Which arguments do evolutionists present that hold any validity in an argument?

The Bible is not a science book, yet it is scientifically accurate. We are not aware of any scientific evidence that contradicts the Bible. We have listed statements on this page that are consistent with known scientific facts. Many of them were listed in the Bible hundreds or even thousands of years before being recorded elsewhere.

Statements Consistent With Paleontology: * Dinosaurs are referred to in several Bible books. The book of Job describes two dinosaurs. One is described in chapter 40 starting at verse 15, and the other in chapter 41 starting at verse 1. We think you will agree that 1½ chapters about dinosaurs is a lot—since most people do not even realize that they are mentioned in the Bible.

Statements Consistent With Astronomy: * The Bible frequently refers to the great number of stars in the heavens. Here are two examples.

Genesis 22:17

Blessing I will bless you, and multiplying I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heaven and as the sand which is on the seashore; and your descendants shall possess the gate of their enemies.

Jeremiah 33:22

“As the host of heaven cannot be numbered, nor the sand of the sea measured, so will I multiply the descendants of David My servant and the Levites who minister to Me.”

# Each star is unique: 1 Corinthians 15:41

# The Bible describes the precision of movement in the universe: Jeremiah 31:35,36

# The Bible describes the suspension of the Earth in space: Job 26:7

# The Bible describes the circulation of the atmosphere. Ecclesiastes 1:6

# The Bible includes some principles of fluid dynamics. Job 28:25

Statements Consistent With Biology

# The book of Leviticus (written prior to 1400 BC) describes the value of blood. Leviticus 17:11

# The Bible describes biogenesis (the development of living organisms from other living organisms) and the stability of each kind of living organism. Genesis 1:11,12, Genesis 1:21, 25

# The Bible describes the chemical nature of flesh. Genesis 2:7, Genesis 3:19

# It is a proven fact that a person’s mental and spiritual health is strongly correlated with physical health. The Bible revealed this to us with these statements (and others) written by King Solomon about 950 BC. Proverbs 12:4, Proverbs 14:30, Proverbs 15:30, Proverbs 16:24, Proverbs 17:24

Statements Consistent With Anthropology

* We have cave paintings and other evidence that people inhabited caves. The Bible also describes cave men. Job 30:5,6 These were not ape-men, but descendants of those who scattered from Babel. They were driven from the community by those tribes who competed successfully for the more desirable regions of the earth.

Statements Consistent With Hydrology

* The bible includes reasonably complete descriptions of the hydrologic cycle. Psalm 135:7, Jeremiah 10:13, Job 36:27-29

The Bible describes the recirculation of water. Ecclesiastes 1:7, Isaiah 55:10

The Bible refers to the surprising amount of water that can be held as condensation in clouds.

Job 26:8, Job 37:11

# Hydrothermal vents[4] are described in two books of the Bible written before 1400BC—more than 3,000 years before their discovery by science. Genesis 7:11, Job 38:16

Statements Consistent With Geology

* The Bible describes the Earth’s crust (along with a comment on astronomy). Jeremiah 31:37,

* The Bible described the shape of the earth centuries before people thought that the earth was spherical. Isaiah 40:22, The word translated “circle” here is the Hebrew word chuwg which is also translated “circuit,” or “compass” (depending on the context). That is, it indicates something spherical, rounded, or arched—not something that is flat or square. The book of Isaiah was written sometime between 740 and 680 BC. This is at least 300 years before Aristotle suggested that the earth might be a sphere in this book On the Heavens.

Statements Consistent With Physics

* The Bible suggests the presence of nuclear processes like those we associate with nuclear weaponry. This is certainly not something that could have been explained in 67 AD using known scientific principles (when Peter wrote the following verse). 2 Peter 3:10,

The television is a practical (if not always worthwhile smile ) device that uses electromagnetic waves (which transmit its video signal). The Bible contains passages that describe something like television—something that allows everyone on earth see a single event. (Note: such passages typically refer to the end of time. It may not be long before all of us learn for sure whether the Bible is true or not.)

Matthew 24:30, Revelation 11:9-11

Things In The Bible That Science Can Not Explain

The purpose of this is not to explain what a great science text the Bible is, but to show that it is consistent with scientific facts. Still, the Bible mentions some things that we can not ex

Richard Dawkins had a good one, in his book The Greatest Show on Earth.

A good metaphor is to imagine ourselves as jurors at a murder trial; all the fingerprints, DNA from blood on a knife and on clothing, etc. point to one culprit - the butler killed the victim in the office. But before the verdict is made, one last piece of evidence is found - the security camera footage!

As they play the footage, we watch as the butler takes out a knife from a drawer and creep toward the office. Another angle shows the butler still creeping toward the office. And yet another angle, after the murder takes place, shows the butler leaving the scene of the crime, wiping the blade.

The butler's defense lawyer points to this evidence and says, "Look! There's a gap in the video record! As you can see, there's no way that this is not evidence that my client has murdered anyone."

I hope you can see the correlation. All of the evidence of evolution is already there - genetically, biologically, and if we just compare ourselves to other animals. We don't even need the fossil record; but we are lucky to have it. It makes case solid. Pointing to gaps in the fossil record only ignores the evidence for evolution that has already locked it in place as a valid scientific theory.

How about the fact that over the past century, we have actually witnessed how bacteria have evolved to have resistance to antibiotics? In 1900, all staph bacteria was susceptible to penicillin. Now virtually all staph is resistant to penicillin. The new super-bug MRSA is resistant to most types of antibiotics. As we've overused antibiotics, the bacteria have adapted to them. This is evolution in action. The reason we can see such quick adaptation is because bacteria reproduce very quickly. Humans have longer life cycles and reproduce slower so our evolution takes much longer.

