Should we reopen the book on Evolution?

flabengal,

Woudl you be able to believe that evolution is God's process of creation? As opposed to the very simplified version of creation that we read about in the Bible?

 

Sure, God could do it that way if he wanted to. I just don't think the evidence points in that direction.

To sum up my position:

-Evolution and Creationism are the only two explanations available.

-For atheists to be correct Evolution MUST BE TRUE.-If Evolution is untrue then the atheists must admit they have no plausible explanation for Life without a Creator.

-Because of the position they are in atheists will push the Evolution theory and "cook the books" in their favor. I don't believe that scientists are the only human beings that are incapable of corruption.

-So the question is whether there is evidence that the "experts" or in this case scientists have in fact cooked the books and I believe there is plenty of evidence that this does take place.

Examples:

-Scientitst- Global Warming

-Sociologists- The Idea that Men and Women are essentially the same and gender differences are a result of socialization.

-Financial Realm- The Treasury is committed to a strong dollar.

-Government Bodies- The Warren Commission; 9/11 Commission; The Federal Reserve

-Medical Field- Abortion is not the killing of an unborn child (obviously it is).

Religious- Anglican Bishops say homosexuality is not against Christ's teachings.

Athletic- SEC Office says the refs are correct regarding Peterson interception. (Sorry Bama fans, just an example. Webster also should have been flagged against Bama a few years back in Tiger Stadium.....oh well...)

Judicial- The Supreme Court legislating from the bench. This is completely unconstitutional. The Congress should make the laws.

just some examples to clarify the point. Experts and authorities are not exempt from human failings and corruption. In fact, the more power they have over others then the more likely it is that they become corrupt.

 

mostly creationist science tries to poke holes in evolutionary science.

man existed with dinosaurs. nessie and some strange aquatic animal caught by jap fishers 40 yrs ago prove it.

carbon dating is inaccurate because it is based on the speed of light. einstein was wrong because the speed of light is not constant, it used to travel exponentially faster so the earth really is 6000 yrs old.

the "firmament" was a layer of water in the atmosphere that protected pre-Noah people from more cosmic rays and explains why they lived 900+yrs. the firmament doesnt exist anymore because it came down in the flood.

blah blah blah

so this explains it. heston caught some monkey (excuse me, chimpanzee) virus that caused him to go crazy and cling to guns and religion.

"www.conservapedia.com" youve got to be kidding!

if you are going to suspend reason to believe in a god then why not suspend it to believe in any and everything?

 

Not to be an ass here but I think that is one of the most flawed things about this board. I don't understand how you think whether or not a statement is true depends on the speaker.

A scientist says that global warming is true. A truck driver says he thinks global warming is untrue and is an excuse to charge him more money to drive his truck.

The globe warming is not dependent upon these two people. Either it is or it isn't. Period.

I don't understand your objection to the info I posted previously. Is it true or not? Do you want me to find a nicer sounding website? Are you telling me the Piltdown man was not, in fact, a fraud?

You people need to stop bowing down to the secular authorities...they are no better than the religious authorities. Think for yourselves.

 

Well, science is about the material world. It would be hard to test the immaterial world using material tools.

Also, regarding the supernatural processes I think they have done some experiments regarding the ability of people to pray and affect the material world. If I can find it wouldn't that be evidence of the ability of immaterial things to affect the material?

My point hinges on the idea that there is an immaterial world.

And regarding the origins of life and evolution, I think that the one totally depends on the other. If evolutionary theory can't explain the origins of life then isn't the theory dead in the water?

Also, regarding evidence directly contradicting evolution what about the polonium?

bbl

 

Red:

Was Piltdown Man a hoax or not? Are there known hoaxes still published in textbooks? You are more involved with this than me....I assume this is part of your walking around knowledge.....

link:

Theory of Evolution and Cases of Fraud, Hoaxes and Speculation - Conservapedia

 

Piltdown man is not a very good example. It was always questioned and scientific scrutiny is what exposed it as a hoax. It did not fit with the evolutionary theory of the day, and that was recognized immediately after its discovery, and what led to its exposure as a fake.