Creationists believe in adaptation but not some stupid lighting bolt big bang crap. If lighting hits it would blow everything to hell and back not make life. It take a hell of a lot more faith to believe in your Evolution big bang theory then a Being somewhere in all that universe smart enough to create dirt and biorobots. Then let 6000 years of adaptation do its thing.
18 comments
So, you believe in evolution but not the big bang. Most creationists are far worse.Option 1
We know from our observations that energy is conserved; you can't create or destroy it. (Matter is a form of energy.) Since light travels at a finite speed, we can see "back in time." What this means is: Since the light from a distant source takes, say 5 billion years to reach us, we see that source as it was 5 billion years ago. From this, we see that things were once quite different; it would suggest that everything was smushed into less room. Add in the background radiation, and we end up with a mathematically consistent theory supported by evidence, which suggests that some billion years ago, everything was smushed into less room, and that there was an expansion we call the big bang. We don't know exactly why it expanded or what happened beforehand, but the people who accept this option are researching it as fast as they can.
Option 2
A magic being who no one has ever seen and who is apparently not made of matter (or any energy) created all energy (and thus, matter) out of nothing, in violation of the conservation of energy. No mathematical formulae are given and no evidence is presented; in fact, people who take this option stress the importance of believing it without evidence. They do no research; in fact, they claim that everything is unknowable, and that research is pointless. Instead of research, they try and force their views into public schools and public life, and examine research done by others in order to "debunk" it by any means possible; they stress the importance of (and even depend on) ignorance, and thus want to limit knowledge as much as possible.
Which takes more faith?
Oh, and lastly, I agree that 6,000 years of evolution isn't going to accomplish much. Luckily, life has been around (and evolving) for much longer than that.
The theory relating to lightning "sparking" life has been confirmed as a very real possibility, actually. They still don't know if it is definately what happened, but the theory is quite sound.
"Creationists believe in adaptation"adaptation IS evolution . If you accept adaptation, you are accepting evolution.
"but not some stupid lighting bolt big bang crap."
Good for you. We who understand and accept evolution and the big bang do not believe in "stupid lightning bolt big bang crap" either.
"If lighting hits it would blow everything to hell and back not make life."
The word is lightning , not lighting, dumdum.
Niether the ToE nor the big bang theory say anything about lightning creating life.
Theories of abiogenesis include the idea that some necessary compounds may have been formed by lightning strikes.
"It take a hell of a lot more faith to believe in your Evolution big bang theory then a Being somewhere in all that universe smart enough to create dirt and biorobots.
Smart enough to create dirt? Biorobots? You really are an idiot.
"Then let 6000 years of adaptation do its thing."
6000 years? No, let's say billions and billions of years. And, remember, adaptation IS evolution.
Bah, biorobots (Or replicants as we in the biz prefer to call them) weren't created by God, they were created by the Tyrell Corporation in the early twenty-first century for use as manuel labour on the off-planet colonies. But after a brutal mutiny on one of these colonies, replicants were declared illegal on Earth.
Darwin's Finch beaks analogy proves that adaption not only happens but can be beneficial or not. The longer beaked Finches found a food source they could exploit while the shorter beaked one lost out in one group of islands on the world. It's logical, it's a fact and it's something someone paying attention can notice.
Evolution, in it's most basic explanation is change over time in generations of lifeforms. With only time as a consideration It even happens with mountains and the path of stars. or planets.
Their willingness to accept adaptation is promising but their denial of that being the same as evolution is depressing and shows a disconnect with logic
But then, this poster believes in a 6000 year old universe.
What I have learned from Gemstone:
The Big Bang is the same thing as abiogenesis is the same thing as evolution.
The Big Bang/abiogenesis/evolution says that everything (i.e. dirt and biorobots) were created when lightning hit . . . something, I guess.
All "adaptations" have nothing to do with evolution and occurred within the past 6,000 years.
It takes more faith to understand scientific theories than to believe in a Supreme Being of some sort for which no evidence exists.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
