Let's end this Creationist v. Evolution debate right now!?

It is so cool to see populations of organisms change in their genomes in response to selective pressures. Bacterial populations can pick up antibiotic resistance in a day. The scientific community has unfortunately watched the evolution of huge numbers of antibiotic resistant bacterial strains in the wild over the last decades. The SARS virus genome changed dramatically in the first human infections. The mutations occurred in the gene that encodes the protein that specifies binding of the virus to cells, presumably adapting to growth in humans. Because we can see large numbers of changes concentrated in certain areas and not in others, it suggests those changes were important for adaptation. We have over 100 SARS genomes sequenced and you can watch the changes (mutations) over time. HIV is currently evolving to be drug resistant; you can watch the genome changing. One of the most amazing things you can see in viral genomes is that they actually steal genes from the host organism

(e.g. human) and then adapt the gene to benefit virus survival. Viruses don't think or plan; all this is random accidental mutation and then selection of the fittest. It is so cool. Of course this is the reason we can't do anything about the H5N1 influenza threat right now, because we're all just waiting to see what it evolves into. We won't know until/unless it happens.
Microorganisms are easy to study in a short time frame because they replicate at very high rates, so you can watch evolution in real time.
With organisms that have slower replication rates, decades instead of hours, it takes much longer to evolve a population. In macro-biology you can see significant changes in species that are separated for longer periods. If you travel, you can see differences in various birds and plants between the east and west coast, or Hawaii, really any geographically distinct area. You can see that various populations adapt over time. Humans from Africa carry the sickle cell gene because

yes .. disease organisms do seem to have the ability to develope resistance ... doesnt prove evolution to me .. heres my side of the argument .. One of the simplest and best proofs that evolution is a joke, is the FACT that there is NO recorded history prior to 4,000 B.C. The world's history is CLEARY defined by SIX world powers since time began: Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, Medo-Persia, Greece, and Rome. Since Rome's fall in 476 A.D., there have been no world-powers (many super-powers; but, no world-powers). At the time of Moses, Egypt ruled the world. The Israelites were used as slave labor by Pharaoh to build the pyramids. Before Egypt, there is absolutely nothing recorded in history about a world-power. It is NO coincidence that Revelation 17:10 speaks of these world-powers, "...five are fallen, and one is, and the other is not yet come; and when he cometh, he must continue a short space." At the writing of Revelation, Rome was still a world-power. The Apostle John, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, tells us that Rome is the 6th world-power, and there is one more to come. The 7th world-power will be the beast system, the kingdom of the antichrist. This diabolical New World Order is quickly forming now (i.e., a universal religious view, global centralized government, a one-world economic system, a cashless society, etc.)

Jesus, I wish it was that easy.

If anything, I would find a god who could create the mechanisms of evolution to be far more awe inspiring than one who could create animals with a wave of his magic wand. Unfortunately, many christians do not seem to think that way.

And, to answer rach3l_elizabeth, evolutionists do not try to exclude god, they try to exclude special creation. There are christians evolutionists who believe mutation is not totally random but that god has a hand in it and/or that selection is not totally natural but that god has a hand in it. These beliefs combine evolution and christianity very nicely if you are willing to view Genesis as a powerful myth rather than a literal truth.

*eyeroll* Yep, let's attribute the whole thing to God... there's no gap to cram him into, but let's graft him to the outter areas of our knowledge just to keep him around!

Unfortunately your argument is based on science, logic and evidence.

Creationists don't accept that line of reasoning

Evolutionists attempt to exclude the possiibility of the existence of God by proclaiming that life occured randomly, and that new species developed by gradual changes through mutation.The discovery of a rapid explosion of new cratures during the Cambrian period has become an insurmountable problem for evolutionists theorizing gradual development. Even Darwin recognized this problem in his book On The Origin of Species indicating that his evolutionary theory precluded such rapid development of new varieties. The Cambrian fossil beds reveal the abrupt appearance of all of the existing known animal phylea except two-- All in a space of time considered far too short for evolution to operate. Other analysis of the fossil record reveals many other major problems with theories that species evolved, most notably the "gaps". In addition to the Cambrian problem, Darwin was also troubled by these. He theorized, however, that eventually fossils would be uncovered to fill in these gaps. In Darwin's day there were relatively few fossils available, which perhaps justifies his theorizing. Today though, it is estimated that virtually all of the known fossil species have been uncovered-- And we still find missing links throughout all species' chains. Even many leading evolutionists reluctantly acknowledge the problem of the fossil record. Noted evolutionist Steven J. Gould stated,

"The absence of fossil evidence for intermediary stages between major transitions in organic design, indeed are inability, even in our imagination, to construct functional intermediates in many cases, has been a persistent and nagging problem for gradualistic accounts of evolution."

