why I hate evolution..

Part 1 of 2
Evolution is just a bad idea.
It’s been passed off as fact, claims to be scientific, and is offer as natural explanation for creation without the need for a supernatural God.
However when you dig into it you find that Evolution and creation actually have more in common than most people think. Creation has a supernatural God, but Evolution has a few supernatural events that have to take place, plus it doesn’t follow the scientific method. If Evolution truly followed the scientific method it would be bad hypothesis and not a theory. The only reason it’s a theory is the alternative is undesirable to most people.
Below are some examples of supernatural events in evolution….

1st the cause for the big-bang, it can’t be explained, but the going theory is our universe was created by an unexplainable event outside our universe, maybe something like another universes colliding… This concept that a universe outside our own was the cause of our universe is the same idea that creationist has, we just say the other universe is called heaven and God hangs out there. The big bang is almost the same idea you all just removed God out and call whatever happened that cause the big bang some accident.

2nd supernatural event was atoms began to forum a few nanoseconds after the big-bang…. So basically the law of conservation of mass is violated, (matter and energy can’t be distorted or created) was violated. Here matter, energy, and space/time is all being created, so evolution can violate basic physics laws when help the theory out, I guess.

3rd supernatural event, life created itself.

So above is few supernatural event, yet evolution is all scientific. Evolution is not a theory, it’s a hypothesis pasted off as theory as solid as gravity, and yet doesn’t even follow the scientific method. The scientific method in a nut shell…

Ask a Question
Do Background Research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment and/or making observations
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
Communicate Your Results

So what happens when you apply Evolution to this method??????

QUESTION: did all life evolution as oppose to some type of intelligent design
Background Research : (could take days talking about this, but we’ll just say it seem possible evolution might have happen)

Construct a Hypothesis: all life evolved from a signal cell organism that created itself naturally 4.5 billion years ago.

Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment: Now things get interesting, the whole "theory" is based with life creating itself, it's the building block for Evolution and where we all came from. Yet every experiment under natural and unnatural conditions to create life has failed. The closest anybody has ever came I believe was to create a protein, and that a far cry from life. Now if the scientific method was really followed this so called “theory” did not pass the experimental stage and is truly a hypothesis, in fact with the numerous of failed attempts at creating life, it seem to be a bad hypothesis.

If the next step is to Analyzer your data and draws a conclusion, how is it concluded that the hypothesis is now theory with no experimental evidence that life can create itself.

So here is why and how evolution became a so called theory; it’s all opinionate and objective reasoning. That just simply means observations are made, and then they are made fit into the theory. This is the exact opposite what is supposed to be done when proving a hypothesis. The experimental stage is supposed to be fair and objective, but it’s not when comes to evolution. Chimps have 98% similar DNA is go example of this, what does this tell us.

Is this an example of life creating itself, No!!, but what I can do is take this observation and apply to an evolution theory…..because humans and chips have 98% the same DNA I can conclude that chimps and humans have a common origin from a single cell organism.

Here what’s bad about that, with that type of reasoning it’s just as valid to apply a conclusion to another hypothesis. …. because humans and chips have 98% the same DNA I can conclude that chimps and humans have a common origin from a single creator.

All of evolution is based on this type of reasoning. Now, just because it may be logical to apply an observation to evolution does not make it correct to actually do so, nor does it negate the fact the first part of the hypothesis has failed in every experimental attempt, which is life can’t seem to create itself.

part 2 of 2

So why do people believe and fight for evolution…well for a few reasons..
1. They have been convinced by what they think is good a science.
2. They just blindly believe whatever the popular opinion is.
3. I can’t see God, so the logical explanation is evolution.
4. They don’t like the alternative (God) so they use denial to continue to believe in the evolution.

