Is Evolution a Dangerous Idea? If so, why?

oh really?? Perhaps you could share that with me because Ive been in the field for over 40 years and Ive yet to hear of anything other than denial of the scientific evidence compiled by universities and other scientific institutions .

I think youre just funning me. You guys cant even agree on the age of the earth, and most all of Creation "Science" revelations are total Bullshit

Name one. I keep a fairly complete file of the more notable debates between guys like Duane Gish and Stephen Gould, or Bill Nye and "Dr Ham".

With all due respect you can’t definitively PROVE they’re bullsh*t.You can only HOPE they are bullsh*t. This HOPE being based upon sound logic that you have not fault with yet....mainly due to the fact that you either don’t understand it or don’t want understand it.

As philosophy only deals in black and white...until you or anyone else can provide definitive proof evolution remains a potential myth...one needs to get used to this FACT.

Share a piece of your evidence with me. dont feel shy. Id love to see what Ive been missing. AS I said, Creationists cant even decide on arth's age.(You have YECs and OECs). Science has compiled the evidence that you guys try to pick on (to no avail).

I think that youve totally missed the bot as far as information goes. You really dont have any idea whats out there so you just paddle along
in your research free environment.
PS can you even name some actual Creationist Research that is going on today??

Did you know that colleges that offer biology or science degrees are either not accredited or else the Creation "science" degrees are classified as religion studies.

YECs all believe that all animals were created together and that humans lived among dinosaurs. I can disprove that very easily if you can understnd stratigraphy, paleontology orradio isotopic dating.

Listen if you think you can prove it carry on.There are many that say you can’t.Personally my claim to you is that you HOPE that you can prove it that’s all..The reason I say this is because I have not seen you in the news yet taking all the adulation for this definitive proof for all the world to scrutinise and quite frankly laugh at.

you dont read very well do you. Id never said that proof was the end,
Overwhelming Evidence is how we draw our conclusions. Proofs are for solid geometry and more extended fields of mathematics.

I cant evience anything unless you give me an example of what you think is evidence of CReationism.
Dont claim your superiority without any example.
verstehen sie?

Let me know what IT is please OK? your the one who is expressing a belief in your evience.

You know how this works???

Pretty Sure of yourself aint you? . Give me an "it" that you blieve support your belief system

Remind me again how do these evolutionary scientist explain the total lack of morphing creature evidences again? What made up science do they provide again? .....is it timescales?......can’t quite remember that laugh...

It's not about 'morphing' creatures. It's about nature and evolution. Humans belong in the primate family of animals. The only thing special about humans are our bigger brains, and our ability to use our hands.

How do you arrive at that statment??? Its all wrong but its interesting.
Theres a neat little book by Sean Carrol called "Making of the Fittest" which gives many examples of how we have seen , what you call "morphing" in a species within human timescales. (In other words volution has occured within the timespans within which human observers could observe the change and, as it turns out, the earliest of preserved specimens provide enough genetic material that we can map the actual genes that were responsible for the evolutionary chnge under observation.

One series of species are cichlid fishes that had been trapped behind dams built in the early industrial revoultion (late 1700's) and had become genetically modified wherein they now have totally different mouth structures and eyes for silty water as compared to the founder population.. Also several fin structures enabling the fish to use their pectorals for feeling their way through murky river water.

There lots more examples from birds to fish to howler monkeys to Ethiopean wolves etc.


You actually believe that humans existed with dinosaurs and the earth is but a few thousand yars old. You believe in a worldwide flood too?

Darwin HOPED that the gaps would be filled 150 years ago.The attempts to plug the gaps are admirable but nowhere near convincing enough for many.The biblical flood evidence is very persuasive however.What about about the red blood cells found in dinosaur bones and the skin tissue?Have the evolutionists plugged that gap with poor science yet?

Nowhere in the geological record is there any evidence of a worldwide flood. There was a period called the Cryogenian (bout 750 Million yers ago) hen the earth was a ball of ice (No evidence of humans though, nor dinosaurs or trilobites.
There are a number of papers about the occurrence of red blood cells in The duckbill dinosaurs and a few carnivorous dinos from the Hell Creek Fm. The entire mass was an example of encapsulation an preservation through iron reactivity. (Haem is iron ). Weve been able to add to the list of the types of chemical fossilization that occurs .Weve seen Wax deposits from the Carboniferous , amber (another organic series of benzoquinones that were preserved).
Saponification (formation of soap and wax) has occured in fossils from the Pleiocene and OIL is actually an organic fossil too .
So the tabulation of different kinds of fossilization bears nothing on the validity of volution and paleontological evidence. The fact that the tem from UNC had to crack the rock that contained the blood cell waxy deposit gives strong evidence of the age of the bone eenecloosures.


Darwin was pretty muh right on. He had no idea how right he ws.Imagine he made som relly dumb observations and conclusions.Using his method of computing, his idea of heritability of traits that are transmutating (his terms) would run out an disappar after about 7 generations. He had no idea about genetics and how genetic information is often preserved , mutated, "turned off" or enfolded by Methylation and peptide linking. A little monk didnt discover that until about 6 years after Darwin had his edition 1 of"The Origin of Species..." published. Darwin went to his grav, mostly ignorant of genetics .Genetics provided a method by which trits were actually preserved and species could change while still maintaining their Class linkages for time immemorial.

glad you asked, Carroll doesnt explain where Darwin got it wrong but Stephen Gould, in his"The STructure of Evolutionary Theory" does,

The creationist have plenty of evidence of a world wide flood.The fact that you don’t agree with it is a completely separate matter.They don’t agree with the evidence that the secular scientists put forward.Red blood cells and skin tissue found on dinosaur bones suggests that these creatures were around in our recent history just as the bible suggests.The geological records should be full of thousands if not millions of examples of morphing creature types.We should be tripping over the stuff.Ziltch.The point I am making is that there are sound completely opposite arguments to the secularist views that people should be made aware of.Anyway,SELF is embroiled within all the sciences.ENTANGLED...so similar debates to this need to be going on across all the sciences.

