ArtsAutosBooksBusinessEducationEntertainmentFamilyFashionFoodGamesGenderHealthHolidaysHomeHubPagesPersonal FinancePetsPoliticsReligionSportsTechnologyTravel

Fallacy in evolution

Updated on March 20, 2013

Evolution of man

Source

Evolution ... it's on!

After lively discussion on subject question, I was unable to answer the following comment from a a fellow hubber because of restraints of the question format:

“diane - so you really don’t care about facts - you just want to perpetuate an archiac fallacy?”

Evidently we are supposed to start a Hub at some point so ...


Is evolution fact?

In response to the question on my archaic fallacy, I picked up a definition from Wikipedia to facilitate discussion:

“Fact indicates a matter under discussion deemed to be true or correct, such as to emphasize a point or prove a disputed issue.”

Consider

1. Evolution does not appear to be fact because there are so many variations of the process. 1 + 1 = 2 is a fact. Women have ovaries. Men have testicles. These are facts.

2. It is not fact that Christianity is an archaic fallacy.

Creationism has scientific support

Scientific proof of Creationism

Evolutionists assume that Creationism is not based on fact. They direct Christian to read multiple sources on evolution. The evolutionists' sources do not state a unified position. Evolution cannot be considered fact if the sources don't agree.

Christiananswers.net directs readers to a list of geneticists, biologists, physicists, and other scientists that do not believe the theory of evolution. http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/edn-scientists.html

Specific sources which document the authenticity of Creationism include:

In the Beginning: Compelling Evidence for Creation and the Flood, by Dr. Walt Brown http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/

Summary of Scientific Evidence for Creation (Part I & II) by Duane Gish,PhDhttp://www.icr.org/article/summary-scientific-evidence-for-creation/

Creation Evidence Discredits Evolution http://www.allaboutcreation.org/creation-evidence.htm

Darwinists are unable support their position

Darwinists has not responded the following problems with evolution

1. Where are the transitional fossils? Darwin said that there should be numberless intermediate varieties, linked closely together in support of evolution. No evidence of transition has been found.

2. The is more evidence to support a young earth and an old earth.

3. The Big Bang theory, taught in schools, does not explain uneven distribution of matter that results from voids and clumps.

a. How did the explosion cause order? The universe is in amazing order.

b. Retrograde motion violates the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum.

I encourage Evolutionists to address problems Darwinism has not explained.


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Creationism is not antiquated fallacy

Yes I care about the facts. I have seen no evidence that evolution is fact. I don’t believe my ideas are faulty or antiquated. It takes faith to believe in Creationism. I believe.

What are your thoughts on evolution?

Has evolution been proved beyond a reasonable doubt?

See results

Fallacy in evolution

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    • Nell Rose profile image

      Nell Rose 4 years ago from England

      Hi diane, interesting hub, I am an evolution kind of gal! lol! but seriously its one of those things that as you say has great big holes in both theories. I do believe in scientific facts such as knowing how old the earth is and so on, and of course dinosaurs and how we date them. But my beliefs are that evolution is just the 'growth' of the earth, and God made everything in the first place at the beginning of time. As we sow seeds on the ground to plant flowers and trees I believe that at the beginning however long ago it was, something started it all off. Whether that be God, or just natural science I have no idea, but I tend to go towards God, I think there is a middle in all this somewhere, and hopefully one day they will figure it out, interesting stuff though, and voted up! nell

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Nell I didn't know you date dinosaurs! I guess that's another way of saying you have an "old man."

    • karthikkash profile image

      Karthik Kashyap 4 years ago from India

      Nice hub :) I wouldn't say that theory of creationism should be limited to Christianity.. Since, Christianity is probably one of the most widely practiced religions in the world, we can understand that the theory is connected to this religion and hence is attacked. Many people don't know that there are about 200 religions and civilizations in this world that talk about flood mythologies. May it be Noah (Jews), Lord Vishnu (Hindus) or the Viracochas (Aztecs).. Not only this, there are similar ancient gods in most polytheistic religions (Egyptian/Ancient Persian/Hindu or some other).. When one starts delving deeper into each and every religion which probably had no connection 10000-15000 years ago and probably even didn't know to read and write, he/she finds glaring similarities that are "in your face". These can only start forcing a person to alter his/her beliefs that these may not be mere myths after all, but there must be something deeper we haven't discovered yet.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for your comments karthik! I was not aware of Hindu and Aztec belief in Creationism.

    • karthikkash profile image

      Karthik Kashyap 4 years ago from India

      I was born Hindu (though I don't practice any religion).. Matsyavatara (the fish avatar of Lord Vishnu) is similar to Noah's ark :) Many people don't know that Sanskrit and Latin were cousin languages (Sanskrit being lot older than Latin and also called by some people as God's language) ;) Yes, a normal Hindu's day to day language involves "God created us" (Brahma being the creator) ;)

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Brahma? When I think of Brahma, I think of a bull. Could you elaborate?

