Posted on 01/27/2004 10:32:22 PM PST by Cowgirl
Questions for Evolutionists
The test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. Some well-meaning but misguided people think evolution is a reasonable theory to explain man’s questions about the universe. Evolution is not a good theory—it is just a pagan religion masquerading as science. The following questions were distributed to the 750-plus people who attended my debate at Winona State University in Winona, Minnesota, on January 9, 1993. (The videotaped debate is #6, $9.95.) Questions added since the debate remarked with an asterisk (*).
Where did the space for the universe come from?
Where did matter come from?
Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
How did matter get so perfectly organized?
Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
When, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?
When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
Why would any plant or animal want to reproduce more of its kindsince this would only make more mouths to feed and decrease the chances of survival? (Does the individual have a drive to survive, or the species? How do you explain this?)
How can mutations (recombining of the genetic code) create any new, improved varieties? (Recombining English letters will never produce Chinese books.)
Is it possible that similarities in design between different animals prove a common Creator instead of a common ancestor?
Natural selection only works with the genetic information available and tends only to keep a species stable. How would you explain the increasing complexity in the genetic code that must have occurred if evolution were true?
When, where, why, and how did: Single-celled plants become multi-celled? (Where are the two and three-celled intermediates?) Single-celled animals evolve? Fish change to amphibians? Amphibians change to reptiles? Reptiles change to birds? (The lungs, bones, eyes,reproductive organs, heart, method of locomotion, body covering, etc., are all very different!)
How did the intermediate forms live?
When, where, why, how, and from what did: Whales evolve? Sea horses evolve? bats evolve? Eyes evolve?
Ears evolve?
Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails, claws, etc., evolve?
Which evolved first how, and how long, did it work without the others)? The digestive system, the food to be digested, the appetite, the ability to find and eat the food, the digestive juices, or the body’s resistance to its own digestive juice (stomach, intestines, etc.)? The drive to reproduce or the ability to reproduce? The lungs, the mucus lining to protect them, the throat, or the perfect mixture of gases to be breathed into the lungs? DNA or RNA to carry the DNA message to cell parts? The termite or the flagella in its intestines that actually digest the cellulose? The plants or the insects that live on and pollinate the plants? The bones, ligaments, tendons, blood supply, or muscles to move the bones? The nervous system, repair system, or hormone system? The immune system or the need for it?
There are many thousands of examples of symbiosis that defy an evolutionary explanation. Why must we teach students that evolution is the only explanation for these relationships?
How would evolution explain mimicry? Did the plants and animals develop mimicry by chance, by their intelligent choice, or by design?
When, where, why, and how did man evolve feelings? Love, mercy, guilt, etc. would never evolve in the theory of evolution.
*How did photosynthesis evolve?
*How did thought evolve?
*How did flowering plants evolve, and from that?
*What kind of evolutionist are you? Why are you not one of the other eight or ten kinds?
What would you have said fifty years ago if I told you I had a living coelacanth in my aquarium?
*Is there one clear prediction of macroevolution that has proved true?
*What is so scientific about the idea of hydrogen as becoming human?
*Do you honestly believe that everything came from nothing?
After you have answered the preceding questions, please look carefully at your answers and thoughtfully consider the following questions.
Are you sure your answers are reasonable, right, and scientifically provable, or do you just believe that it may have happened the way you have answered? (Do these answers reflect your religion or your science?)
Do your answers show more or less faith than the person who says, "God must have designed it"?
Is it possible that an unseen Creator designed this universe? If God is excluded at the beginning of the discussion by your definition of science, how could it be shown that He did create the universe if He did?
Is it wise and fair to present the theory of evolution to students as fact?
What is the end result of a belief in evolution (lifestyle, society, attitude about others, eternal destiny, etc.)?
Do people accept evolution because of the following factors? It is all they have been taught. They like the freedom from God (no moral absolutes, etc.). They are bound to support the theory for fear of losing their job or status or grade point average. They are too proud to admit they are wrong. Evolution is the only philosophy that can be used to justify their political agenda.
Should we continue to use outdated, disproved, questionable, or inconclusive evidences to support the theory of evolution because we don’t have a suitable substitute (Piltdown man, recapitulation, archaeopteryx, Lucy, Java man, Neanderthal man, horse evolution, vestigial organs, etc.)?
Should parents be allowed to require that evolution not be taught as fact in their school system unless equal time is given to other theories of origins (like divine creation)?
What are you risking if you are wrong? As one of my debate opponents said, "Either there is a God or there is not. Both possibilities are frightening."
Why are many evolutionists afraid of the idea of creationism being presented in public schools? If we are not supposed to teach religion in schools, then why not get evolution out of the textbooks? It is just a religious worldview.
Aren’t you tired of faith in a system that cannot be true? Wouldn’t it be great to know the God who made you, and to accept His love and forgiveness?
Would you be interested, if I showed you from the Bible, how to have your sins forgiven and how to know for sure that you are going to Heaven? If so, call me. See www.creationscience.com for more tough questions for evolutionists.
You may also want to review this: 15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense. From Scientific American.
Indeed, that's why I'm no longer a Christian.
As for the rest of the questions, the askers aren't interested in the answers. They've been answered in exhaustive detail on many threads here and elsewhere, but now they get asked again as if it's for the first time.
Besides, most of the questions above have absolutely nothing to do with evolution. She's lumped in about a half-dozen other scientific disciplines (which creationists also believe are the spawn of Satan) along with biology. This is also a dishonest creationist tactic, but one which your average scientifically-illiterate American is unlikely to catch; to this crowd, all scientists (and therefore all sciences) are the same -- smarty-pants practitioners of arcane mumbo-jumbo whose sole role is to lead good, God-fearing Christians astray.
To be fair and balanced, I should also present the other side. This is probably the best presentation of the creationist position:
Jack Chick's "Big Daddy".
Where did the space for the universe come from?
We don't know. Not a question that evolution tries to answer. Talk to astrophysicists.
Where did matter come from?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
Where did the laws of the universe come from (gravity, inertia, etc.)?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
How did matter get so perfectly organized?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
Where did the energy come from to do all the organizing?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
When, where, why, and how did life come from non-living matter?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
When, where, why, and how did life learn to reproduce itself?
Not a question evolution tries to answer.
With what did the first cell capable of sexual reproduction reproduce?
I don't think we know the answer to this.
You loose-lipped fool! Now you've done it. Your thoughtless admission has given them iron-clad proof of Noah's Ark.
I forgot- When science doesn't have the answer for something yet, then the answer must be supernatural. Silly me.
Damning evolution for not answering where life came from is like damning physics for not answering why my cat is afraid of the vacuum cleaner.
Your response: I don't think we know the answer to this.
Actually, we do. Many organisms are known that can reproduce both ways, so the first time a mutated specimen appeared with the capacity to reproduce sexually, all it needed to do was clone itself, as its ancestors had always done. Soon there'd be enough of this variety to enjoy reproduction the newfangled way.
If this kind of question is the best that creationists can come up with as "stumpers," their case against evolution is tragically doomed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.