Edit: Allow me to respond to Y!'s answer. Some types of bacteria did evolve into single celled organisms. These single celled organisms evolved to multicellular organisms and so on until mammals and finally us. Not all bacteria did this. There are various branches on the evolutionary tree. Some led to where we are but most didn't. Please click on the second link. It is a video that does a much better job explaining the process.

Carl Sagan brought up the point that it is hard for people to believe the process of evolution occurs because a human lifespan is about 70 or 80 years yet evolution takes millions of years. We rely on fossil evidence found in the rock strata to verify the theory. If you want to investigate the matter more thoroughly, I recommend you purchase a book on paleontology or attend a paleontology class at a college. It's a fascinating subject to study and I bet you would enjoy it.

The greatest argument for evolution is the fact that we have DIRECTLY OBSERVED evolution happen. We have witnessed dozens of new species evolve in both the lab and in the wild, and we know with great certainty why and how that happens. We also have a massive fossil record which clearly shows through its transitional forms the entire evolutionary history of life on earth. It's not so much about an argument as it is about the evidence

Actually there is no evidence. Evolutionists are willfully blind.

Humans are stlly humans even ancient human DNA structures tested have shown to be fully human and well with in parametres

For example: We have no examples of something that was an oak tree and something that has "evolved" just a little past an oak tree.

So too with monkeys or anything else.

Natural selection is not evolution. Natural selection uses genetic factors already present. These are re-combined, new DNA materials are not made.

DNA shows a pattern and obviously the pattern is successful. This show the Creator and His handiwork.

Like a human artist has techniques by which his work can be identified so too is DNA the signature of creator God

Here is the main reason why the idea of evolution fails

Evolution for each species takes a specific - very specific changes - and in turn these are past on to the next generation. This over millions and billions of years.

But the evidence of "extinction events" alone shows the fallacy of evolution.

No, it would not. you're stunning. It is senseless. Evolutionist atheists won't be able to stay a persevering with existence. If we are all in uncomplicated terms a cog interior the Evolutionary gadget, then why do any human beings mourn demise & suffering? If Evolutionists have been to be consistent, they may be very unfeeling certainly. Their anti-God philosophy of the international has no foundation for compassion. satirically, all their complaining approximately an uncompassionate god turns right into a self-satisfying prophecy as confirmed by making use of any variety of Communist regimes. have you ever examine Nancy Pearcy's "entire fact"? satirically (because of the identify), i do in no way agree along with her Christianization of clever layout (biblically speaking that's no longer component to the entire fact she so elequently builds up interior the 1st component to the e book), yet maximum of her different factors communicate precisely to what you're speaking approximately. i comprehend that's beside your substantial factor, yet mutation isn't a sufficient mechanism for Evolution. as an occasion, in case you think of suitable to the reality that maximum of those with the mutation observed as Down's Syndrome are sterile, how might that artwork? a undeniable computer virus's antibiotic resistance isn't an occasion of Evolution (which might necessitate the internet income of expertise), even nevertheless it reflects organic determination (that's somewhat the internet loss of expertise). because of the fact we are scuffling with against it, (putting that inconsistency you point out aside for the 2d), it appears like they're triumphing, so gee, they could desire to be evolving regardless of our efforts. yet quite, they simply seem to grow to be greater advantageous precisely because of the fact there is way less & much less variety in a inhabitants each and every time they grow to be resistent.

Could you please read a book. Fossils, Geology, DNA. Just to name a few.

Could you present your historical evidence of Jesus? What's that, you have none? I thought so. Now present your alternative theory to Evolution without attacking it. You WILL NOT succeed.

"Nothing in Biology Makes Sense, Except in the Light of Evolution"- Theodosius Dobzhansky

"Creationism is not the alternative to Evolution - Ignorance is." NoAnswersInGenesis

"Debating creationists on the topic of evolution is rather like trying to play chess with a pigeon — it knocks the pieces over, craps on the board, and flies back to its flock to claim victory." - Scott D. Weitzenhoffer

Steve Jones, the award-winning geneticist and author, argued that suggesting that creationism and evolution be given equal weight in education was “rather like starting genetics lectures by discussing the theory that babies are brought by storks”. Panda's thumb

Read these books:

The Journey of Man: A Genetic Odyssey -Spencer Wells

Your inner fish- Neil Shubin

Why evolution is true- Jerry A. coyne

The Link-Colin Tudge

Only a Theory-Kenneth R. Miller

The Greatest Show on Earth- Richard Dawkins

The inaccuracies in the various books of the bible, plus the contradictions between the various contribute-rs. If the Babe was born at the taking of the census, and the journey to pay the taxes that was historically known to be in September.

I could go on for pages of reasons, but i will give one more the Bible was not scribed and was put together from memories passed down about 130 years after Christs death.

Evolution's best argument is that it is an observed fact.

Natural selection's best arguments are the literally millions of pieces of evidence, gathered over 150+ years by hundreds of thousands of people (many of whom were/are religious), verified by objective parties, published in peer-reviewed journals, and accessible to the entire world at museums, science centers, on-line, and in books.

If you want to show natural selection false, you have to address *all* of that evidence, because all of it shows natural selection to be a correct explanation of one way the observed fact of evolution happens. Showing one piece of those millions of pieces wrong doesn't disprove the whole -- you'd have to show that all of them are wrong. Good luck with that.

Peace.

The fact that it happens. There is way too much evidence that is all the best evidence. There is genetic evidence, lab tests and experiments, fossil evidence, really the list just goes on and on. I guess if I really had to choose the best evidence and argument I would have to say it is that there is no valid evidence or argument against evolution that has ever been presented or found.

Reality,rational thought and evidence.People that don't believe the truth of evolution either lack the education to understand this reality or are willfully ignorant.