates of change and so on are not from the bible or the church. Showing them to be nonsense is not a criticism of your religion.Bear in mind that some things get very complicated. For example, although the Big Bang is often described as an explosion, this is very misleading. It is nothing like the kind of explosions you are used to in which matter bursts out from some central point. It is about an expansion of space itself, which is a very different thing; and really hard to understand.Good luck -- Sylas

Something I originally posted in the "When God said day did he mean an actual 24hour day?" topic:As I recall, the year was determined to be about 400 days back in the Devonian (approx. 400 million years ago). This was determined by studying daily and annual growth ring paterns in corals.Anyhow, (365.25 d/y / 400 d/y ) x 24 hr/d = 22 hr/d back in the Devonian.IF you project that back linearly, that would make the day about 19 hours 1 billion years ago (bya), 14 hours 2 bya, 9 hours 3 bya, 4 hours 4 bya, and 1.5 hours 4.5 bya.Now, I'll stop, and give everone a chance to say "Who cares".Moose

OK OK PEOPLES........I see that non of you are taking in what I am saying so I Give up.....obviously no one here beleives in creation so I am going to stop trying, cuz I know None of you people really care...so What ever..........believe what you want cuz I dont care N E more........Cuz there is no scientific evendence to prove my case there is only the bible and my faith. so I am done

---

~~~Gods Servent~~~