Katazia said:
Enigma,
Don't listen to one who refuses to be "open minded" but advises others to do the same.
Since she is so sure of herself, she can 'refute' the evidence shown here.
Scientific Case Against Evolution
How do you talk to someone who believes...
- Thread starter Thor
- Start date
Enigma,
Don't listen to one who refuses to be "open minded" but advises others to do the same.
Since she is so sure of herself, she can 'refute' the evidence shown here.
Scientific Case Against Evolution
SouthStar,
Here is an index to Creationist claims against evolution. There are hundreds of them and each one has been refuted.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/index.html
Here are a select few that seem relevant to your ICR article.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA112.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html
Enjoy
Kat
Here is an index to Creationist claims against evolution. There are hundreds of them and each one has been refuted.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/index.html
Here are a select few that seem relevant to your ICR article.
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA111.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA112.html
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA610.html
Enjoy
Kat
Katazia said:
VERY scarcely related to what I posted. The nature of the analysis is far less "scientific" than the data included in the ICR article.
Let's look here:
Gee if because "there are, and always will be, unanswered details" we didn't question what is scientifically false, as they hypocritically urge, we would be disobeying another of their "points", which is that a scientist is skeptical about all things.
At the bottom of the quote, we see a crass generalization, VERY vague, no examples, but yet "scientific"
.. I hope you too have read the ICR article to at least, juxtapose. I assure you, the ICR article is far more scientific than this opinionated..
The three foundational assumptions for evolution (cosmological and
biological)
are:
1. Matter from non-matter (where did the matter from the big bang
come from
in the first place? Was it always there?)
2. Life from non-life (abiogenesis)
3. Random genetic mutation resulting in an INCREASE in genetic
information
We have zero empirical evidence to make these assumptions. The laws of
thermodynamics state the matter is neither created nor destroyed. We
have
never seen abiogenesis take place and cannot feasibly predict a
mechanism
where is would/could occure, and in the case of assumption three our
observations are the opposite that random genetic mutation results in a
loss
of genetic information.
Without empirical evidence, evolution must be accepted by faith taking
it out
of the realm of science and into the realm of religion.
biological)
are:
1. Matter from non-matter (where did the matter from the big bang
come from
in the first place? Was it always there?)
2. Life from non-life (abiogenesis)
3. Random genetic mutation resulting in an INCREASE in genetic
information
We have zero empirical evidence to make these assumptions. The laws of
thermodynamics state the matter is neither created nor destroyed. We
have
never seen abiogenesis take place and cannot feasibly predict a
mechanism
where is would/could occure, and in the case of assumption three our
observations are the opposite that random genetic mutation results in a
loss
of genetic information.
Without empirical evidence, evolution must be accepted by faith taking
it out
of the realm of science and into the realm of religion.
§outh§tar said:
I shudder at the use of "ICR" and "scientific" in the same sentence.
ICR peddles garbage dressed up in pseudoscientific mumbo-jumbo. Nobody with any scientific background could read that site without laughing out loud.
Enigma,
Just read what ICR has to say and compare it with the references in "talkorigins".
Just read what ICR has to say and compare it with the references in "talkorigins".
@sideshowbob
You are disappointing me. Have you actually READ the articles on talkorigins?
Let's take a look at a few:
Evolutionists are intellectual snobs.
This is obviously and BLATANTLY propaganda. Is that even an argument? What does that have to do with proving or disproving evolution? I can dismiss the entire site's validity on this farfetched claim but let's look at a few more.
Hitler based his views on Darwinism.
Again what does this have to do with evolution? Why did they include it but to maliciously discredit skeptics. Even if he did, SO WHAT? What creationist uses this claim to DISPROVE evolution? Again, more propaganda and even more stupid than the last.
A lot, if not all of these are either made up lies or things said by individuals that have been stupidly applied to mean creationists in general believe these things.
Tell me, how many of those claims do you see on the ICR? Does the ICR stoop to sling mud on evolutionists by such preposterous claims?
I am ENTIRELY SHOCKED that you would even consider these claims valid! I hope you too will take the time to at least fairly critique the article I provided since I also took the time to skim through. I will return again to read a few more of the talkorigins article later on today.
You are disappointing me. Have you actually READ the articles on talkorigins?
Let's take a look at a few:
Evolutionists are intellectual snobs.
This is obviously and BLATANTLY propaganda. Is that even an argument? What does that have to do with proving or disproving evolution? I can dismiss the entire site's validity on this farfetched claim but let's look at a few more.
Hitler based his views on Darwinism.
Again what does this have to do with evolution? Why did they include it but to maliciously discredit skeptics. Even if he did, SO WHAT? What creationist uses this claim to DISPROVE evolution? Again, more propaganda and even more stupid than the last.
A lot, if not all of these are either made up lies or things said by individuals that have been stupidly applied to mean creationists in general believe these things.
Tell me, how many of those claims do you see on the ICR? Does the ICR stoop to sling mud on evolutionists by such preposterous claims?
I am ENTIRELY SHOCKED that you would even consider these claims valid! I hope you too will take the time to at least fairly critique the article I provided since I also took the time to skim through. I will return again to read a few more of the talkorigins article later on today.
SouthStar,
The two examples you give are charges that are, in fact, levelled at evolutionists by creationists.
