Perhaps 4000 years from now some idiot full of answers will dig up a mexican chiwawa and realize that mice evolved from the wolf.

There is insurmountable empirical evidence for evolution. There are admittedly grey areas in the evolution of species however in contrast to the weight of evidence already in existence, these are not considered to compromise the general theory.

However, There is very little (or none) empirical evidence supporting hypothesis on the origins of life itself, from either the evolutionist or creationist camps.

It is this grey area that allows the ‘debate’ to continue. Without a ‘proven’ explanation for the initial ’spark’ of life. Evolutionists have no right to completely disregard suggestions of the influence of a higher power / intelligence in the creation of life.

Equally absurd to me is the ridiculous evolutionists that deny indisputable empirical evidence for the mutation of dna and the theory of natural selection and insist on denying historical time lines for the development of life as we know it. Which even with current scientific measurement, is conservative at best.

Far too much energy is spent on defending a school of thought, be it evolutionist, IDist or creationist, rather than defending the true scientific process of discovery and comprehension. Discount all possibilities and what you are left with is most likely the truth.

I say ‘most likely’ because knowledge evolves. It is not created!

I am an avid believer in *evolution*

hehe sry :)

God only appeared in physical form to one person after man was banished from Eden, and thats Moses, and God had to shield Moses’ eyes until he had passed, and then he was allowed to view his back.

RE: So, when/if Christians proclaim, “JESUS LIVES!!!”…what?..they are lying, then?

Have you ever even heard of Christianity? The point was that Christ was obedient to God’s will unto death and by his death He himself was the perfect sacrifice to god. Because Jesus had died so pure, he had conquered Death and opened the gates of heaven so that we all might be able to live there.

RE:RE:life

this is only the belief of certain Christians with whom i do not agree. What the Bible teaches us is that by being a good person and loving your neighbor as yourself, you by default believe in God and righteousness, even if you don’t know it.

RE:RE: meaning and purpose

Doesn’t prayer reside within us? Meaning and purpose are discovered within, but who is to say that God is an outside force, and not part of us?

RE:RE: direction

This comment isn’t even logical. You just proved him right with what you are saying, because to ask WWJD, when perhaps breaking a commandment is necessary (which i can’t think of an instance when it would be. why would it ever be necessary to take the life of another), because Jesus is a more holy, godly version of ourself, who through our choice, we are aspiring to be. So asking WWJD is by definition using Christianity to give “direction” to your life.

RE:RE: liberty

True we may be enslaved here on Earth, but that is by Sin, not by God. And God does not say that “if you fuck up, you gon’ burn bitch.” The point is that you live the best life possible, and be the best person you can, and THEN, you are FREE from Death, and can live eternally FREE from the bondage of sin which drags us ever downward into a loveless hell hole.

Biatch.

P.S: I am only slightly Christian, and I have nearly no faith in a higher power, but you should probably know a little bit about Christianity before you go and make yourself look dumb….

But of course if we did take your silly little challenge, and we passed it, what would it change? You’d just say we “fooled” it — but we can’t fool God! Or something like that. So what’s the point?

Jeff: “It just seems, from simple observation, that the weight of the evidence falls on the Creationists side of the scales.”

Knocking holes in evolution, and/or, biology (or, I should say, attempting to do so) does not create nor constitute “evidence” for “Creationists”. Again; non-sequitur/false dilemma. “Creationism” – either by Yahweh & Co, or some other supernatural being – is not the default alternative to Evolution by Natural Selection(which doesn’t even seek to explain the origins of life in the first place). And furthermore, if I recall correctly, you are not anti-evolution, so it’s a moot point, I would think. So, that leaves us…

Where, then, is this *evidence* that all life(whether it evolved, or still its original “kind”) was “Created” by an invisible, conscious being? When/if that evidence is put forth, where is the evidence that this creator is none other than the Christian biblegod?

*Also, can anyone tell me/us *how* biblegod created everything? If not, then you ultimately don’t have a theory, nor explanation, as saying “God did it!” is the equivalent of saying, “I don’t know!”.

Continues….”[biblegod] loves you..”

Fine. Just as soon as this alleged being makes this known to me, itself…..*note—not via you, your neighbor, songs, your church, or ancient manuscripts—then I’ll have to reevaluate my position. Until then, I only see/hear other human beings insisting that it is so.

