Creation or evolution?

[Dudley Do-Wrong]

Phil,

The firewall here (at work) will not allow me to open many of the sites posted, I'll have to do it at home

 

[JBowers]

Based on carbon-14 dating, scientists have theorized that the world is billions of years old. When the amount of carbon-14 remaining in dinosaur bones is measured, an extremely tiny amount is found, indicating apparently that these prehistoric animals lived millions of years ago.

The whole article bases its argument and conclusion on this method and assumes this is/was the only method used to determine the age of the eath and when certain animals lived based on fossils. That assumption is incorrect.

 

[GeauxLSU]

David,
Same problem here.

JB,
Exactly. Casting doubt (and I'm using that term liberally), which is far far from DISPROVING, one specific method does not invalidate EVERY method we have which gives, relatively speaking, consistent results. i.e., when you are comparing billions of years to a few thousand years.

I think we all know this goes back to those who do not accept anything that, in their interpretation, APPEARS to go counter to a literal reading of the Bible. Not saying they are wrong, but in the end, that is the issue. Some see a (big) problem there. Some do not.

Again, I personally don't understand the conflict. :

Hunt/fish safely,
Phil

 

[Madsnooker]

I do not view this as a conflict unless you think animals, fish whatever evoved into something else. This has nothing to do with the literal interpretation of the Bible.

I have no idea if God created everthing in 7 days as we no them or not. I do believe that he created everything. I do not believe life just happened and as time went by creatures turned into something else thru evolution. I do believe that creatures died off or adapted to their surroundings.

As far as how God did the creating, I do not know nor does it matter in the grand skeem of things.

 

[JBowers]

I do believe that creatures died off or adapted to their surroundings.

That is evolution

 

[Madsnooker]

JB, I do agree.

But when most pose the question of evolution, they mean something evolving into something else. At least that is what I have always thought.


I would like to say that this thread has shown what a great site this is. I have been on other forums where this type of topic would turn ugly fast. I can't think of a better site to discuss such topics as this one.

 

[hntrchk29]

I Beleive In The Big Bang Theory

God Spoke It And ----bang----- It Happened!!!!
Jessie

 

[Etter1]

The concept of evolution isn't that a single animal faces an environmental stress and simply changes to suit its environment but that animals with genetic mutations find themselves better suited to their environment and therefore pass on their genetics more succesfully than those un-mutated organisms. Over hundreds of millions of years, you get something very different from the original organism. UGA's upper level biology class is entirely based on evolution (including human) and this is what the scientific community agrees is correct. Everyone has their own opinion but this is what is being taught. Now, I figure this will start a real storm but don't shoot the messenger.

 

[Etter1]

By the way, the earth is said to be about 4.5 billion years old.

 

[Throwback]

If evolution is true, why do so many scientists that believe in it concern themselves with "endangered species". Won't the ones here eventually morph into something better anyway.

HHHHHMMMMM, makes you think!


T

 

[GeauxLSU]

If evolution is true, why do so many scientists that believe in it concern themselves with "endangered species". Won't the ones here eventually morph into something better anyway.

HHHHHMMMMM, makes you think!


T

T,
I think they are mainly concerned with the ones MAN endangers. I personally have no issue with an animal going extinct due to it's own obselesence. However, every animal I can think of in recent memory that has gone extinct has been because MAN has directly caused it. THAT, IMHO, is NOT being "good stewards" as we are commanded to be.
Hunt/fish safely,
Phil

 

[Throwback]

So man is not part of the evolutionary process, even though he supposedly "evolved" like everything else? What about the dinosaurs? We surely didn't kill them out by hunting. Why has something not "morphed" into a tyranosaurus rex? What's the fuss about? Everything, according to this silly train of thought, comes from something else, so everything is therefore doomed to become extinct, but not really because everything will change into something else. "A dog is a pig is a goat is a boy" as Ingrid Newkirk of PETA said--or something like that, I don't have the time (or stomach) to look up the exact quote.


T

 

[Etter1]

We're destroying this planet too quickly for most species to evolve in time. The extinction rate has gone up by about 100x since the 1800's

 

[Madsnooker]

ETTER,

can you tell me what species is evolving at this time that may not complete the process becuase they could become extinct. I'm sure UGA will have many examples.

Let me guess, the reason they can't provide that info is becuase the process is so slow it can't be detected.

 

[Randy]

I can give you one good one. Humans.

 

[Etter1]

Evolution has no end result. It keeps going. Humans are a great example. The bubonic plague killed about 1/3 of europe during the middle ages. Your and my ancestors survived because they have some kind of tolerance to the virus. Now, we don't get the plague anymore because we are tolerant of it. The best suited individuals pass on their genetics. We may not look any different but that was evolution....and if you want proof of evolution, I could go on for days. whales have finger bones, humans have wisdom teeth and appendix, anacondas have remnants of legs, humans are genetically closer related to chimpanzees than dolphins are to porpoises. If we didn't evolve from a common ancestor, then god sure made us both with the same mold huh? I don't know where god fits into all of this but there is tons of scientific proof.

 

[Tom Borck]

Evolutionist can not show you a fossill at stage one then stage two and so on and so on. If everything has evolved you would think there would be tons and tons of fossill record to accurately back it up. It just doesn't exist.

.

We are burning them up in our industries, cars and homes......they are called fossil fuels. Can you image the massive amounts of fossile fules under the ground and how many living organisms it took to make this? Hard for me to understand.

I believe in BOTH creation and evolution. Don't ask me to explain...because I can't

 

[Boyd Green]

Wheww!!!

Once again, I thank God I don't have to have all of the answers!!

 

[Madsnooker]

ETTER,

Before Darwin died he said if evolution were true (as far as creatures evolving into something else) there would be millions of transitional fossils. There is not ONE. You cannot just discount this fact.

As far as every example you gave. There is no proof of any kind that those items you mentioned are a result of evolution. How does the plague that hit people that looked exacly as we look like today have anything to do with us evolving from a monkey. By the way, did the monkeys,chimps, whatever, that are here today forget to evolve or are they evolving into humans as we speak? Not trying to be smart, I really want to know your opinion on this.

Just like the fact the coelacanth(sp) that is alive today (just recently discovered of the coast of Madagascar) is a perfect match to fossils from millions of years ago (if the carbon dating is accurate, HEHEHE). There are so many fossils from as far back as you want to see that have perfect matches with living animals today. Alligators, roaches, birds, Coelacanth etc. but no transitional fossils to give merritt to evolution.(again, where a creature evolves into something else). This is a HUGE problem that even some of the most respected evolutionist agree with.

Also, I have read books and listened to many tapes over the years and watched debates on tv concerning creation/evolution and something I've noticed is, there are many, that after years of trying to prove evolution, are now writing books on creation. I have never heard the opposite. If someone has studied such a person I would like to know. I feel this speaks volumes on this issue. But that is just my little opinion.

 

[sr.corndog]

creation

My vote creation why do you ask? Simple question read your bible!