There is one very logical and viable explanation for the gaps in the fossil record and the sudden appearance of a wide diversity of life in the Cambrian period: That the fossil record is actually evidence of creation according to the account in the Bible.

Creation is unexplainable. God has always been here. He has no beginning and no end. He's always been here. He is Eternal. Evolution isn't true. Creation is.

I have already ended it. But I'll end it again. The proponents of creationism argue their side out of blind faith and contorted pseudo scientific contortions. I have nothing much I can say that could persuade someone with that perspective.

I'm a little confused. Which side of the debate are you on? You seem to be arguing for both sides. That doesn't end anything.

Actually, there is no debate. Evolution won before creationism was created.

The debate exists only in the minds of the ignorant and those who like to indulge the ignorant. Generally, scientists find it fun to smash the creationist base, and the creationists are the ignorant ones. You could quote more evidence than one can read in a life time (there is that much evidence in fact) but these fools would not listen. Your arguement is one of the most evident and visible ones:there are thousands more.

Wow dze is surprisingly foolish. I trust math a lot more than literature, and since science IS math, I'd trust (and I can prove) that the world is 4 billion years old. Oh, and the first town was formed around 6000 bc. Prior to that, humans had been existing in a transition phase between hunter gatherer/small farmer. Humans have been around for hundreds of thousands of years. Your ignorance is bleeding through my screen.

as long as some think that God doesn't exist because people get the flu, I don't think you will stop the debate! Why would anyone think that the flu is evidence of evolution????wake up?

Get over it, you CANNOT prove what is NOT true!!!!!

God created the Heavens and the Earth, that's the truth and you will never have proof that it happened any other way!

IF we are to believe the creationist belief, we have to believe that all evolutionary intermediate species of whales existed at the same time. That in itself defies logic and fossil evidence. Further plate tectonics, Einstein's Theory, and Hubble's Law - proving the age of the universe and that it is expanding are convincing enough. How could galaxies be millions of light years away in an earth and universe that is 6000 years old.

Hold on a sec...Isn't there a law of matter that says "Matter cannot be created or destroyed". So how do you explain Humans coming from tiny, miniscule things?
How can humans who have morals, and can plan ahead and love and care for others come from nothing? It just doesn't add up.

All well and good. Also, statistics tell us that macroevolution is not possible in the time allotted. But did you notice that the atheists blame the Christians even when you DO come up with a logical, scientific proof that evolution NEEDS God? They simply refuse to open their eyes and LOOK at the evidence. That's why the debate will go on regardless.

Theistic evolution, let's keep it that way

You forgot, the average height of an american has grown a foot in the last 200 years. That's evolution at work.

So when does the Evolution vs. Interventionalism debate begin?

Beat that and then maybe you'll win, until then evolution is nothing more than something than a theory

A few things, I thought mutations were a loss of information not a gaining of new information.

..and I also heard that the fossil record and the geologic column were based on circular reasoning (date the fossils by the rock and vice versa) so how can that work..?

You also accuse Rach31 of citing a bias source, however the video you refer her to on Youtube seems to be just as bias in favor of evolution.

As for Mitochondrial DNA, all that proves is that there is a common source of DNA outside of the threads provided by a mother and father. Theres no way to tell where it originated or came from...

..and what about the law of thermodynamics that says energy cannot be created or destroyed. That is a proven fact that has been tested over and over again. If this is true how can the universe and life in it have come from nothing?

As for the guy in the video mentioning Unicorns and the fact that no Unicorn fossils have ever been found (was an interesting video btw) theres this to consider...

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation...

All this actually does is widen the debate.

Is adaptive behavior and mutation EVOLUTION.

Evolution, in the traditional sense, is natural selection from a given set of choices.

Now, when you throw something into the mix is that truly evolution or is that a knee jerk reaction, followed by normal defense mechanisms.

Your model above can easily be equated to an inorignic chemistry model.

When the Big Bang happened random charges were released, positive and negative and immediately some of these began to meld together due to their natural adhesive properites into hydrogen.