Closely related— I would still like to know why biblegod presumably had no issues with simply appearing in physical form…. you know, as he supposedly did, frequently, just a few thousand years ago? Again, these appearances hurt no one’s “faith”, nor their “free will”, one iota. I wouldn’t think this a problem at all, for a being who’s supposedly right in our very midst this second, and who’s so concerned about saving “the lost”. Right?

Continues….”[biblegod]died for you….”

So, when/if Christians proclaim, “JESUS LIVES!!!”…what?..they are lying, then?

Continues….”and [biblegod]wants to give you His life, meaning, purpose, direction and liberty.”

RE: “His life”

No, according to doctrine, what “He” wants (and *requires*), first and foremost, is my belief. Otherwise, this supposed “debt” (that I didn’t even incur) would be paid in full.

RE: “meaning/purpose”

Meaning and purpose come from within; they cannot be given away.

RE: “direction”

No one gets their “direction” from “the body of Christ”. Moreover, the supposed “direction” found in the bible is ultimately dependent on *us* to interpret any given situation, and act accordingly. Is “thou shalt not kill” absolute? No, of course not. It is evidentally up to human beings to interpret the circumstances, and act accordingly. It’s silly to ask “WWJD?”….because obviously, “Jesus” might kill; he might not. Thus, there is a human standard higher than the “direction” of “God”.

RE: “liberty”

Excuse me……’whAT? You cannot be serious! Yes, I’m “free” to do what I wish, so long as I don’t mind being incinerated for eternity for not accepting the Christian philosophy as “Truth”, on faith.(which, at this point, would require me to lie to myself)

Can’t find a reply button so posting this new, hopefully final, post. Wintermute, I have not claimed that biologists are incompetent, malicious, imbeciles, or that they have an evil agenda. Where, in anything I’ve posted, did you come up with that?

I agree that you’ve not explicitly stated this. However, if the evidence is as obvious as you state, then either they’re incompetent not to know it, or they do know that evolution is wrong, and are maliciously lying to conceal that fact. Do you see a third option?

I know I do it too (my statement about hundreds of working biologists should not have been made without being prepared to provide examples), largely the nature of this type of forum and the feeling of limited rebuttal space, etc. but you are also fond of not a few sweeping generalizations yourself my friend.

Sometimes sweeping generalisations are correct. It is a fact that well over 99% of working biologists believe (or, at least, claim to believe) that evolution is the best available explanation for the biodiversity we see around us. Is this a sweeping generalisation? Yes. Is it an accurate description of the lay of the land? Yes.

I stand by all the statements I’ve made, and am prepared to defend them in excruciating detail.

If you find no value in the debate forum then your continued prodding and poking of me in this space makes no sense. I wonder if it’s a worthless forum because evolutionists routinely suffer so badly in it, or just because of its inherent flaws?

This is not a “debate”. Debates have a formal structure and rules of engagement. This is an informal discussion. Quite apart from which, as this is happening in writing rather than in speech, it’s a lot easier to pick over specific claims and to ensure that everything gets properly discussed.

Debate is a worthless forum for deciding scientific truth no matter who wins. If the round-Earthers trounce the flat-Earthers in a debate or vice versa, it makes no difference to the state of the evidence.

By the way, this is one debate the evolutionists won, but as you said, “debaters frequently ignore the evidence in favour of making so many absurdly false claims that their opponent cannot hope to rebut them all in any detail in the time allowed. This gives the appearance that the points are valid, which is purely an artefact of the debate format.” Yes I’m aware that I left off the word “Creationists.” That’s how us Creationists roll with it. :)

There is not time limit here, and you’re attached to the biggest repository of human knowledge the world has ever known. Feel free to challenge any point that you don’t feel has been made properly.

Really. I want you to challenge me, to make me demonstrate what I’m claiming. Actually, ideally, I want you to research on your own, and make up your own mind, but better that you make me work than that you just accept what I’m saying without question. If there’s anything I’ve said that you doubt, point it out, and I’ll do my best to support it. If you made points that you think I didn’t properly respond to, let me know and I’ll do my best to meet them. All I ask is that you grant me the same respect.

As for my remarks about Jesus, the name of this blog is “unreasonablefaith.” It’s the overarching theme of most of what is written here. Don’t tell me you haven’t noticed? Ha ha. lol

Yes, but it has nothing to do with this argument. Both atheists and Christians (not to mention Sikhs and Buddhists) can accept or deny a scientific theory on the evidence. Their religion should make no difference, should it? I am more than willing to change my mind, if good evidence is presented.

