Why do people deny evolution?

@Briancrc,

If George lived on the West Coast, more than likely he also was at Tule Lake.

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Our mother converted to christianity when we were in concentration camp during WWII

Did she ever say why she converted to the religion associated with the country that imprisoned her?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Stockholm syndrome ?

Quote:

Stockholm syndrome, or capture-bonding, is a psychological phenomenon described in 1973 in which hostages express empathy and sympathy and have positive feelings toward their captors, sometimes to the point of defending and identifying with the captors.

1 Reply

@parados,

Then where is the link between Australopithecines and Hominina. There is no link although our science 'assumes' that there is one. Perhaps there is and we just haven't found it yet however this shows that evolution is mostly opinion. I am not saying that evolution didn't happen I was just telling you how religion substitutes for answers we do not have about our condition-answers we will never have because we are not evolved enough to understand the complexities of the world around us.

1 Reply

@spooky24,

Quote:

Then where is the link between Australopithecines and Hominina. There is no link although our science 'assumes' that there is one.

Once again. Your ignorance doesn't mean science has no evidence.

Quote:

I was just telling you how religion substitutes for answers we do not have

God of the gaps isn't evidence. It is nothing but replacing the unknown with your own superstitions. Science is filled with unknowns. The difference is science accepts they don't have all the answers ans seeks to find them with evidence.

1 Reply

@parados,

Thankfully I don't have minutes, hours, days and years to hang out on the internet and beg someones attention.

Over all our combined science knowledge is somewhere around 10% of the cosmos we inhabit. We know more about the bottom of the ocean than we do the atmosphere we live in.

That is why science is applied because in the next 10 seconds something could happen that would change everything we thought we knew.

0 Replies

@Fil Albuquerque,

Quote:

Stockholm syndrome ?

Maybe, but I doubt it.
Too bad CI is unable or unwilling to answer the question. But I'm not sure whether his silence or his answer would tell us more.

0 Replies

@JimmyJ,

Can you give me one example of macroevolution beyond speculation. Show me how many mutations had to happen in perfect order to evolve from single celled asexual reproduction to multicellular heterosexual reproduction, and how that can happen by random mutations with no intelligent guidance. I think there must be an entity that can move any atom in the universe as easily as our thoughts move the atoms in our minds.

3 Replies

@brianjakub,

Evolution is a kind of intelligence.

0 Replies

@brianjakub,

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/05/100513-science-evolution-darwin-single-ancestor/

2 Replies

@brianjakub,

The answer is, it's not possible for random mutation and/or natural selection to do the job.

This is from CI's linked source which evolutionists believe supports their case.

Quote:

All species in all three domains share 23 universal proteins, though the proteins' DNA sequences—instructions written in the As, Cs, Gs, and Ts of DNA bases—differ slightly among the three domains (quick genetics overview).

The 23 universal proteins perform fundamental cellular activities, such as DNA replication and the translation of DNA into proteins, and are crucial to the survival of all known life-forms—from the smallest microbes to blue whales.

But that of course proves nothing. If Life was intelligently designed by a creator, why would he reinvent the wheel every time he created a new species? Or to put it in information technology terms, It's an obvious case of software reuse.

No, it doesn't prove that God exists or that he did it but neither does it prove that he didn't.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Quote:

If Life was intelligently designed by a creator,......

Not creator; evolution.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

By definition random mutations means no intelligence. Natural selection implies intelligence, because the word selection implies intelligence. Nature selects who will live or die without intelligence. That is logical and comprehensible. But, nature cannot select the order of the mutations to increase the complexity needed for macro evolution. That selection needs to be made and is extremely complex, with a very small number of mutations, in a very precise order that will work without killing the organism and still reach higher complexity. That selection cannot happen randomnly.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Quote:

Evolution is a kind of intelligence.

Interesting, but Darwin specifically rules out any purpose, intent, foreknowledge of goals, planning, etc. Evolution only allows for whatever succeeds - lives, what doesn't, dies.

What is your definition of intelligence that meets Darwin's evolutionary model?

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Evolution doesn't imply purpose, intent, or foreknowledge. It just happens based on the environment. It's "intelligence" is its survivability.

1 Reply

@cicerone imposter,

Doesn't sound like intelligence to me, but If that works for you, OK..

0 Replies

@cicerone imposter,

How did macroevolution from asexual organisms to heterosexual organisms happen by Darwinian evolution? And how did the males and females reproduce as they were evolving? And what made one inseminate the other one day? Who taught them?

2 Replies

@brianjakub,

Here's a load on the subject. https://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=How+did+macroevolution+from+asexual+organisms+to+heterosexual+organisms+happen+by+Darwinian+evolution%3F&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8

1 Reply

@brianjakub,

Quote:

How did macroevolution from asexual organisms to heterosexual organisms happen by Darwinian evolution?

It's a good question. People who think evolution answers all these questions would probably answer that genetic diversity is a big survival advantage therefore - sex was 'invented'.

Of course that begs the question of why the earliest life forms like bacteria persist and adapt just fine without it. They obviously 'found' a better and far simpler answer.

The details of reproduction in Angiosperms may be the most extreme example of complex reproductive systems. To believe that is an example of random mutation and natural selection requires a level of faith in evolution that is beyond me. Evolutionists have no choice but to invoke 'intelligence' in some form or another as CI did.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Your statement is pure nonsense.
1. sex wasn't "invented"
2. You make the false assumption that one creature always has a survival advantage over another.
3.You make the false assumption that survival equates to a better and simpler answer.
4.There are no such thing as "evolutionists". That is simply your attempt to slander people that agree with the scientific theory of evolution.
5.People that agree with the theory of evolution don't need to invoke "intelligence" to explain how random mutation works.

You might want to look up parthenogenesis.

0 Replies

Why do people deny evolution?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know