Creation or Evolution: The Statistics!!!

Creation or evolution?

  • Creation

    Votes: 20 43.5%

  • Evolution

    Votes: 26 56.5%
  • Total voters
    46
Silverbackman said:
What is even more suprising is that many people believe the universe is 6,000 years old,
Click to expand...
i have never met anyone in my life who believes that.
like you know exactly how old the earth is?:rolleyes:


Silverbackman said:
When people stop confusing myths for religion, then religion would be much better off. Follow the teachings of Jesus or Mohammed, don't give a crap on whether the was born in a manger or whether the rainbow is really there because of a promise:rolleyes:.

The new global religion if it ever comes should make sure they concentrate more on the teachings for religious ceremonies more than the stories. They stories are great but we need to distinguish stories from spirituality;).
Click to expand...

still on the all new global religion kick. certainly, as long as it matches up with your doctrine.:rolleyes:
When people stop confusing myths & theories for scientific proof, then science would be much better off.
 
What strikes me as curious is this; creation, specifically the God of the bible, has obliterated all comers since conception and explains an incredible amount of data with ONE ENTITY -the bible-( that would be God). Yet evolutionists attack it like it was pulled from the rear of an orangutan last week, brushed down, and pegged up as Religion with a capital R.

To objectively examine the masses of evidence and state that Almighty God is not the best explanation we have leaves me incredulous.



All the dead bones on the planet have not proven evolution.

The fact that someone can significantly alter the body plan of species does not prove macro-evolution and it does not refute the God of creation.

It seems to me that macro-evolution requires LOTS of NEW information and NEW genes that make NEW proteins that are found in NEW organs, systems & blah blah blah.

The evolution theories lacks severe evidence.

When a lobster gives birth to a mouse, let me know.:)
 
I see creation around me every single day. A single cell grows into a perfect little baby. A tiny seed grows into a massive tree (with time :p ). I see creation in each chirping bird and each blooming bud.

I see creation in evolution. Evolution and Creation are not seperate. They are one and the same. Evolution does not disprove creation or existence of God.

Having said this, I also cannot comprehend the idea that there was one moment when "everything came into being". For me God has always been. There was never a point in time (if there is such a thing as time) that God was not. So then I cannot comprehend why there was no creation when there was God. I would say creation also has always been.

I would say there are many universes now and have been. Universes are born and they die. Just as stars and planets are born and die.

Humanity would be just one of Gods many creations. I also believe that there are beings in other worlds probably at a higher plane of consciousness and sentience and probably closer to God than we are.

Just my thoughts.
Regards.

P.S. There should be an option in the poll to vote for "both".;)
 
Bandit said:
When a lobster gives birth to a mouse, let me know.:)
Click to expand...

I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the above idea is as much a misunderstanding - or a deliberate misstatement - of what the theory of evolution says as is the idea that it teaches that humans evolved from apes.

I really wish that people who want to refute evolution would have at least a passing understanding of what that theory actually says.

I'm sorry if that sounds intolerant, but I've taken the time to read all the sides of the argument and I really don't have the inclination to try to have a serious discussion with someone who obviously hasn't taken the time to do so.

And that's one (and only one of many) of the reasons why I cannot take creationsim seriously. Many, if not most, of the advocates of creationism that I have read either have not studied evolution enough to know what they are arguing against, or else they deliberately misstate what the theory teaches and take information out of context in order to bolster their own arguments. If they had serious and valid arguments against evolution, they wouldn't have to do that.
 
I am free said:
I see creation around me every single day. A single cell grows into a perfect little baby. A tiny seed grows into a massive tree (with time :p ). I see creation in each chirping bird and each blooming bud.

I see creation in evolution. Evolution and Creation are not seperate. They are one and the same. Evolution does not disprove creation or existence of God.

Having said this, I also cannot comprehend the idea that there was one moment when "everything came into being". For me God has always been. There was never a point in time (if there is such a thing as time) that God was not. So then I cannot comprehend why there was no creation when there was God. I would say creation also has always been.

I would say there are many universes now and have been. Universes are born and they die. Just as stars and planets are born and die.

Humanity would be just one of Gods many creations. I also believe that there are beings in other worlds probably at a higher plane of consciousness and sentience and probably closer to God than we are.

Just my thoughts.
Regards.

P.S. There should be an option in the poll to vote for "both".;)
Click to expand...

Hmmm, according to scripture, there are at least eleven orders of beings higher than Human, that are closer to God. They are definitely not of the same plane of existence as Man.

I also find it interesting that the universe, with its supposed expansion outward, is not showing galaxies moving farther apart from eachother with time. Though all is moving through space (in an apparent spiral), nothing is moving away from eachother. In fact some galaxies it is reported are colliding with eachother, which means some are over taking others? If all started at once, then the speed of expansion should be relative to that original BANG.

If smaller galaxies were moving faster than larger ones, that would make sense, but when larger galaxies are overtaking smaller ones, and all are moving courtesy of a big Bang of energy release, that is contradictory in the laws of physics.

Also, if the Big BANG occured from one focal point, then all should be expanding outward. None should be coming from the opposite direction or at right angles to the reference point. Unless one wishes to look at the universe like a solar system. Then that would make sense. Except there is no super sun at the beginning of time.

(Sun ignites and spits gasses and dust out. Sun spins causing that around it to spin with it, gasses and dust collect into clumps and become planet bodies orbiting the sun. Solar system is created).

Or is there? Galaxies show the same signature as Solar systems...Why can't we see the universe showing the same signature as the galaxies and solar systems? Maybe we're too far away to see the reality of the universe.