Not everything posted here is directly and explicitly intended as a refutation of religion.

One final remark, and answer to your question: When I wrote, ” I think what bothers people most are that there are sincere, thinking people who HAVE considered the evidence, who do not share your opinion.”

You retorted

So far, you’ve failed to identify any of these people. There’s a reason for that.

I was inelegantly referring to myself, and others like me who post in places like this (again perhaps an unforgivable superlative) by the hundreds.

Once again, I am eager to see the evidence that convinced you. If you have truly considered the evidence dispassionately and honestly and come to the conclusion that evolution is not a good explanation of the world, then by all means let me see it. What can you possibly seek to gain by keeping it hidden like this?

Even if I don’t find it convincing (and I might well, if it’s as good as you appear to think), at least I’ll be able to understand that your doubt is an honest one.

Without wanting to get into sweeping generalisations, I have enough familiarity with both the science of evolution and with creationist arguments that my default position is that a given creationist has not honestly considered the evidence; if they had, they would not make the arguments they do. As you have yet to make any arguments beyond a couple of appeals to authority, I’m more than willing to reserve judgement in this specific instance until you’ve presented your evidence.

As an honest seeker of truth, I’m sure you can understand why I’d be so excited to see evidence that might overturn everything we know about biology. The opportunity to learn new things is always to be cherished.

Religion:

By the way, it’s all about Jesus. He’s the only thing that’s permanent about any of this.

*cough* belief only, zero verification *cough*

Science: Upheld!
Religion: Overruled!

Notice Christians are no longer saying:
“Geocentrism vs. Heliocentrism: Teach the Controversy”

I know I do it too (my statement about hundreds of working biologists should not have been made without being prepared to provide examples), largely the nature of this type of forum and the feeling of limited rebuttal space, etc. but you are also fond of not a few sweeping generalizations yourself my friend.

If you find no value in the debate forum then your continued prodding and poking of me in this space makes no sense. I wonder if it’s a worthless forum because evolutionists routinely suffer so badly in it, or just because of its inherent flaws?

As for my remarks about Jesus, the name of this blog is “unreasonablefaith.” It’s the overarching theme of most of what is written here. Don’t tell me you haven’t noticed? Ha ha. lol

I feel a little like Albert Brooks in the film “Defending Your Life.” I’m happy with the defense I’ve made. I think it’s at least as cogent and comprehensive as anything posted here rebutting it. I think I’ll just make this my closing statement.

By the way, this is one debate the evolutionists won, but as you said, “debaters frequently ignore the evidence in favour of making so many absurdly false claims that their opponent cannot hope to rebut them all in any detail in the time allowed. This gives the appearance that the points are valid, which is purely an artefact of the debate format.” Yes I’m aware that I left off the word “Creationists.” That’s how us Creationists roll with it. :)

One final remark, and answer to your question: When I wrote, ” I think what bothers people most are that there are sincere, thinking people who HAVE considered the evidence, who do not share your opinion.”

You retorted

So far, you’ve failed to identify any of these people. There’s a reason for that.

I was inelegantly referring to myself, and others like me who post in places like this (again perhaps an unforgivable superlative) by the hundreds.

By the way, it’s all about Jesus. He’s the only thing that’s permanent about any of this.

It was and is the simple fact that the evidence (in my opinion), data, and observation more closely fit the creation model that led me, kicking and screaming, into that camp. That’s why I made, and stand by, the statement about God hiding the evidence for evolution.

Are you planning on citing any of this evidence? I promise I’ll give it a fair shake, and may even become convinced, if it’s as compelling as you think.

That’s also one of many reasons evolutionists rarely win debates in this (USA), or any country, when the winner is decided by an audience poll. It just seems, from simple observation, that the weight of the evidence falls on the Creationists side of the scales.

As you pointed out earlier, science is not decided by mob rule. Who is a better debater has no bearing on what the evidence says.

As I’ve pointed out earlier, creationist debaters frequently ignore the evidence in favour of making so many absurdly false claims that their opponent cannot hope to rebut them all in any detail in the time allowed. This gives the appearance that the points are valid, which is purely an artefact of the debate format.

In arenas where the actual evidence is paramount rather than the rhetorical skill of the presenter (such as laboratories, or courtrooms), creationism loses every time.

