disproving evolution in 5 minutes or less

[one.opinion]

5 minutes ago, ARGOSY said:

In some ways, then I am an evolutionist.

In the most important sense, I am a creationist. I believe an omnipotent God created everything in the universe (including you and me) and sustains His creation even to this day.

[JTC]

To many of us the word evolution implies everything formed at random without intelligent design. This idea also implies God is far away and distant from mankind. Finally, evolution implies life originated without a Supreme God. If that changed you should use a new term, not evolution.

[one.opinion]

10 hours ago, Debp said:

 I've  also heard that only evolutionists are hired at the universities!

This is both exaggeration and misleading. It is exaggeration because I personally know of several professors at secular universities that are proponents (to one extent or another) of Intelligent Design. It is misleading because when an individual learns enough biology to earn a PhD, there are very few that are skeptical of the evidence supporting evolution. It's a bit like claiming "I've also heard that only people with 10 fingers are hired at the universities!"

[ARGOSY]

8 minutes ago, JTC said:

To many of us the word evolution implies everything formed at random without intelligent design. This idea also implies God is far away and distant from mankind. Finally, evolution implies life originated without a Supreme God. If that changed you should use a new term, not evolution.

Yes I would say that the main difference is that according to the Theory of Evolution, all life came from one common ancestor. 

Creationists claim that there were multiple different organisms to begin with. 

But creationists should acknowledge some speciation/adaptation since then. Eg the various big cats, the various canines (dogs and wolves etc). Even humans have diversified into many races since Adam and Eve. So creationists should be able to admit some adaptation since creation. 

 

Edited October 14, 2019 by ARGOSY

[one.opinion]

4 hours ago, JTC said:

To many of us the word evolution implies everything formed at random without intelligent design.

Believe me, I understand that there are some strong connotations associated with "evolution", but this is not necessarily the case. I have spoken with several of the prominent members of the Discovery Institute that accept much about evolution that more traditional biologists accept.

4 hours ago, JTC said:

Finally, evolution implies life originated without a Supreme God. If that changed you should use a new term, not evolution.

This concept of evolution stretches beyond what is explicit in the theory, which is why many Christians reject evolution without really listening to people (like me) that fully accept a Creator, and believe He created life with the ability to adapt and change over time. Sometimes, people use terms like "theistic evolution" or "evolutionary creation" to note beliefs like I possess. A friend of mine has used the term CASE, for "Christians that Accept the Science of Evolution". Terminology is always tricky!

Edited October 14, 2019 by one.opinion
typo

[one.opinion]

5 minutes ago, ARGOSY said:

Even humans have diversified into many races since Adam and Eve.

Genetic variability within most people groups is so close to variation in the entire human population that the term "race" is really sociological, rather than biological. Biology tells us that we humans are all of the same race, just as the Bible teaches.

[JTC]

I'm smart enough to know that I don't know it all. Further, I don't think the Bible contains all the knowledge God has, that's another foolish idea. And I can easily see that God created 1 breed of dog that became all the breeds we have today. But I don't think a dog ever became a flying bird or an ape. And I certainly don't believe we were once apes. (anyone here remember the skeleton named Lucy? It was supposed to be a cross between a bird and a land animal. Finally, other scientists examined it and it was a phony) So I have no doubt evolutionists are still pulling tricks.

   I read most of Darwin's "The Origin of the Species" in collage when I was an atheist. He mentions God so often I put it down. Many yrs later I was told if Darwin didn't give credit to God no publisher would have taken his book. That makes sense. No matter what Darwin believed his name became synonymous with atheist and atheist is synonymous with evolution. An evolutionist might believe ancient astronauts but I never heard of 1 believing in the Most High God. So I still say evolution is a failed unproven theory.

   None of this is my area of special interests. 

[Deadworm]

Fundamentalists on this site and in general lack the intellectual integrity to investigate evolution as presented by acknowledged secular experts like Dr. Kenneth Miller, who is featured on several YouTube lectures.  So my hunch proved to be true that my brief video (4 minutes+ at the end of p. 37 on this thread) cut from a longer masterful lecture on a powerful new piece of evidence for primate evolution would be too threatening to be viewed here.   I guess you people need to stay within the myopic sheltered confines of the evangelical Ghetto for all your reading (Creationist, Intelligent Design groupies, etc.).  As for me, I feel compelled to swim the troubled waters of honest and open intellectual inquiry, regardless of its impact of my previously sheltered, but passionately devout Evangelical faith.  God deserves HONEST seekers and the company of those who love Him enough to endure the doubt and pain of an honest spiritual quest that needs to consider opposing perspectives from their most articulate and well-informed spokesmen!

[one.opinion]

3 hours ago, JTC said:

An evolutionist might believe ancient astronauts but I never heard of 1 believing in the Most High God.

That all depends on how you define "evolutionist". If it is someone that accepts the theory of evolution, then there are literally millions of us that accept evolution while believing in the Most High God.

[The Barbarian]

8 hours ago, ARGOSY said:

In some ways, then I am an evolutionist. My only gripe with the TOE is that both the fossil record and the Bible indicate that this planet was seeded with multiple fully formed life forms, rather than just one original life form.

It certainly isn't in any of the Bibles I have.   Mine says that life was brought forth by the earth.   It says that life diversified, but doesn't say how that happened.

And the fossil record (not to mention genetics) shows that all living things on Earth have a common ancestor.  If you doubt this, name me any two major groups, said to be evolutionarily connected, and let's see if there's a transitional form.

What would you like to choose?