An argument in favor of creationism

We all know, and agree, that second law of thermodynamics entropy is a very real thing, and no one argues with it as one of the proven laws of physics. Nevertheless, the scientific literature does contain reports of apparent speciation events in plants, insects and worms.

But in the s Richard Hardison, then at Glendale College, wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's.

The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution. On the contrary, biology has catalogued many traits produced by point mutations changes at precise positions in an organism's DNA —bacterial resistance to antibiotics, for example. How can this happen.

Natural selection is based on circular reasoning: National Center for Science Education Web site www.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

The theory goes something like this: Freeman and Company, In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution.

Offering resources for combating misinformation and monitoring antievolution legislation, it is ideal for staying current with the ongoing public debate. Astrochemical analyses hint that quantities of these compounds might have originated in space and fallen to Earth in comets, a scenario that may solve the problem of how those constituents arose under the conditions that prevailed when our planet was young.

Thus, physics describes the atomic nucleus with specific concepts governing matter and energy, and it tests those descriptions experimentally. Drop a fast-breeding pair of small-beaked finches and a slower-breeding pair of large-beaked finches onto an island full of food seeds.

Natural selection might explain microevolution, but it cannot explain the origin of new species and higher orders of life. Let us handle each of these one at a time: He makes similar points about the blood's clotting mechanism and other molecular systems.

Science vs. Bible? 5 Arguments for and Against Creationism From the Ken Ham, Bill Nye Debate

For instance, evolution implies that between the earliest known ancestors of humans roughly five million years old and the appearance of anatomically modern humans aboutyears agoone should find a succession of hominin creatures with features progressively less apelike and more modern, which is indeed what the fossil record shows.

Creationism is literal; there is no interpretation. An amazing fossil creature from million years ago named Tiktaalik embodies the predicted and long-sought transition of certain fishes to life on land.

But if everything existed within that point, what would there be to act upon it from the outside. Today's intelligent-design advocates are more sophisticated than their predecessors, but their arguments and goals are not fundamentally different. Similarly, the blood-clotting system seems to involve the modification and elaboration of proteins that were originally used in digestion, according to studies by Russell F.

But they may help inform those who are genuinely open to argument, and they can aid anyone who wants to engage constructively in this important struggle for the scientific integrity of our civilization. Nevertheless, even if their objections are flimsy, the number and diversity of the objections can put even well-informed people at a disadvantage.

15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense

Of course we have lots of evidence for evolution. If the point of singularity existed in a stable state, why did it suddenly explode. He recalled a situation where planes crashed on the ice in Greenland in and were discovered 46 years later, covered with feet of ice.

His opponent stands up and states that the evidence is not sound because the dog could belong to anyone and is not necessarily his dog.

Unfortunately, in holding to this, the scientists are contradicting themselves. Jones and Bartlett Publishers, The Second Law of Thermodynamics says that systems must become more disordered over time.

If it were valid, mineral crystals and snowflakes would also be impossible, because they, too, are complex structures that form spontaneously from disordered parts.

The universe is dying of heat loss, energy loss. Creationist arguments are notoriously errant or based on a misunderstanding of evolutionary science and evidence. It is a story, so employs figures of speech and other literary devices to tell the story of how God created man e.

Old earth creationist do believe in the 7 day representation in the bible, but as was stated in the 2nd round, the hebrew word for day could mean a general, vague time.

I'm always looking for some splendid argument from a creationist that would make me think, but they always give me such silliness, instead. When we accept this as the only solution possible, we are then forced to realize that the real question is not whether the universe was created, but who created it.

Living things have fantastically intricate features—at the anatomical, cellular and molecular levels—that could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated.

He also states in the bible: Thus the universe leapt into being. This set of pages attempts to collect all the creationist claims you are likely to run across, provide brief rebuttals, and, in many cases, point to where you can find further information. Scientific creationism differs from conventional science in numerous and substantial ways.

One obvious. Evolution isn't an argument against creationism, because there is Old Earth Creationism. See also Hugh Ross theory.

He has a number of books on this topic and provides a case for Old Earth Creationism that points out that the data we have is more consident with Creationism, specifically the explosions of species (ie Cambrian Explosion) are more.

Thank you, Shaun, for giving a concise but lucid summary of the traditional arguments for the existence of God. I have always felt that Anselm's argument is something of a shell game. Sep 09,  · Don’t you just love a challenge? I’m always looking for some splendid argument from a creationist that would make me think, but they always give me such silliness, instead.

Common Argument #6: Like creationism, evolution is just a theory. Your Response: No, evolution is not a “theory” in the way that creationism is a theory. Youtube Screenshot Ken Ham, founding president and CEO of Answers in Genesis, debates Bill Nye at The Creation Museum Tuesday night.

Ham argued that there are different kinds of science: observational science, which involves the world as it is, and historical science, which attempts to understand the world that came before.

An argument in favor of creationism
Rated 4/5 based on 98 review
15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense - Scientific American