I’m the first to admit that that doesn’t constitute proof, but it also makes me question what would? If you’ve actually studied both sides but still (from my point of view) “cannot see the forest for the trees”, what possible fruit can this thread yield?

You could present some of the evidence you’ve repeatedly claimed to have. I’m sure its more convincing that your list of “hundreds” of “working” “biologists” who “reject” evolution. I’ll give it all due consideration.

The important thing, from my perspective, gets lost in the din. Jesus is Who He says He is. He effects lasting, miraculous life change today. Sin is the real and terrible barrier between mankind and our Creator. These are not theories I have, but unassailable experiential Truth. There is also substantial proof of the legal/historical nature, and no I do not feel compelled to provide it in this forum. I have ample proof that it will be debated strongly and argued incessantly, but perhaps never truly considered. That’s a shame, because acceptance of Christ is the only thing that changes someone from within.

What does this have to do with evolution? Whether or not Jesus is the son of God has no more bearing on evolution than it does on relativity. A huge number of Christians agree with you entirely on this point, but do not feel compelled to claim that every living biologist is either incompetent or malicious.

Even if evolution was universally accepted, and had been around 500 years, my interpretation of the data, as it now stands, would still be that it’s an inferior construct to Creationism.

Inferior in what sense?

I think what bothers people most are that there are sincere, thinking people who HAVE considered the evidence, who do not share your opinion.

So far, you’ve failed to identify any of these people. There’s a reason for that.

The number of honest people who have sincerely looked at the evidence and feel that evolution is not a true explanation of the world around us is so close to zero as to make no difference. There are equally as many people who honestly hold the informed belief that the Sun rotates around the Earth, rather than the other way around. Does this mean that geocentrism is as valid as heliocentrism?

We will all stand before the living God someday. By comparison, this question probably won’t even matter when we do, but my suspicion is that none of us have it all figured out.

You’re right. We don’t know it all. But we do know a lot about how organisms have changed over time. And if you don’t think that the subject is all that important, why not just accept that the 99.999% of practising biologists probably know what they’re talking about? Why assume that they must either be imbeciles to have missed so much evidence that is so obvious to you, or that they have some evil agenda for lying to everyone?

Very good points, especially the material I had not previously read, which brought into question the veracity of some of the claims made in the “Expelled” movie. Without further research I’m not prepared to concede particular points, but I can certainly see this discussion with a more accurate appreciation of your perspective.

Still, as I probably do from my vantage point, I believe you continue to suffer from wearing the evolutionary blinders. It was and is the simple fact that the evidence (in my opinion), data, and observation more closely fit the creation model that led me, kicking and screaming, into that camp. That’s why I made, and stand by, the statement about God hiding the evidence for evolution.

That’s also one of many reasons evolutionists rarely win debates in this (USA), or any country, when the winner is decided by an audience poll. It just seems, from simple observation, that the weight of the evidence falls on the Creationists side of the scales.

I’m the first to admit that that doesn’t constitute proof, but it also makes me question what would? If you’ve actually studied both sides but still (from my point of view) “cannot see the forest for the trees”, what possible fruit can this thread yield?

I’m sure I’ve left some of your points unchallenged, as you have mine, but this tit for tat leads nowhere. Both of us are verbally strong, and intellectually robust enough to continue this nonsense, but to what end?

The important thing, from my perspective, gets lost in the din. Jesus is Who He says He is. He effects lasting, miraculous life change today. Sin is the real and terrible barrier between mankind and our Creator. These are not theories I have, but unassailable experiential Truth. There is also substantial proof of the legal/historical nature, and no I do not feel compelled to provide it in this forum. I have ample proof that it will be debated strongly and argued incessantly, but perhaps never truly considered. That’s a shame, because acceptance of Christ is the only thing that changes someone from within.

He loves you, died for you, and wants to give you His life, meaning, purpose, direction and liberty.

And Ed, I did check out those sources. Sorry if my ignorance caused you exasperation. There are a great many things which everyone in this discussion has demonstrated ignorance about. You appear to not fully appreciate (perhaps comprehend) the difference between assertions and proof, but then, neither do I at times. We both have blinders on. Even if evolution was universally accepted, and had been around 500 years, my interpretation of the data, as it now stands, would still be that it’s an inferior construct to Creationism.

I think what bothers people most are that there are sincere, thinking people who HAVE considered the evidence, who do not share your opinion.

We will all stand before the living God someday. By comparison, this question probably won’t even matter when we do, but my suspicion is that none of us have it all figured out.