But we were talking about scientific matters, not insults from either side. If you would bother to read the scientific analysis of ICR's preposterous claims, and the references....
The two examples you give are charges that are, in fact, levelled at evolutionists by creationists.
But we were talking about scientific matters, not insults from either side. If you would bother to read the scientific analysis of ICR's preposterous claims, and the references....
sideshowbob said:
How interesting that you should say that
Why don't these talkorigins "scientists" actually analyze creationism instead of what individual creationists say.
If the people at the ICR were remotely that ignorant, they would also make a page about what evolutionists say.
Now I truly hope you don't believe that what individual evolutionists may say at all reflects evolution.
Let's just make an example, shall we:
Creationist Mark Johnson and or his organization say "Evolutionists are intellectual snobs". The talkorigins webpage makes a preposterous statement, totally without any sort of evidence that such has been said. The ICR on the other hand, does not attack the statements of evolutionists since that is entirely foolish, but the theory of evolution.
And instead of accusing me of not "bothering" to read, why don't you also point out some of your alledged "fallacies". That would be more constructive.
1 has everything to do with evolution. If cells are made of matter, therefore, where did the matter come from. It just appeared doesn't cut it because that would be breaking the laws of thermodynamics.
2 has already been demenstrated as impossible by pasteaur with his meat expariment. No one has been able to create a cell from no living matter.
3 GIVE ME AN EXAMPLE! Mutations cause a LOSS of information, not a gain.
Last edited:
See, this is where creationism gets into problems. It not only tries to deal with the creation of life, but the creation of the universe as well. So, according to creationism, one is very important for their argument. But to evolution it doesn't relate. The matter is there. How it got there is another branch of science altogether.
Lol... that's just funny
1) Evolution has to deal with one form of life EVOLVING into another. It has nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Even saying that it has to do with the creation of life is pushing it. It only has to do with the changing of life.
2) LMAO. I just left my meat out for 2 years, and it didn't turn into a star. That proves that stars are not made of matter. Stupid argument, eh? I fail to see how your meat example has anything to do with evolution, or for that matter how matter formed complex amino acids. If you wish to explain why you think this proves something, please do. In the meantime consider that it doesn't tkae many atoms to form life... it was just a matter of time.
3) How about:
Parkinson's Disease
Extra Immune Genes - http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/10_03/defensins.shtml
Down Syndrome
E. Coli (this has been shown in the lab, no escpaing this one)
Distal Trisomy
The list goes on and on.
1) Evolution has to deal with one form of life EVOLVING into another. It has nothing to do with the creation of the universe. Even saying that it has to do with the creation of life is pushing it. It only has to do with the changing of life.
2) LMAO. I just left my meat out for 2 years, and it didn't turn into a star. That proves that stars are not made of matter. Stupid argument, eh? I fail to see how your meat example has anything to do with evolution, or for that matter how matter formed complex amino acids. If you wish to explain why you think this proves something, please do. In the meantime consider that it doesn't tkae many atoms to form life... it was just a matter of time.
3) How about:
Parkinson's Disease
Extra Immune Genes - http://www.genomenewsnetwork.org/articles/10_03/defensins.shtml
Down Syndrome
E. Coli (this has been shown in the lab, no escpaing this one)
Distal Trisomy
The list goes on and on.
Stars are not living matter, and the meat was no longer living, thus it couldn't reproduce. Cows produce more cows, ducks produce more ducks, cows donot produce ducks. If something will kill you off sooner than the rest of your species, what advantage is that?
Try questioning him. Ask poigniant questions about his beliefs. Questions that lead him to question his beliefs and point out flaws. When you see his reasoning you can understand what's wrong with it and direct him to the flaws you see with your questioning.
You may also be interested in this:
- http://www.suttononline.org/suthiswal.htm
It's about a bet I remembered reading about that took place couple centuries ago. They set up an experiment to test whether the earth was flat or not, placing three poles at the same hight along a river, and sighting through a telescope from the first to the last. The middle one appeared to be a few feet higher due to the curvature of the earth.
You might also ask him about refusing to go on a plane. How could so many people who take the plane all across the world be lying? Try taking him to an airport and interrogating people.
You may also be interested in this:
- http://www.suttononline.org/suthiswal.htm
It's about a bet I remembered reading about that took place couple centuries ago. They set up an experiment to test whether the earth was flat or not, placing three poles at the same hight along a river, and sighting through a telescope from the first to the last. The middle one appeared to be a few feet higher due to the curvature of the earth.
You might also ask him about refusing to go on a plane. How could so many people who take the plane all across the world be lying? Try taking him to an airport and interrogating people.
Do you pay attention? What does dead meat have to do with amino acids forming? They are already there, but in small enough quaitites and not very good conditions. Compare this to a planet full of them.Enigma'07 said:
Says the creationist. Yet we see animals which can produce different animals. Some horse families are like this. Many types of bactieria... etc.. etc.
Most mutations will be bad. However, some are not. Did you look at the extra immunity gene? In some cases it is better.
So, do you actually have any reasoning... or are you just going to stick with 'my parents/preacher/whoever told me so, so it must be true'.
Lol... and if you can't get him to realize the earth is round... at least you'll get him arrestedAlpha said:You might also ask him about refusing to go on a plane. How could so many people who take the plane all across the world be lying? Try taking him to an airport and interrogating people.