""God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years or so." Evolution, by their lights, played no role in shaping us."

-Niagara Falls rate of washing out its current trail shows that is has been flowing less than 8000 years.

-Mississippi Delta mudflow into the Gulf of Mexico shows less than 8000 years.

-There are massive trees fossilized standing vertically through 30+ layers that are each "millions of years old." Trees do not take hundreds of millions to decompose meaning that they were sinkers in a giant flood like the ones in Spirit Lake and the layers are from settling sediment from a flood.

-The Colorado River flows over 2000 feet UPHILL through the Khiabab Uplift at the deepest points in the Grand Canyon and many of the inflowing tributaries entered the Colorado River at opposing angles the only place this is found is when a dam breaks and all the water drains out very quickly to a low point then joins the main flow of water.

I dont know of any Christians that would argue with the idea that species evolve to their environment over time the problem is taking that idea and saying therefore we can assume that the Universe and everything in it evolved the same way.
We call it variation of species.

Have lots and lots of other things that I could add on for facts showing that while the science part of evolution is science the rest of it is a religion itself.

NOT trying to start a religious debate but taking wrong facts and preaching about them like this article did is just stupid.

Wasn't it Darwin who came up with the idea of evolution by natural selection? As far as I know Darwin at first didn't want to present his ideas because of the religious outrage they would cause. Then later he was contacted by Wallace who presented his own similar ideas to Darwin, which gave Darwin the confidence to present his ideas. That's as far as I know, anyway. Are you saying that something different happened?

This post was edited by voniazmogis on May 16 2013 08:00am

the evidence of evolution is pretty fucking concrete

The bible is wrong.

Religion looks for answers that lead to the desired conclusion

Science looks for facts that lead to the truth.

That's exactly what happened... except it didn't give Darwin confidence it just made him not want to lose out on it, they actually held a scientific gathering where both Wallace and Darwin presented what they had done/learned so far so that the scientific community could decide which of them would get the major credit.... Darwin was vastly more prepared and had years more time invested so it was quite clear he had come up with or at least started researching the idea sooner....



if these are the types of arguments then that article is just ridiculous >_<

people who don't believe in evolution have to believe in a God that makes mistakes of sorts, cuz some things about the human body make no sense at all.... but, most religious people are coming to accept evolution and realize it doesn't prove God didn't make us all (that's how I feel)

and why its the #1 selling book

the problem about nonsensical structures in the human body is circumvented by stating that it's importance is unknown, but only for the time being

any apparent drawback would then be compensated by the hidden benefit, not that i necessarily approve of that argument, though

This post was edited by Neptunus on May 19 2013 02:54pm

The defects I'm talking about can't... really... be explained by simply "we don't know if they have a purpose yet." It's quite apparent that they are bad things and we have actually had to evolve multiple ways around these... and some of them have been exaggerated in other species.

Voniaz - Wasn't it Darwin who came up with the idea of evolution by natural selection? As far as I know Darwin at first didn't want to present his ideas because of the religious outrage they would cause. Then later he was contacted by Wallace who presented his own similar ideas to Darwin, which gave Darwin the confidence to present his ideas. That's as far as I know, anyway. Are you saying that something different happened?


Darwin had the theory without the proof first, and yes, he was being a pussy about what the religious upper class would say so he waited - waited until Wallace, naive to the potential fame surrounding this sent Darwin his own theories with evidence, and thats when Darwin presented his ideas. It shoulda been called The Wallace - Darwin Theory of Evolution, but Darwin put his name infront and got all the credit while poor wallace got very little recognition.