Arguments for Evolution

What I am referring to as evolution is the belief in no God and that life started at the Big Bang and evolved into what we are today. I realize that evolutionist like to separate the views of the evolution of man and the Big Bang, but most evolutionist also believe in the Big Bang and the whole entire view point is what I will be addressing here.

Quote from evolutionist:
"And you cite..... what now? I have read several essays by scientists about evolution. Adaptation and natural selection have been observed, and from there it's simply a matter of time to reach speciation. Which, for that matter, has also been observed. While the fossil record is incomplete, some transitional forms have been located, and assuming that the holes are due to the rarity of fossilization is just as valid as assuming that the missing transitional forms don't exist."

This is from the talkorigins.org website. Creationist do believe in adaptation.

Creationist believe in a creator because life does not come into existence by chance (this has never been observed in science). Creationist believe in a creator which has been believed as long as man has been on the earth. Evolution has not been a widely accepted view point until Darwin.
Lets discuss some of the primary arguments for evolution (See my next posts for rebuttals):

1) Evolutionist believe in the Big Bang (Unless you are someone like Hugh Ross who doesn't truly believe in the Bible so they adapt the Bible with evolution): This theory believes that intelligence comes from non-intelligence, that the earth is billions of years old and that over billions of years we evolved by random chance and random mutations into what we are today.

2) Evolutionist believe in macro-evolution which means that we evolved from a completely different Kind.

3) Evolutionist believe that the earth is billions of years old. (So do other people who adapt the Bible to evolutionist theories)

4) Evolutionist do not believe in a world wide flood caused by God, but other forms of natural disasters such as the ice age.

"Many ...believe in evolution for the simple reason that they think science has proven it to be a `fact' and, therefore, it must be accepted... In recent years, a great many people...having finally been persuaded to make a real examination of the problem of evolution, have become convinced of its fallacy and are now convinced anti-evolutionists."
-- Henry Morris, former evolutionist.

Read more...

Radioactive Dating, Carbon Dating and the Age of Earth

Many people have a serious misconception concerning dating methods. When I took an Astronomy class in college the teacher, who has a PHD in Astronomy, asked a question on how old the students thought the age of the earth was. I already knew what she was going to say which was somewhere in the billions of years. I raised my hand and said that some scientist believe that the earth is young. She started asking me questions and one of the questions was, "What about carbon 14 dating?" That is along the lines of common misconceptions even among scientists.

Carbon 14 can't be used to date the universe or the earth at all. If it is going to date anything, it can only date it up to about 50,000 years. Another misconception that people have is that carbon 14 can date anything. Carbon 14 can only date something that at one time was living.

For C-14 dating the conditions are:

1. The material to be dated must be organic
2. The organism to be tested must have gotten its C-14 from the atmosphere
3. The sample has remained chemically and physically a closed system since its emplacement.
4. That we know what the atmospheric concentration of C-14 was when the
organism lived.

Radioactive dating is the method that was used to date the age of the earth.

Evolutionist make many assumptions when it comes to radioactive dating. They assume that lead in a rock was produced by the decay of its uranium. They assume that the amount can be accurately estimated. They also assume that the material being measured has been in a closed system. They assume that no outside factors altered the normal ratio in the material. Even after 10,000 years, you should assume that something might have altered the material in the object that is being tested. They assume that the rate of decomposition has always remained constant.

The evolutionist claim that the age of the earth is 4.5 billion years old. The scientists jump to huge assumptions to support their far fetch theory and it seems that many people just don't want to question them. The evolutionist want to look at Christians as being lunatics, but the only difference between the evolutionist and the Christian is that Christians worship a Creator, and the evolutionist worships science.

"The belief that species are immutable [unchangeable] productions was almost unavoidable as long as the history of the world was thought to be of short duration."—*Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species (conclusion to second edition).

Read more...

The Big Bang Fact or Fiction

George Wald, an evolutionist, states, "When it comes to the origin of life, there are only two possibilities: creation or spontaneous generation. There is no third way. Spontaneous generation was disproved one hundred years ago, but that leads us to only one other conclusion, that of supernatural creation. We cannot accept that on philosophical grounds; therefore, we choose to believe the impossible: that life arose spontaneously by chance!" ("The Origin of Life," Scientific American, 191:48. May 1954).

(H.S. Lipson, Professor of Physics, University of Manchester, UK, "A Physicist Looks at Evolution," Physics Bulletin, vol. 31, May 1980, pg.138).
H.S. Lipson who was quoted as saying that the Evidence indicating Intelligent Design is abundant and overwhelming. He went on to say that evolutionists have zealously sought evidence to validate their theory and nothing has yet to stand up under the close scrutiny of an in depth scientific evaluation.

People have been persuaded to think that evolution is a fact, and there isn't any evidence against evolution. One atheist asked me (in another post) why so many scientist believe in evolution. My answer is this, "Because the evolutionist ran a good campaign". The evolutionist have been successful in influencing the media and our educational institutions by convincing people that science has proven everything. People constantly use the term, "it is scientific", and therefore it must be true. The fact is that evolution has so many holes in it that the atheist are embarrassed. However, this is the only theory they have so they keep believing it.

Some of the problems with the big bang:
http://www.metaresearch.org/cosmology/top10BBproblems.asp

1) The element abundance predictions used in the Big Bang require too many adjustable paramters to make them work.

2) The universe has too much large scale structure to form in a time as short as 10-20 billion years.

3) If the open universe we see today is extrapolated back near the beginning, the ratio of the actual density of matter in the universe to the critical density must differ from unity by just a part in 1059. Any larger deviation would result in a universe already collapsed on itself or already dissipated.

You can read more at the above website.

Read more...