    • karthikkash profile image

      Karthik Kashyap 4 years ago from India

      Even in Hindus, there is the holy trinity (I don't know in detail about the holy trinity in Christianity. I need to read about it), Brahma, Vishnu and Siva. These are the three major gods. Brahma is the giver. He generates life. Brahma is also the god who imparts knowledge. Vishnu is the sustainer as he is responsible for sustaining life on earth. Siva is the destroyer. He is responsible for removing any life form on earth.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      If God is omnipotent and the Alpha and Omega, God could easily make things any date he wants. But here is what begs the question; Man is still evolving. Size, longevity, speed, knowledge, environmental and even wars prove this. I think change and diversity are wonderful gifts on earth.

      So for the beginning it is Creationism. Since the beginning it is evolution.

      (Diane let me know how that sets with you, I am still trying it for size)

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      I like it Eric! You must be a total joy at church. I hope you guys enjoyed dinner Friday night.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Here is some fun evolution Diane. I am born bred and baptized by a federated Methodist, Presbyterian church. I have a degree in philosophy. I am ordained (kind of) as a Lay Eucharistic Minister in the Episcopal Church. I was a Brother in the Order of Saint Lukes and am a Cursillisto.

      The dinner Friday found me in my office with a Deacon and a Priest. They want me to teach adult Catechism of the Ordinary Catholic Church.

      I have no problem with it. In fact started Sunday. Now, my girlfriend, that is evolution, in a soul created by our Father.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      You are a crack up! Keep them laughing while you are teaching!

    • Nell Rose profile image

      Nell Rose 4 years ago from England

      Lol! yes I date dinosaurs! well I did, then I became one!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Oh my Nell, how long did it take to go through the cougar stage?

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Not funny you two. I am a dinosaur.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Eric, I never noticed!

    • karthikkash profile image

      Karthik Kashyap 4 years ago from India

      I like Eric's take on creationism and evolution :)

    • Nell Rose profile image

      Nell Rose 4 years ago from England

      Still in the cougar stage! lol! I just watched a program about creationists being taken to America to speak to scientists about evolution. It was fascinating, and I will admit to yelling at the tv! lol! some of them were open to suggestions but one guy wouldn't see what was in front of him, then it suddenly dawned on me, the light went on so to speak! lol! I think we should all have our beliefs because it balances everything out, if we all believed the same thing then there would be no questions, or beliefs at all, thats my take on it anyway,

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Grrrr! Thanks Nell!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Hi, I left a comment for you back on April's hub.

      Sorry, but the vast majority of your "creation science" resources are based on MISREPRESENTATIONS!

      First off, you provide NO EVIDENCE that Darwinists are "split" on the issue of Evolution. You provide NO SCIENTIFIC data supporting your notion that evolution didn't happen.

      You cite the "Big Bang Theory" and act as if that's "The Theory of Evolution" which it is NOT. And NO ONE who denies the Big Bang Theory can explain why the universe is RAPIDALLY EXPANDING! Why is it rapidally expanding? BECAUSE OF AN OUTWARD EXPLOSION! Hence, the Big Bang.

      I'm not a biologist or a physicist. I am a Religious Studies major. HOWEVER, I DO understand the science behind BOTH the Big Bang Theory and the Theory of Evolution. Here is a great book that anti-evolutionists like yourself should look at:

      http://www.amazon.com/Only-Theory-Evolution-Battle...

      Kenneth Miller is a leading evolutionary biologist who is expert at debunking the intelligent design myth. Also take a look at Richard Dawkins who is a Zoologist who also knows how to defend the theory of evolution. Kenneth Miller, IMHO, can defend evolution better though.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Hi Newengland, I have websites for my sources of information. When there are multiple sites providing conflicting information, that shows the split. My first link shows the sources of my statement and has multiple links. People choose which sources they want to believe. That shows the split with supporters. Thank you for commenting.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Your first link was on ChristianAnswers. It says:

      "Despite strong pressure to accept evolutionism, many intelligent and experienced scientists either openly or secretly dismiss Evolution as highly unlikely or impossible. In the 1980s, researcher and lecturer David Watson noted an increasing trend that continues today, disturbing those who want evolutionism to be perceived as the accepted scientific consensus:"

      This is FALSE! 99% of the scientific community ACCEPTS the theory of evolution as a FACT! Besides, I used to be an IDer until I actually STUDIED the theory of evolution. You should too. WITHOUT pulling on biased anti-evolution sites. I've been to the ChristianAnswers site before and it is DOGMATICALLY YEC which is CONTRARY to science! Further, it argues that a circle is a sphere demonstrating Christians have BAD geometry skills!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for your opinion Newengland!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      It is NOT an opinion! It is FACT! Your idea is the OPINION!

