Great Debate Evolutionist Vs Creationist

[notyou2]

Wow. There actually exist television debates in which people argue about whether God made the world or not? Are the endless political debates and 'advertisements' not boring enough already?

This has been a huge issue in the US for many years. Many US schools have been forced to teach creationism. The creationism viewpoint is growing in the US and many other countries including the UK. IMO they are forcing the education system backwards, denying truth and dumbing down the populace.

[universalchiro]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

[Ray Rider]

So what's the best debate available on this subject? Is Dawkins vs. Lennox the best presentation of both sides?

To be honest, I don't think I've ever seen a great debate on the subject. I just meant the level of discourse and quality of the debate was nothing compared to a Dawkins vs. Lennox debate. Both of them are highly respected Oxford professors with doctorates in their respective fields (Lennox even has a triple doctorate). Those two have some great athiest vs. theist debates and the subject of evolution is hardly even mentioned; that's why I don't understand why some people like UC are so focussed on it.

[Nola_Lifer]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

[universalchiro]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

A common mistake by evolutionist. Adaptation is not evolving. Adaptation is based on DNA already existing to adapt. Evolution is random unguided mutations of DNA to have new function & new kind. Completely different. No matter how much viruses adapt, they remain viruses. You never have nor will ever observe evolutionary change of kind, always remains the same kind.
Evolution response: well it happens sooooo slow that we cannot observe it. And if you lived 300 million years ago then you would see changes of kind.
That's faith based.

[betiko]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

A common mistake by evolutionist. Adaptation is not evolving. Adaptation is based on DNA already existing to adapt. Evolution is random unguided mutations of DNA to have new function & new kind. Completely different. No matter how much viruses adapt, they remain viruses. You never have nor will ever observe evolutionary change of kind, always remains the same kind.
Evolution response: well it happens sooooo slow that we cannot observe it. And if you lived 300 million years ago then you would see changes of kind.
That's faith based.

You are wrong!

[denominator]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

A common mistake by evolutionist. Adaptation is not evolving. Adaptation is based on DNA already existing to adapt. Evolution is random unguided mutations of DNA to have new function & new kind. Completely different. No matter how much viruses adapt, they remain viruses. You never have nor will ever observe evolutionary change of kind, always remains the same kind.
Evolution response: well it happens sooooo slow that we cannot observe it. And if you lived 300 million years ago then you would see changes of kind.
That's faith based.

Yeah, and steering your car isn't driving.

[GoranZ]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

A common mistake by evolutionist. Adaptation is not evolving. Adaptation is based on DNA already existing to adapt. Evolution is random unguided mutations of DNA to have new function & new kind. Completely different. No matter how much viruses adapt, they remain viruses. You never have nor will ever observe evolutionary change of kind, always remains the same kind.
Evolution response: well it happens sooooo slow that we cannot observe it. And if you lived 300 million years ago then you would see changes of kind.
That's faith based.

What about Marsupials?

Does the bible has any story about them? Do you know any biblical explanation about them?

[Metsfanmax]

Australia's on the bottom side of the Earth, so the marsupials developed the pouch to keep their young from falling off.

[GoranZ]

Australia's on the bottom side of the Earth, so the marsupials developed the pouch to keep their young from falling off.

hmm... When the bible was written, the Earth was quite flat

But in current times the concept of "UP" in maps is as accurate as the concept of Greenwich Line. But for the sake of not complicating things in RL we still use them.

[Metsfanmax]

Australia's on the bottom side of the Earth, so the marsupials developed the pouch to keep their young from falling off.

hmm... When the bible was written, the Earth was quite flat

As UC has pointed out, the Bible correctly "predicted" that the Earth was spherical, well before that was common knowledge.

[notyou2]

Australia's on the bottom side of the Earth, so the marsupials developed the pouch to keep their young from falling off.

hmm... When the bible was written, the Earth was quite flat

As UC has pointed out, the Bible correctly "predicted" that the Earth was spherical, well before that was common knowledge.

Yet the religious zealots persecuted those that said it was round.

[betiko]

Australia's on the bottom side of the Earth, so the marsupials developed the pouch to keep their young from falling off.

hmm... When the bible was written, the Earth was quite flat

As UC has pointed out, the Bible correctly "predicted" that the Earth was spherical, well before that was common knowledge.

Yet the religious zealots persecuted those that said it was round.

Does the bible explains anything about dna though? I think it didn t exist yet when that book was written. The problem with that book is that they never make new editions like the dictionary, it s already a great best seller, heroic fantasy kind of shit.