Obviously you have no idea about what you are trying to impress us with.
1. Universal Flood--This is total Bullshit because for every age since the Hadean we have full stratigraphic records of deposits in streams , lakes, rivers etc, as well as sand dunes and loess. Obviously, if theres a stream, it indicates that there is running fresh watr on lnd.
Whether you wih to believe it is immaterial because all the data fits and is a compltely usful tool in mapping of geological resources. A universal Flood would lave a special kind of deposit and we dont see these deposits overtoppingland masses. If you believe in a Flood, you cannot possibly accept the science of Global Tectonics (continental drift), because theres gotta be a continental mass or masses that exist.
The Bible is a compilation of tales for development of anything but science.

2, The geological record is actually full of fossils of creatures an plants "Morphing" from one form to another. It also includes the full record of the entire life spans of entire Phyla of living things (plants, animals, archae etc). We are fining new fosil beds almost weekly and these deposits of stratigraphic material give us a lear picture of deep time.
How do you think oil is found?? Certainly not by Creationist thinking.

Look, you are totally free to live your belief system, just dont try to pass it off as scientific knowledge or to further pollute our kids minds with your Baseless (evidence-free) bullshit in public school biology . Well take you to court and win , as weve done for more cases than Rudy Giuliani has brought in the 2020 election.

The only case your side ever won in the USwas the Dayton Tennessee "Scopes Trial" and that was merely a set-up to test Tennessee's Butler Laws requiring that evolution be struck from the HS cience curricula. Even though SCops lost in the trial, the appeals caused the Butler Laws to be dropped almost 25 yers later

If you believe that your side is right you should not do any deep investigation into atomic energy (since half life and nuclear constants are known quantities like pi). Or Im afraid youd be stunned in how the genomes can be tracked through derivative species through recent time (The present is key to the past).
The thing that kinda does piss me off is how the CReationists use fraudulent science to try to make their point. Like the "red blood cell" You relly dont realize that the deposits of the contained red blood cells were dated by several methods of radio nuclide as well as stable isotope methods and all agreed that the samples were from the id Cretaceous. (Creationists tried to pull some BS over the eyes of the public by trying to date 67 MILLION year old fossils by Carbon 14 (a totally invalid test at ages beyond about 55 K years. The creationists had even "doped" a few specimens with shellac (a recent CC14 vessel) and got phony dates of 40K yars before the lab actually discovered the tricks involved and dismissed the sample validity.

As Richard Dawkins once said,
"the reason I accept standard science in evolution theory is that all the data WORKS" . There are literally hundreds of thousands of research scientists involved in all aspects of the sciences underpinning evolutionary theory and they all tightly coalesce over the same facts and these facts are yrly being further evidenced by new more complete findings tht securely fit within the overall theory. Right now the research is more involved with applications of the theory not just describing fossils in their environment.
What ar the Creationists doing?? Theyre busy tryin to , either support some Biblical stories with Bullshit or else are involved with quasi scientistic writing in the fields of ID .

You guy hve more problems with your own kind than you do with science. SCience easily argues down your points of discussion (its just not that important though), what you guys have is arguments about "old Earth", "Young Earth" "Theistic Evolution" "Intelligent Design by first cause or an actual DSesigner".

ACtually all of geoscience rejects the " Biblical Flood" idea with really indisputable evidence as I spoke above. The fact that we have water borne deposits from periodic floods all over the world , at totally different geologic times is borne by really strong stratigraphic evidence (This is evidence that Creationists ignorantly dismiss)

SCientists just arent that stupid as you seem to try to impress. I include myself (as a practicing geochemist /geologist with several patents and contributions to the work sheet). When I was teaching in undergrad and graduate level geoxciences, I only had two students in 15 years who, enrolled as "stealth Creationsits" who wound up dropping out because they couldnt accept the overwhelmiing mounds of evidence for an old, Flood-free, evolutionary driven planet. Ive had many other students who came in as family driven believers in CRetionism who learned how to think through the scientific revelations and came to their own conclusions where science was right.

Hey, don't take it personally...you can have your views but I would encourage the "kids" to make up their own minds. The FACT is that there are enormous gaps in convincing evidences and also there are other alternative views for deciphering the same information.You are totally free to live your belief systems as well.Remember all any one has is a HOPE that their belief systems are true.ANSWERS IN GENESIS WEB SITE KIDS...LOOK IT UP.

I'm 100% certain that he's not taking it personally.

You're still pretending that he's talking about a belief system based on faith, and that you're espousing a carefully constructed approach with independently verifiable information.

Sorry, but you've got it 100% backwards.

At once as eloquent as it is persuasive.

What evidence are you talking about jasper?

Hey balanced views are the order of the day.

One can sit on one side of the fence with our belief systems and then divide again to justify our views .

Do you understand this concept?

The negative nihilists do it all the time, this is how they come to the hopeful conclusion that good is bad and bad is good.