    • rajan jolly profile image

      Rajan Singh Jolly 4 years ago from From Mumbai, presently in Jalandhar,INDIA.

      Dianne, I find it very difficult to understand why if we evolved from apes, the apes are still around. If this is true, then maybe aliens are our evolutionary form as they seem to be far advanced than us. Lol!

      Voted up & interesting.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Rajan, thank you for the chuckle at 5 am.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @rajan jolly

      You may too want to actually STUDY the FACT of evolution. NO evolutionist says that we evolved from apes. NO EVOLUTIONIST! At least, not the apes that are CURRENTLY around! We DO believe that humans, monkeys, baboons, gorillas, orangutans, etc. ALL share a COMMON ANCESTOR as evidenced by the DNA! Only people who are scientifically BACKWARDS deny that we all share a common ancestor!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Newengland, thank you for your passion on the subject.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Thank you. I hope you recognize that evolution is true and factual and that YECism and Intelligent Design is unscientific.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      I recognize and respect the fact that you have a different background from me. It is so wonderful that we all are able to think and form our own opinions. Come people are not able or allowed to do that.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      But evolution isn't an opinion. It is a FACT!

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Oops I must have fallen asleep reading Ascent of Man, the Bible and Darwin's works. I thought creationism is in fact a belief and that Evolution is still referred to as "The Theory of". Evolution has yet to reach the status of scientific fact. Ms. Diane's premise is very valid. Acceptance of a theory as fact requires consensus in the scientific community, evolution has yet to declare consensus. But I respect that people believe evolution is a fact, and I appreciate that they do it without proof. Faith in evolution is a positve optimistic belief in the future --- let us evolve!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      I love it Eric! Only you could state this so positively.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @ericdierker

      Evolution, as a theory, has been proven over and over and over again. The scientific consensus IS that evolution is a fact. I would recommend looking up Michael Shermer and Kenneth Miller.

      Here's my question - is the theory of gravity a fact?

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Hi Eric, In my opinion, gravity is fact. It is proven all throughout the day. To me it is as factual as 1 + 1 = 2.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Not a theory. A Law. There is no law of evolution. Gravity is proven hence a Law of Gravity. There are parts of evolutionary theory that are accepted as fact. That is good. Based on those facts conjecture and hypothesis are formed. So a theory is developed, cool.

      I think all that we argue about here is semantics. I really like some of the facts of evolution. But I love my faith in creationism.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Great comments as always Eric!

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Diane, I came back to reread and analyze this hub. It is really short and easy to read. Just enough references. I just ask a question on long versus short hubs, and I think you did here just what rcrumple is talking about.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Eric I usually read short hubs. I try to make them short and easy to read because I don't want to waste people's time ... especially yours!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @ericdierker

      A law is something that allows us to calculate what happens.

      You can find the calculation and the actual law of gravity here:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Newton%27s_law_of_uni...

      A theory is an explanation as to WHY something happens.

      Quote: "For example, I might propose a hypothesis that the object that you released fell because it was pulled by the Earth's magnetic field. Once we started testing, it would not take long to find out that my hypothesis was not supported by the evidence. Non-magnetic objects fall at the same rate as magnetic objects." end quote

      http://thehappyscientist.com/science-experiment/gr...

      Therefore, gravity is both a theory AND a law. Since gravity is a "theory" then it shouldn't be taught in science class. We also shouldn't teach Einstein's theory of relativity either. Creationism is anti-science propaganda. You cannot consider yourself to be scientific if you believe in creationism.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Here's another "unscientific" theory that the "pseudo-science" teachers tell us about:

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_theory

      My response to these people is that atoms don't exist! They're too small to be seen!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Sorry, I wanted to present a variety of different ideologies on creationism because many people assume that either evolution happened or creation happened.

      There are several varieties of creationism:

      1. young earth creationism (denial of much science)

      2. progressive creationism (denial of evolution but accepts physics and the age of the earth)

      3. evolutionary creationism (accepts common descent but with modification)

      4. theistic evolutionism (god created the universe using natural processes and/or god created the natural processes and properties necessary for putting the universe and all life in it together on its own)

      If there are several different views of creationism, then we can also use this argument against you now that you have used this argument against evolution.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you newengland! I have heard several of those theories. I just take the Bible literally and don't think about the different interpretations. I like hearing what others have to say and appreciate the thought and time you put into it.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      What if I told you that it wasn't science that convinced me that evolution was true, but rather it was the Bible that convinced me that evolution was true?

