Refutes against evolution

[Noogah]

MY RESPONSE TO O'NUS: To start this off, I really look forward to debating you. ALthough I was originally annoyed by the size of your post, I realized that your style is alot like mine. Your post, although it does contain a few scientific refutes, is mainly a philisophic argument as to the likelyhood of evolution, and the dynamics of religion. I myself am no scientist, and am the first to admit so. Philosophy is my stronger point. You have kept your post well worded, and relatively unbiased. You kept a respect to creationism, while combatting it at the same time. I will try to maintain the same respect towards evolution as you did to creationism. And why would you? You may already have a system that explains how your life works around you, why learn something more prolific and complex? I strongly object. This may be the viewpoint of many other creationists, but I do enjoy learning the evolutionary theory. I feel that it is necessary that I be as literate in these concepts as I can, partially because they ARE intelligent and well thought out. However, more because I feel that is my duty as a Christian. I find it useless to debate somebody who knows very little about Christianity or Creationism. Thus, I feel as though I should not debate the topics unless I understand them. This is because our life around us is dynamic, varied, complicated, and beautiful. It is difficult to simply slap a label to our universe and thus we have an equally difficult explanation as opposed to an easy one. I agree. Our world, and life is very complex. However, I do not believe that this justifies evolution. Rather, I think it only makes it all the less likely. Why? Because I personally believe that creationism is far more complex than evolution. Creationists believe God spoke and it happened. But our theory does not even take place in the physical realm. Our theory takes place where time and space do not exist. The laws of logic and nature have not been created. There was only one thing, and it was spiritual. It was God. He wrote the laws of logic, and the laws of nature. The very rules that govern our existence are trivial to him. We are his computer program. His own simulation. His existence is not governed by boundaries, and this is a hard universe to imagine indeed. What methods he used to create the universe is something so complex it is not physical. So complex it happened in seven days. He was not governed by time, and although such a thing is simplistic and nonsensical in this realm, it would make more than sense in a realm without physical boundaries. By physical standards, evolution is amazingly complex. But I believe that it is in fact the simplistic theory. It is a theory that is locked behind the bars of the third dimensional realm. It suggests that our existence is nothing but the essence of matter locked within the fabric of time and space. I will quote A Wrinkle In Time by Madeleine L'Engle: "Oh, child, your language is so utterly simple and limited that it has the effect of extreme complication." I believe that this quote accurately conveys the complexity of Evolution. In short, Evolution suggests that the universe formed itself. I think that this is the simplistic approach by someone who never thought outside of what he could experience. I don't believe that such a complex universe could have formed itself in it's own realm. I believe it needed external interference. What has to be explained is why a God would cause so much suffering and death between species. Respectfully, this is Christianity 101. God did not cause the suffering. Evil and good were not created. They have existed from the beginning of time. Quite simply, God is perfect. He understands evil, but is not evil. Lucifer, having been given a high position by God, got lifted in pride and wanted to take God's place. Because of his rebellion and plot to overthrow, God cast Lucifer (now Satan) out of heaven. Satan manifested hiself as a snake(a trivial thing to do for a spiritual entity) and tempted the humans. The humans chose the sin, and since then, nature has been imperfect. Essentially, God allowed it, he did not cause it. How can a creationist explain the variations between species? This question is actually a commonly asked question. The variations in species was not caused by mutation.(not from a Creationist perspective) It was caused by variation already in the animal's genes that became present depending on what environment they switched to. Were it a hot environment, the species varied from the ones in a cold environment. After 6000 years of interbreeding, we have all the species we do today. This is adaptation. It is Microevolution, and not macroevolution. This change is purely scientific, observed, and accepted by creationists. You may wish to visit this page . Although this website isn't excellent, this particular article wil expound on differences between adaptation, and evolution. variety amongst species which we have established earlier I'm sorry, I believe I fail to understand what variety you are referring to. Could you please rephrase your question? After Darwin's adventure on the HMS Beagle, he reaped a paramount of evidence for the evolutionary theory I cannot debate this unless you provide me with this "evidence" Respectfully, almost all fossils that were thought to have provided infallible proof for evolution have since been debunked. I am really not sure I understand why this is coming up lately. If anything, it supports evolution. Entropy gives dynamic variables to natural selection to occur rather than isolating or limiting it. Without entropy, evolution could not really function. The 2nd law of thermodynamics is a fundament of evolution - not an opposition. Perhaps someone could elaborate on how this is a detriment to evolution..? ...neither do I I might remove that... Proof for an old earth? The whole sedimentary layer is believed to be the results of the flood by creationists. Fossils thought to be from older lesser evolved animals by evolutionists settle on the bottom, and work their way to the top. Actually,this would be an expected result for settling sediment. It also been pointed out by many creationists that fossilized trees have been found growing through these layers. Before I make a conclusion, I must admit that I didn't finish any of the videos. I'm sorry, but if there is one thing that I HATE when debating is videos. Please, only post videos that are completely necessary, and I will watch them. But I don't want to spend 30+ minutes watching videos in a debate, so use them sparingly, and I will watch them. MY CONCLUSION: Evolution has my respect as a theory. But there is no infallible proof for the theory, and for that reason I don't believe it can be considered a fact any more than creation can. Evolutions problem for me is that it has such a limited perspective on existence. According to the theory, everything is physical, and everything has originated from the physical realm. Essentially, the universe formed itself by accident. All thoughts, emotions, awareness, etc. are all just the byproducts of the physical realms...existence. Rather, it makes much more sense to me that the realm in which we live is only a realm within a larger existence. Like a computer simulation in the real world. I believe we have souls, which is what provides our awareness levels. And that is something that I don't believe evolution could have achieved.