Science against evolution

[theophilus]

How did life come into existence? There are two possible explanations. One is that natural processes brought about the exitence of simple, single-celled organisms and its descendants evolved to produce all the forms of life that exist today. The other is that it was created by God.

It is widely believed that science has proved that the first explanation is correct and those who reject it do so only because it contradicts their religious beliefs. This belief is false. Science is the attempt to find out things by means of observation and testing. The origin of life hasn't been observed and there is no way it can be tested scientifically.

The reality is that there are scientific facts that aren't compatible with the commonly accepted theory of evolution. Here is a site where hou can find out about some of these facts:

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/index.shtml

Each month a newletter is published with new information. Here is this month's newsletter.

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/new.shtml

It includes an excellent article about how to teach evolution.

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v17i1f.htm

Here is an index of all the material on the site.

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/topics.htm

[Ivellious]

One is that natural processes brought about the exitence of simple, single-celled organisms and its descendants evolved to produce all the forms of life that exist today. The other is that it was created by God.

I completely reject this statement. First of all, the areas of the origins of life and the origins of life's variation (evolution by natural selection) are separate questions. There is no scientific consensus or strong evidence for how life first came to be on Earth, and there is a massive consensus in regards to the validity of evolution by natural selection. Secondly, to say that you either have to believe in atheistic evolution or special creation and there is no other option is ridiculous.

It is widely believed that science has proved that the first explanation is correct and those who reject it do so only because it contradicts their religious beliefs

Science has not proved evolution. Evolution is simply overwhelmingly supported and there is no scientific theory with merit out there to compete with it. And while it is true that plenty of people blindly reject evolution based on ignorance or their religious beliefs, that isn't clearly the only reason.

The reality is that there are scientific facts that aren't compatible with the commonly accepted theory of evolution. Here is a site where hou can find out about some of these facts:

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/index.shtml

Just glancing through this site, it is loaded with falsehoods and misrepresentation of information. It also appears to lack any citations and has no scientific evidence to support their views. This is amateurish at best, and no one should take this as a legitimate scientific source.

[RickD]

Theophilis, lemme guess. That's a young earth site?

[PaulSacramento]

The issue really isn't evolution, it is and i think, alwats has been, the "cause" of evolution.
Chance, randomness, natural selection, survival of the fittest, those things just don't add up for many.
I think that most, if not all, accept that living organisms adapt/change to meet the demands of their environment, which is evolution in a "nutshell".
The issue is the "engine" that drives it I think.

[Philip]

Evolution? THAT question should be WAY down the list of questions about the subject of our origins. How about:

WAY before there was any life in the universe, when nothing was moving, what is the CAUSE of the FIRST movement (call that the "Big Bang" or whatever)? Oops, but before even THAT, is the question of: WHAT exactly existed BEFORE The Big Bang? Other universes? Nah, you've just kicked the cosmic can down the road. And theories state that, before the Big Bang, all of the particles and energy in our universe were once confined to a space about the size of a dime; an immense amount of matter and energy were built up in an infinitesimally small point.

OK, and so WHERE did these pre-Big Bang particles and energy come from, and what made them MOVE/EXPLODE with such unfathomable precision?

And so we now have String Theory, an attempt to reconcile general relativity with quantum theory - the idea that tiny strings vibrating in unseen dimensions of space make up all matter, light, energy, everything. Theoretical physicist Michio Kaku says, "Our universe could have either popped into existence or collided with another universe." He tells us to imagine a bubble bath where each bubble represents a universe, and that in this multiversal tub that existed before our Big Bang—and still exists today—universe bubbles are colliding, popping, budding new bubbles, expanding and contracting. Kaku says that if this scenario really exists, then “Big Bangs happen all the time.” That is one really big "IF!"

So our universe simply "POPPED" into existence? Really? And so where did these (pre-Big Bang) "tiny strings vibrating in unseen dimensions of space (that ) make up all matter, light, energy, everything," come from? Have they ALWAYS existed? If true, then there ARE things that can exist WITHOUT ANY CAUSE. Lets not forget that this is all theory. And let's remember that the Big Bang was not just any random explosion, as its mathematically unfathomable precision was critical to ALL that came afterward. Pure dumb cosmic luck? It sure doesn't look too dumb, but describing it as "luck" is probably the most disingenuous word usage of all time!

And so we have a miraculous event beyond comparison, that some physicists THEORIZE may "happen all the time," but that we don't know how it happened the FIRST time, much less subsequent times. Wow! We have vibrating strings in UNSEEN dimensions of space making up ALL matter, light and energy - that apparently have ALWAYS existed, yet without a cause? "DOUBLE WOW."

And so a God could not exist, WHO accomplishes all of these very same things - Who has no cause and Who has ALWAYS existed? And yet we're to believe that The Big Bang (an un-caused beginning with un-caused, always-existing matter and energy) IS possible? One (God/A Creator) accomplishes the very same incredible things, but takes unfathomable cosmic "luck" out of the equation, and Who explains the unfathomable precision and design (clearly discernible, even at the very BEGINNING). And yet the other (The Big Bang) is preceded in existence by things that supposedly have always existed without cause, yet blindly and without any direction, randomly and yet brilliantly makes possible a Creation whose probability of precise processes, existence of correct materials, and outcome appear mathematically, statistically and time-wise to exist by no reasonable standards of human comprehension - much less by observable evidences - and which must be accepted BY incredible FAITH?!!! I'd say what we have here are double standards as to what or Who can exist without a cause.

Belief in naturalism and evolution necessitates FAITH that there are things that have ALWAYS existed without a cause, but those with this faith simultaneously deny that a Creator could exist without a cause. Why? Because believing in God is to believe that the universe is a result of the Unfathomable and Miraculous. And yet believing that the universe JUST HAPPENED, by un-caused, pre-existing materials and energy AND blind random chance isn't ALSO believing in the miraculous? I'd say that an atheist has FAR more faith than I ever will, yet it's just that it's misplaced and irrational faith.

Really, arguments in favor of evolution are basically ridiculous, at least if one can't first answer questions relating to the origins of pre-Big Bang existence of matter and energy, as to what made it EXPLODE, and how it did so with such unfathomable, mathematical precision - which was necessary to ALL that eventually sprang from it.

[theophilus]

The December issue of the newsletter is now online:

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/new.shtml

Here are the articles in it:

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v17i3f.htm

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v17i3n.htm

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/v17i3e.htm

http://scienceagainstevolution.info/links12.htm#dec

[jlay]

Consensus.

Oh brother.