[Metsfanmax]

The interesting part is that they have no problem re-interpreting the words of the Bible to suit them based on modern knowledge and customs, but when it comes to the Constitution, only the original meaning of the words count!

[notyou2]

The interesting part is that they have no problem re-interpreting the words of the Bible to suit them based on modern knowledge and customs, but when it comes to the Constitution, only the original meaning of the words count!

Interpret to your own needs and desires and force that philosophy on all. Whats not to love??????

[Nola_Lifer]

One interesting argument Nye makes is that if Noah only took 7,000 "kinds" of animals (one canine for every canine species, etc.), in the 4,000 years since the flood, 11 new species would have to appear a day to arrive at the 8.7 million species we have now.

Ken Ham also has no response to how a 9,550 year old tree in Sweden could still be alive if the earth were submerged in water for a year. (The dating methods are off for trees?)

Ham does make a good point that just because creationists are a tiny minority of scientists doesn't mean they're wrong, but he needs better scientific proof. His entire argument about the age of the earth is based on genealogies in the Bible.

Macbone, mankind has invented a categorizing systems of:
Life, Domain, Kingdom, phylum, Class, order, Family, Genus, Species. Man still has trouble knowing which creature goes in which category, so don't be concerned that mankind's categorizing system doesn't exactly fit reality.
Species are often capable of interbreeding and producing fertile offspring with similar DNA, So currently on earth there are according to the diversity of humans, around 10 million species of humans if the definition was applied to humans. So man's attempt to categorize each species is fraught with problems.

Regarding the tree rings, there have been observation of trees that produced double rings in a year. I would have to study the tree and the documentation, because evolutionist have been caught numerous times falsifying evidence to force their agenda. Trees that survive a dry winter and wet summer will produce a double ring. Just after the flood, the glacial age would have caused severely dry winters and with glacial melt caused wet summers. So don't be alarmed when you read this information.
http://www.newton.dep.anl.gov/natbltn/600-699/nb660.htm

None of this has to do with evolution. Evolution's main argument is about adaptability. If you adapt to a situation you survive. Diversity of species isn't an argument of evolution but biology. The link I posted earlier is an example of evolution. You want to look at modern, everyday examples of evolution look at the flu virus. Each year it adapts and come back. Another example is our use of pesticides both on plants and insects. We now see that they adapt and can survive that which is suppose to kill it.

A common mistake by evolutionist. Adaptation is not evolving. Adaptation is based on DNA already existing to adapt. Evolution is random unguided mutations of DNA to have new function & new kind. Completely different. No matter how much viruses adapt, they remain viruses. You never have nor will ever observe evolutionary change of kind, always remains the same kind.
Evolution response: well it happens sooooo slow that we cannot observe it. And if you lived 300 million years ago then you would see changes of kind.
That's faith based.

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

[patrickaa317]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

[GoranZ]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

He doesn't have atm... but there are 100+ worlds in the solar system to prove him correct. Unfortunately we barely explored 1 outside our home world.

[notyou2]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

Prove pigs exist.

[Metsfanmax]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

Prove pigs exist.

QED

[patrickaa317]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

He doesn't have atm... but there are 100+ worlds in the solar system to prove him correct. Unfortunately we barely explored 1 outside our home world.

So we haven't explored any of those yet but they definitely are there to prove him correct.... Nice...

[patrickaa317]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

Prove pigs exist.

[GoranZ]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

He doesn't have atm... but there are 100+ worlds in the solar system to prove him correct. Unfortunately we barely explored 1 outside our home world.

So we haven't explored any of those yet but they definitely are there to prove him correct.... Nice...

Look it all threw the prism of statistic. Almost 2 explored worlds, 1 with life, he is @ 50%

[patrickaa317]

Viruses existed long before they reached Earth. They came from asteroids from other planets and moons just like other early forms of life. So to say that viruses evolve into other kinds is bullshit. There are many kinds of viruses that have evolved over the centuries and even in our generation just because they don't turn into a creature with 4 legs doesn't mean evolution doesn't exist.

Please provide two things to make your argument sound.

1. Proof that early forms of life came from other planets and moons.
2. Proof that the proof you provide has no trace of creationism or intelligent design.

He doesn't have atm... but there are 100+ worlds in the solar system to prove him correct. Unfortunately we barely explored 1 outside our home world.

So we haven't explored any of those yet but they definitely are there to prove him correct.... Nice...

Look it all threw the prism of statistic. Almost 2 explored worlds, 1 with life, he is @ 50%

Or real statistics would throw Earth out as it is the base planet, so actually 1 explored world, 0 with life. He is @ 0%.