Evolution vs Creation, Youtube series

[ProtoFury]

Originally Posted by Gulp

Newton did great work. When he was corrected, it wasn't as if Einstein discovered that instead of gravity it was magic (which is what the Creationists are saying).

No one is saying that magic did it. We believe a Creator set up the universe and all of its rules. However He chose to work in this universe, whether by creation or evolution, is another story. It's His universe, and He created the rules. That doesn't mean He always has to play by them--the greatest rule-breakage? The resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Originally Posted by Gulp

Yet, it's still the best way to examine the world.

I agree, as far as non-biased opinions go. However, it's nigh impossible to get an unbiased point of view on things. Scientists who are looking for evidence specifically for something will find the "evidence" to suport their claims. Creationist scientists looking for evidence of creation will find plenty of "evidence". Svcientists looking for evolutionary evidence will find their "evidence as well. Scientists looking for evidence of a biological basis for homosexuality will find their"evidence." Back in times of slavery, there was the popular braqnch of science called phrenology, which was used to "prove" white people were superior to black people based upon brain size and skull structure--and they had plenty of "evidence" as well.

Evidence that everyboy doesn't agree on can't be called evidence, although it often is, from a biased perspective. When someone takes evidence that everybody does agree on and attributes it to something, that's totally different. It's a fact that the galaxies move away from each other aster than the speed of light, and the only explanation science has to offer is that, somehow, new spac is being created between them that pushes them even faster than they're moving. Now if someone wants to attribute that solid fact as evidence of a Creator (as I do), I'm okay with that.

But "evidence" gathered from a biased perspective cannot be trustd, if everyone doesn't agree on it.

Originally Posted by Gulp

From what I've seen, parents seem to tell their children, "the world is 6000 years old and humans lived with dinos" and they never seem ready to finish that statement and say, "But that's our faith. The experts have a completely different opinion." Most of that is probably due to the fact that many fundamentalists are not aware of how much evidence there is for evolution.

One--not all experts agree on that. In fact, many top experts do not agree, but they are silenced by their peers, and the media (not just the "liberal media," but all media). In fact, a recent poll showed that around 2/3 of the world's leading scientists are religious in some way or another, in their beliefs and practices.

Two--while there is much evidence for evolution, there is also quite a lot that evolution doesn't explain. Darwin himself noted that if there was ever any inconsistancies in the branching out of species, his own theories would be incorrect. Look up the Precambrian Explosion--that's something Darwin also noted would be a problem if we couldn't sort it out. We still haven't been able to. There's not enough evidence in the fossil record to prove that evolution was responsible for it.

Originally Posted by Gulp

We're not the onestelling nearly all the scientists in the world that they're wrong. Scientists have mountains of evidence. They've done the work. Nothing proves it wrong. On the other side, we have people with no evidence for their claims. They want to claim science, but they don't want to play by the rules of science. They ask questions like "What about the Cambrian Explosion?" but they never seem to be willing to do a simple Google search to see if the scientists have a reasonable, plausible explanation. It's sad that there's such mistrust because even though every person in the world has the capacity to lie, scientists are one of the few groups in the world whose job description involves actively trying to prove themselves wrong for the sake of the harsh truth.

First of all, I was going to bold certain sections of this and answer them in order, and then ended up bolding most everything.

To begin with, not all scientists agree, so we're not telling "nearly all the scientists in the world" that they're wrong. See my earlier response. And in fact, just becuse someone is an evolutionist doesn't mean that they on't think there's a Creator behind all of it--so just saying someone's an evolutionist doesn't mean they aren't Christian, or another religion.

Scientists have mountains of evidence. They've done the work. Nothing proves it wrong." I don't think I need to say much here again, because it just goes to back to the whole "evidence you were trying to find" versus "evidence you attribute to something" point. And, some evidence is doctored and hand-picked--for instance, the "evidence" of similar origins in embryos.

Ernst Haeckle's drawings of embryonic development did not represent random samplings of embryonic development--rather, he hand-picked ones that looked similar to use as his "evidence." On top of that, there are some inconsistencies with his drawings that arise because he altered thm slightly to look even more similar. But then again, this is just me attempting not to argue with "no evience," as you so courteously put it.

Originally Posted by Gulp

"An atheist's desire to be right"? I feel just as passionate about evolution as others feel about their religion. Evolution is the way I learn more about who I am and where I came from. And the best part is that it's the best candidate for being the truth, so I can base my personal discovery on facts rather than faith.

If you are searching for the truth, the bet way to find oiut the truthis to look into both sides of the argument. If you're really dedicated to finding the truth, then I'm going to call you out. I challenge you to read the book The Case for a Creator, by Lee Strobel. It's not an evangelical book or a book dissuading people from evolution, but rather, the approach of one journalist (who was a firm evolutionist) who went around interviewing top creationist scientists to see heir point of view. I'm not trying o convert you, just seeing if you're willing to consider other sides of the argument. If you're really searching for the truth, what do you have to lose?

And I'll close by saying this--something that a friend once told me, when similar arguments came up.

If you're right, and evolution is actually what happened, and there is no Creator, no God, no Heaven or Hell, and this existance is all that there is--then none of this mattered anyway, I've live my life the way I chose to believe, and even though you'd be right, neither of us would be better or worse because of it. You'd gan nothing for it, and I'd lose nothing.

But if I'm right in believing in Jesus Christ, and the fact that however God chose to create life, he did--then you stand to lose everything.

I gues we'll just have to see who's right and who's wrong at the end.