Ok, so 1-3 on that list isn’t too bad, but I think most people that truly fight for evolution fall into being number 4, denial. Now if you think people don’t use denial to defend this belief I can prove it. Evolutions say dinosaurs existed a little over 200 million years ago, and were not on the earth as the same time as man. It thought you as kid and ingrained into your mind along with everybody else. But is popular opinion a fact, or something we heard was fact so many times we take for granted. So what would happen if there was evidence to contradict this theory, per the scientific method contradicting evidence would mean the theory would go back to a hypothesis or would just show the theory was flat out wrong. However what is really happening in science is when contradicting evidence is found it is sweep under the rug, and is denial prevents evidence from being considered. Many text documents both biblical and non-biblical talk about dragons on the earth. Dragons/ dinosaurs: tamatos and tomahtos, they are same thing, tons of them mention in ancient text; this is ignored despite documentation from many ancient civilizations. Not to mention drawings of them, there is a very detailed drawing of Stegosaurus in an ancient Cambodian temple. How did they draw something they didn’t see, that really can’t be justified. Oh, yeah 1000s of text account is fictional and every drawing is a hoax. Even if there is no evidence for a hoax it has to be because it doesn’t fit into today’s theories. The evidence is right in front our faces, but for some reason we refuse to look. Next you may ask why haven’t and fossils been found with people in the same layer as dinosaurs, well they have, but active denial by the majority that wants to be in evolution has prevented this from being considered as evidence. Just google “Amazing Discovery Near Montrose, Colorado”. In fact tons of evidence in the fossil record is ignored if it debunks evolution, and only fossils that support the evolutionist hypothesis is considered as evidences. If it not ignore an excess is made up, if a human fossil is found in the wrong layer, they are miners, that’s why they were there.

To sum up all the above,
Evolution is a bad hypothesis and no less more supernatural then creation, it starts with life created itself yet never has been experimentally proven. The backbone of Evolution is unproved, with many failed attempts. Observations are made to fit the theory, and don’t prove life created itself. Even the very act of evolving doesn’t prove life can create itself. Any observation that contradicts evolution is omitted from the hypothesis or is assumed a hoax.

reply to post by Tbrooks76


I suggest you go learn a little about the theory of evolution before you waste anymore time trying to prove it wrong, and I stress waste and trying heavily....

As well...

The big bang isn't part of the theory of evolution. at all. in any way what so ever... no matter how hard you want it to.

reply to post by Tbrooks76


The first two "super natural events" have not much to do with evolution, but the creation and source of the Universe as we know it. For more information regarding such events I suggest you take a look at this thread I made a few weeks ago: Before The Big Bang

3rd supernatural event, life created itself.

Yes, the very first self-replicating organisms must have been created via some extremely rare occurrence... however, you must understand a highly unlikely event is neither impossible nor super natural.

They don’t like the alternative (God) so they use denial to continue to believe in the evolution.

That's rich coming from a person who creates a thread titled "why I hate evolution". Hypocrite much?

reply to post by Tbrooks76

just google “Amazing Discovery Near Montrose, Colorado”.

I did. You get one hit from "discoverynews, which is in no way affiliated with the discovery channel mind you, and 2 other direct hits.

This thread, and the thread you probably lifted that link from.

There are various reasons for that being in the same layer, it's interesting yes, but to date, no humanoid fossils have been dated back far enough for man to have existed with dinosaurs.

As for cave paintings depicting dinosaurs. Well, we have pictures of what WE think they look like too, and guess what we had to go on? the same fossils those people probably encountered.

I could go on, but i'm sure others are already on the way.

I get the point your trying to make but you mixed in a lot of things that don't actually pertain to evolution. Evolution doesn't attempt to explain how life was created, how the the universe was created....

I'll attempt to summarize your hypothesis though...

"Even an evolutionist must admit there was some "God", or creator forces, prior to life on Earth"

I guess these science debunkers will never bother learn what is the theory of evolution is... instead they mix abiogenesis, big bang, and crap together be like "see its don't make sense" *sigh*

People are not angry at god, they feel stupid to believe or have believed in something for so long on just someone else's words and it make sense less and less from each scientific discovery

creation is just a "man... i have no frking clue how that happened, so im gonna say GOD!" man's theory.

reply to post by KnawLick

"Even an evolutionist must admit there was some "God", or creator forces, prior to life on Earth"

I doubt you'll get them to say god. But the fact remains, all we can explain is what happened after that first spark, we can't explain what that first spark was.

This doesn't mean we won't ever though.

My opinion has always been, how else would a "god" ensure a thriving biologically diverse planet such as ours without the mechanism of evolution to drive it?

Why, for some, does it have to be black and white, god or evolution, I think they both mesh pretty darn well.

Even if evolution were suddenly falsified tomorrow, that wouldn't mean the torch automatically passes to creationism. That's not how science works. It's a creationist false dichotomy to suggest otherwise.

reply to post by luciddream

creation is just a "man... i have no frking clue how that happened, so im gonna say GOD!" man's theory.