In otherwords...we just don't know.

my thoughts

v/r

Q
 
littlemissattitude said:
I don't mean to be disrespectful, but the above idea is as much a misunderstanding - or a deliberate misstatement - of what the theory of evolution says as is the idea that it teaches that humans evolved from apes.

I really wish that people who want to refute evolution would have at least a passing understanding of what that theory actually says.

I'm sorry if that sounds intolerant, but I've taken the time to read all the sides of the argument and I really don't have the inclination to try to have a serious discussion with someone who obviously hasn't taken the time to do so.

And that's one (and only one of many) of the reasons why I cannot take creationsim seriously. Many, if not most, of the advocates of creationism that I have read either have not studied evolution enough to know what they are arguing against, or else they deliberately misstate what the theory teaches and take information out of context in order to bolster their own arguments. If they had serious and valid arguments against evolution, they wouldn't have to do that.
Click to expand...

The genetic variation in code between the closest primate and Man is considered 2-7% (the Chimpanzee). The genetic variation between Chimpanzee and Gorilla is between 3-10%. Wherein the genetic variation between all of mankind is less than .03%.

Man may have evolved along with primates, but was never kin to one.

No one could say that Racoons are related to Apes, yet racoons have hands (four fingers and an opposable thumb). The apes have hands, or do they? They have four feet that resemble human hands but all four are proportionate to each other, and disproportionate to the hands of man. Yet the racoons front paws are similarly proportionate to the human hand.

Thirty years ago, Neandrathal man was considered a forebare of modern man. Now he is considered a dead end (in other words that version of homosapien did not take, and died off).

Why don't apes have sweat glands in their epidermus? But Humans and horses do? Why does no other mamals have this heat reducing system? Why does man have color vision but apes and horses don't (cats do, and some other animals). Why is it that a pigs heart can sustain a man's life, but an ape's heart cannot? Why is it that a pig's skin can be used to graft over burned human flesh but an ape's cannot?

Don't get me wrong, I think evolution goes hand in hand with creation, or intelligent design. I also think Man came up on his own, and is not an ape offshoot.

Can Apes obtain sentience? Perhaps they already have. But we are not from the same tree, neither are we and cetaceans.

my thoughts

v/r

Q
 
littlemissattitude said:
I really wish that people who want to refute evolution would have at least a passing understanding of what that theory actually says.
Click to expand...

no disrespect, i am glad you have it all figured out & feel so much more intelligent, though i doubt your passing understanding of the theories &/or evidence supercedes mine.

exactly what breed of ape do you belong to?
or do you prefer the porky pig theory for your great grand parents?
:)
 
Quahom1 said:
Or is there? Galaxies show the same signature as Solar systems...Why can't we see the universe showing the same signature as the galaxies and solar systems? Maybe we're too far away to see the reality of the universe.

In otherwords...we just don't know.

my thoughts

v/r

Q
Click to expand...

i enjoyed your recent posts on this Q, especially the questions.;)
 
Bandit said:
i have never met anyone in my life who believes that.
like you know exactly how old the earth is?:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old;).
 
Silverbackman said:
You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old;).
Click to expand...

thanks for that info & at least you are honest.
i dont care how old or young the earth is.:)
 
Silverbackman said:
You don't know that many Christians believe the Earth is 6,000 years old? What planet are ya living on? No I don't know the age of the Earth but I know for sure it is much longer than 6,000 years old;).
Click to expand...

Actually there is no proof of the age of Earth. Speculation, yes. Carbon dating is proven to be faulty.

There is no proof of anything. The fossils we find? We can't carbon date. We find fossilized remains next to perfectly preserved specimens in peat bogs.

Q
 
Bandit said:
What strikes me as curious is this; creation, specifically the God of the bible, has obliterated all comers since conception and explains an incredible amount of data with ONE ENTITY -the bible-( that would be God). Yet evolutionists attack it like it was pulled from the rear of an orangutan last week, brushed down, and pegged up as Religion with a capital R.

To objectively examine the masses of evidence and state that Almighty God is not the best explanation we have leaves me incredulous.
Click to expand...
I'm flattered by your willingness to plagiarise my work.

Out of curiosity, what evidence is there for your Almighty God?

What do your theories (if they can be called anything more than idle conjecture) explain exactly?
Bandit said:
All the dead bones on the planet have not proven evolution.
Click to expand...
What a curious statement.

Bandit said:
The fact that someone can significantly alter the body plan of species does not prove macro-evolution and it does not refute the God of creation.
Click to expand...
Which god are we talking about again?

Bandit said:
It seems to me that macro-evolution requires LOTS of NEW information and NEW genes that make NEW proteins that are found in NEW organs, systems & blah blah blah.
Click to expand...
You've lost me.

Bandit said:
The evolution theories lacks severe evidence.
Click to expand...
What is severe evidence Bandit?

Bandit said:
When a lobster gives birth to a mouse, let me know.:)
Click to expand...
I'll keep you posted. :p
 
Quahom1 said:
Actually there is no proof of the age of Earth. Speculation, yes. Carbon dating is proven to be faulty.

There is no proof of anything. The fossils we find? We can't carbon date. We find fossilized remains next to perfectly preserved specimens in peat bogs.

Q
Click to expand...
Can you provide some reading material that discredits Carbon dating?
 
Jaiket said:
[/font][/size][/color]

I'll keep you posted. :p
Click to expand...


are you from the pig side or the ape side of humans? or something different.:p

do keep me posted
 
Bandit said:
are you from the pig side or the ape side of humans? or something different.:p

do keep me posted
Click to expand...

I am not sure what you mean by this. Is the idea of men and apes evolving from common ancestors repulsive to you?
 
I am free said:
I am not sure what you mean by this. Is the idea of men and apes evolving from common ancestors repulsive to you?
Click to expand...

You can not prove it happened.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top