We can easily see how many of the elements could form naturally this way.

But, U235 doesn't usually form naturally. It require human intervention and processing to render simple Uranium ore into other isotopes.

Now, is that TRULY EVOLUTION on an atomic level.

I mean NATURE is doing this, INTELLEGE DESIGN is.

Now, is the HIV going through all of this NATURALLY or is it facing an assault from an INTELLEGENCE out to take it apart, observe it, destroy it, neutralize it and is this ORGANIC life using natural DEFENSE mechanisms that WOULDN'T NORMALLY BE IN PLAY.

It's like putting a kidney into a person. The body defense start to reject it.

And if your thesis is correct, it is POSSIBLE that NATURAL SELECTION may eventually render things like Pollio innoclautions useless, by RESTORING the body to what it was before the invading entity started changing things.

Your thesis, which inview of the problems with Pennicline these days, may indeed be correct. BUT is that EVOLUTION or the body simply fighting back with the structure NATURE GAVE IT to survive.

Can we term that EVOLTUTION or is it really REVOLUTION or all out WAR.

Finally you have to get to Planck's thesis that just by observing something you change it.

Does that still make the process EVOLUTION or have you tainted things and INTRODUCED bias that wouldn't normally have occured!

I wonder if Evolution scientists would even embrace some of your thinking applied from a STRICTIST point of view.

The MOMENT intellegeces comes into play interacting with something of nature, can you call the results EVOLUTIONARY or did you CREATE those results with your interference.

For EVOLUTION to be the way the Randomists want it to be, there can be NO INTENTFUL BIASING, only NATURAL influences. Those that occur NATURALLY in the environment.

Nature does NOT evolve ALL spieces to become SELF PROTECTIVE against preditors, because NATURAL SELECTION works on a MACRO basis not a MICRO basis. Natural Selection takes the entire LIFE and FOOD CHAIN cycle into account when it makes the choices.

It does not give a little fish some protective device like spines hilly nilly (or does it!)

The choices nature makes starts with the WORLD as a whole, the REGION as require and the individual as necessary.

Of course, we're now starting to talk about nature as if it were an intellegent entity.

I suppose we could say, things can happen randomly, as well as through biasing, as well as through other needs.

But none of this attacks the root point of it all.

IS there an intellegence behind this or is this some automatic, perpectual motion device that works without a brain and a soul.

If the LATTER is true, we can EVENTUALLY CONQURE ANYTHING.

It is ONLY when some INTELLEGENCE is at play that the game goes from being 21 or dice or roulette to being CHESS.

The Religious view is we are involved in a game of Chess

The Ranomist view is this is just lotto being played over and over for no reason, purpose, etc. It's just a perpetual motion machine rolling those little balls

You can potentially win at chess if you are good enough or at least stalemate

In dice it's totally random.

In that case even if you find a cure for HIV it still becomes a dice throw.

Heisenbergs uncertainty principle

The electron is not where it normally is so the process fails

YOu can't predict where the electron will be at any given moment

There are no 20 moves ahead to look at

I guess what's more important than Einstein's saying GOD DOESN'T PLAY DICE is DOES GOD RIG THE TABLE

If God doesn't rig the table we can succeed

If God does, we're no closer to answers because the Randimist Planck/Heisenberg observations would be similar

OF course if GOD doesn't stack the deck, maybe Satan does.

The net results are the same.

Out of chaos comes order. If we learn how to operate in such a matter we would have the understanding of everything that is. As it stands now we have only knowledge of effects, and hypothesis to these effects which cannot be tested. What is right?

Creation and evolution may be one in the same simply by stating that creation was designed with the intent of evolution.
Is this a right answer? No and yes, this is because it is the right answer for me, but cannot be tested either way. Scientifically it is wrong.

The assumption that God does not exist is also not testable by science, this means that any theory claimed by science that God does not exist is actually a hypothesis, and can crumble under its own logic by the simple statement that there is no truth about this.

Really it is quite simple .... Creationism ...now called scientific design ... is the message of Fundamentalists who ignore true science and all its hard evidence and make fundamentalist interpretations of the bible and other such texts.... What they preach is a religious philosophy ...and it is not very mainstream.... Religious beliefs have no place being taught in a science class or in any way effecting what is taught in a science class ....

Just as science is not something to be taught in a religion class...

the two are separate and must remain so..