Isn't it though? And really, if it was willing to adapt to the science as we learn it, it would actually be a theory, but to believe it currently, you have to ignore documented science, and I don't play that....

I liken it to the native americans.

Daddy, where did that rock come from?
native: Well son, the rock god came and created it, just like the sun god creates the light, and the wind god creates the winds

Science: Well son, that rock formed over millions of years probably from a much larger rock that itself was manipulated by years of erosion and pressure and various chemical and geological systems.

I'd rather know why the sky is blue, the mechanism that makes it appear blue, than be given some happy go lucky "god did it" bs answer.

reply to post by phishyblankwaters

Why, for some, does it have to be black and white, god or evolution, I think they both mesh pretty darn well.

Because if they accept evolution, they have to discount their bible. If we can just get rid of the bible and other ridiculous fictional texts, religion would be a much easier thing to coexist with. I have no problem with believing in a deity of some sort, but it's the discounting of scientific evidence simply because the bible doesn't agree that irks me, and the ones who use that bible as evidence of itself--make me want to slam my head into a brick wall because I may as well do that then argue why that is so wrong.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
reply to post by phishyblankwaters

 

Why, for some, does it have to be black and white, god or evolution, I think they both mesh pretty darn well.

Because if they accept evolution, they have to discount their bible. If we can just get rid of the bible and other ridiculous fictional texts, religion would be a much easier thing to coexist with. I have no problem with believing in a deity of some sort, but it's the discounting of scientific evidence simply because the bible doesn't agree that irks me, and the ones who use that bible as evidence of itself--make me want to slam my head into a brick wall because I may as well do that then argue why that is so wrong.

Seriously.. i been saying that.. i mean if you have a person god, a god just for you, it would be so simple, the problem starts when a community gets together and pray to a god and make rules and regulation that's doesn't make sense in real life.

i mean, i wonder how many men died saying earth is round just because of some bull*** rules.

Simple solution, believe in a personal god, abandon text and rules and regulation, don't mention you personal god to others.

I mean if people look at certain rules in some holy text. YOU KNOW IT WAS MADE BY MEN! ITS BLATANTLY OBVIOUS, MEN WHO WANTED CONTROL OVER MASSES AND TREATED WOMEN AS BELONGING.

Just because you hate evolution doesn't make it not true.. there's plenty of evidence supporting it.. Even mainstream religion is beginning to accept evolution..

And as already stated - the big bang is not part of evolution.

There are SIX different types of "evolution" and only one is proven fact.

Please watch this video I uploaded to my youtube:

Originally posted by john_bmth
Even if evolution were suddenly falsified tomorrow, that wouldn't mean the torch automatically passes to creationism. That's not how science works. It's a creationist false dichotomy to suggest otherwise.

And evolution being suddenly false tomorrow seems to me to be beyond unlikely .. at most, some element of evolution might need to be re-thought or adjusted .. but you're right, the torch most certainly wouldn't pass to creationism..

reply to post by Tbrooks76


you cant imagine an amazingly advanced and powerful being god,,, setting the universe into motion, with the intent of creating diverse life forms on trillions of planets,,, and have these energy capturing and utilizing mechanisms sort themselves out,,, decide their own fate and path,,,, organize themselves,,,,,, like computer programs that can "evolve" and fix themselves....... self replicating...... physical representations of math equations creating new formulas, working off of the original templates,,,,,

reply to post by CALGARIAN


And there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of gods spoken of over the ages. None have been proven true.

Originally posted by CoherentlyConfused
reply to post by CALGARIAN

 

And there have been hundreds, if not thousands, of gods spoken of over the ages. None have been proven true.

Precisely right.. even if you believe only 1 of 6 forms of evolution are proven fact then you have zero of a huge number of creationism theories that have been proven as fact ..

Evolution: 1, Creationism: 0

I can live with that.

reply to post by CALGARIAN


Please stop posting the lies and ignorance of fraudster Kent Hovind. It's a very well trodden and refuted path.

Originally posted by phishyblankwaters
reply to post by Tbrooks76

 

I suggest you go learn a little about the theory of evolution before you waste anymore time trying to prove it wrong, and I stress waste and trying heavily....

As well...

The big bang isn't part of the theory of evolution. at all. in any way what so ever... no matter how hard you want it to.

the big bang is required to any evolution model, and there is nothing to prove wrong, a theory requires evolution to prove right and this 1st step in the evolution theory that all life was came from an single cell organisms is improven