"LIFE-How did it get here? By evolution or creation?"?

Question

Is the title of a book my neighbor gave me to read. I found it incredibly annoying. Not because of the opinions in it; everyone's entitled to that. It's because it claims to use logic, science, and fact to support its claims, which it most certainly does not. D= Worst of all, it tries to use an obsolete fossil record to its advantage. Mind you this book was written in 1984 and I was given a 2006 version. We've made a wee-bit of progress in 25 years...

Quote time: Skip if Walls of ridiculous text make you sick.

'Of Darwin's book, The Origin of Species, A London Times writer who accepts evolution wrote: "we have here the supreme irony that a book which has become famous for explaining the origin of species in fact does nothing of the kind... it was full of colossal holes."'
"The eye appears to have been designed; no designer of telescopes could have done better"
"It's hard to accept the evolution of the human eye as a product of chance; it is even harder to accept the evolution of human intelligence as the product of random disruptions in the brain cells of our ancestors"
"While the fittest may survive, this does not explain how they arrive"
"Darwin's theory, I believe is on the verge of collapse"
"The evolutionary theory lacks a proper foundation"
"The Origin of the genetic code poses a massive chicken-and-egg problem"
"in photosynthesis plants use sunlight, carbon dioxide, water and minerals to produce oxygen and food products. Could a simple cell have invented all of this?" (Yes, I was hitting this book over and over again for being so stupid)
"A scientist admitted: 'the only acceptable explanation is creation"
"Scientists have no proof that life was not the result of an act of creation"
"No biologist has actually seen the origin by evolution of a major group of organisms"
"The fossil record says the opposite of what evolutionary theory had predicted. Basic kinds of living things appeared suddenly and did not change appreciable for long periods of time. No transitional links between one major kind of living thing and another have ever been found."
"Early in what is called the Cambrian period, fossils of the major groups of invertebrates appear in a spectacular "explosion of living things, unconnected to any evolutionary ancestors"
"There was a complete absence of intermediate fossils"
"Evolutionary theory maintains that flying creatures evolved from transitional ancestors, but none have been found" (Smacking book with Biology textbook)
"Fish jump into the fossil record, seemingly from nowhere"
"Archeopteryx is no link between reptile and bird"(to anyone who doesn't know, Archeopteryx was the first link capable of powered flight.)
"Why did "inferior" apes and monkeys survive, but not a single "superior" "ape-man"?"
"Every drawing of man's family tree will have to be junked"
"Mutations are likened to "accidents in the genetic machinery. But accidents cause harm, not good"

Even the people who don't "believe" can agree that these quotes are ridiculous. o-o Right~?

Everyone out there who understand evolution and biology, hope you get some lulz from the quotes. 

Dear Creationists, please tell me if you actually believe these, and why? Have you ever studied Evolution? What are your thoughts on it? How can you deny the wonderful goodness of fact and knowledge?

Dreamstuff Entity · Accepted Answer

That's really bad. The problem is tat there are two types of creationists: professionals who make money from books, lectures and such, and knowingly make false claims - and followers who accept those claims without understanding them.

Dan -E- · Answer

Creationists tell more lies to justify their anti-science, than the Catholic church to Galileo. 

No evolutionary biologist says that the origin of first life was evolution. Life originated by the anthropic principle.

Evolution is the gradual progression of genes. Evolution is the reason for all species, but not the origin of first life.

Those quotes are taken out of context by the way. The one of Charles Darwin and the eye for example, is a preface to explain natural selection. He put up that statement, so he could defeat it with his theory. If that person had actually have read The Origin Of The Species, they would know that.

If someone wants to know the basics about evolution, pick up the books "Evolution for Dummies," or "Climbing Mount Improbable."

Marc L · Answer

Actually, evolution does not answer how life got here in the first place.  It answers why the diversity of life on Earth is the way it is today.

Regardless, believing in a god does not in any way mean you can't accept Evolutionary Theory.  While I, as an atheist, believe that the naturalistic explanations supersede the religious ones, there is nothing objectively stating that God did not have a hand in it.

Anonymous · Answer

Just look at it logically. To create a cake you break some eggs mix them with flour, fat and sugar, and bake it in an oven. Evolution is the act of creation. But instead of by a grand design or receipee, it is by trial and error. However that does not mean that the instigator of the mechanism does not exist. ie The father of all things the catalyst, the Creator. The two concepts are not exclusive of each other by any means.

angelmusic · Answer

I have a copy of the book you are referring to.

Although you have placed quotation marks around the above statements, perhaps it would have been most appropriate to have given the publication name, the scientist's name, and if given the university he represented.

This would allow those who read your question to realize that at least a portion of the scientific community do support creation, or at least see clearly the limitations of the theory of evolution.

I have both the older and the newer versions, and both supply the proper references for the quotes.

Anonymous · Answer

your an idiot you obviously have no idea how evolution  works  it takes millions of years for animals to evolve also for the fossil record not all fossils survive due earthquakes and other natural phenomena as well as human interference  also i suggest that you go ask people like professors who study evolution. Also what doesn't make sense that this so called god made the world and made animals only six thousand years ago where is the proof of god? where

Anonymous · Answer

Whatever event started life on earth has yet to be proven, however believing it was created out of nothing by an invisible eternal being we call "god"is plainly childish.

Anonymous · Answer

My question is why do you disagree?  All those statements have been backed up and are true.  It is up to you if you choose not to believe it.  Evolutionary science disproves itself more and more every day.  It's easy to accept a theory when it is the only one allowed to be taught in public schools, but it is still a theory and not a very strong one.

? · Answer

Evolution is Creation through time.  I don't see why we have to keep seperating that which is inseperable. God, and Creation, are One, and what Science investigates is a world that is not, and cannot be seperated from That which Created it.
Peace, and Namaste!

Anonymous · Answer

Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of life - that is a separate science.

And, the quotes are absurd - scientifically illiterate statements for the scientifically illiterate.

Trending News

"LIFE-How did it get here? By evolution or creation?"?

12 Answers