      Genesis 1:11 - And God said, "Let the earth sprout vegetation, plants yielding seed, and fruit trees bearing fruit in which is their seed, each according to its kind, on the earth." And it was so.

      Genesis 1:20 - And God said, "Let the waters swarm with swarms of living creatures, and let birds fly above the earth across the expanse of the heavens."

      Genesis 1:24 - And God said, "Let the earth bring forth living creatures according to their kinds--livestock and creeping things and beasts of the earth according to their kinds." And it was so.

      Plus, a day to Yah is as a thousand years (2 Pet. 3:8) so time is relative to Yah therefore, the days are probably thousands, millions, maybe even billions of years long!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for your references Newengland! Taken in context, 2 Peter 3:8 is addressing the 7 verses before it. Men will scoff and say there is no God, deny what is Biblical, etc. God has His own time and will do what He wants in His time. If He says soon, we might think today. Soon couple be thousands of years. I don't see the relationship to evolution.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      "God has His own time and will do what He wants in His time"

      The connection with evolutionism is that God has his own time and will do what he wants in his own time. Therefore, God can create the universe in his own timeframe. Hence meaning the Bible destroys young earth creationism!

      Besides, its quoted from Psalm 90:4 which is addressing that time is relative to an everlasting God. Thus, since God was the only one around at the time of creation, then these days, mornings, and evenings should be understood on his timescale, not ours.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      That would be adding to God's Word because nothing is written about evolution:

      Revelations 22:18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book.

      Deuteronomy 12:32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.

      Proverbs 30:6 Do not add to his words, or he will rebuke you and prove you a liar.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Diane I think you may be bit narrow on that. Clearly the Revelations were written before Our beloved Paul wrote his epistles which added to that which was revealed. And it was revealed to Paul. Clearly the whole New Testament added to that found in Deuteronomy. And Proverbs warns fairly against your first paragraph. I find love and the word in your mighty writing which has added to my understanding, how can this be wrong?

      As to speaking of evolution, I think Christ Himself helped us to evolve from the old testament to the new. Testimony and preaching is good but Christ's love is more than that.

      I love you. I could not have said such a thing 15 hundreds years ago, that is evolution.

      I mean nothing harsh by what I say, I mean it lovingly.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @dianetrotter

      You make a despairing mistake. Revelation 22:18 is referring strictly to the book of Revelation. Note that the book of Revelation tells us God is creator (Revelation 4:8-11) but it says nothing about the "how". Evolution does not contradict a creator.

      Deuteronomy 12:32 contradicts your first paragraph, because John of Patmos was adding to the Bible. Besides, Deuteronomy 12:32 is talking about not adding to the commands of Yah.

      Proverbs 30:6 is talking about not adding to Yah's words but the only thing Yah says in Genesis is "let the...produce" which clearly implies evolutionism.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @ericdierker

      I am in a New Testament class right now and you do not have your facts straight about that subject.

      Revelation was definitely written AFTER the seven letters of Paul. The other seven mainstream Christianity attributes to him were probably pseudepigrapha (written in his name and/or his honor or forged). "Forging" is too harsh a word so I think "written in his name" is more accurate. Check out:

      http://www.amazon.com/Forged-Writing-God-Why-Bible...

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @dianetrotter

      Continuing on in your despairing mistake. It is this:

      "That would be adding to God's Word because nothing is written about evolution"

      The Bible never claims to be the only source of truth! It claims that it CONTAINS truth but that does not mean that it is the ONLY reliable source of truth! Besides, the truth it contains is PHILOSOPHICAL, not necessarily historical or scientific. Take Jesus's statement about the mustard seed for instance. Or Jonah and the whale. My NRSV Bible commentary says that Jonah and the whale is NOT historic.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Hi Erirc and Newengland, I stand by what I wrote. The basis of Christianity is the Bible being the inerrant word of God. If I can't believe all of it, I can't believe any of it.

      When Jesus told parables, as was the mustard seed, it was to provide examples and clarity of principle. The writings let you know that He is telling a story or parable.

      NRSV, if I'm not mistaken, is a Jehovah's Witness version of the Bible.

      I disagree with both of you but in love!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      @dianetrotter

      First off, do some research on Biblical inerrancy and as to how self-contradictory this teaching is:

      http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Problems_with_biblica...

      Second off - "If I can't believe all of it, I can't believe any of it ... When Jesus told parables, as was the mustard seed, it was to provide examples and clarity of principle. The writings let you know that He is telling a story or parable." This is a self-contradictory and self-dilusioning statement in and of itself.

      Third: "NRSV, if I'm not mistaken, is a Jehovah's Witness version of the Bible" is a false statement. It is used by the Church of Christ as is the RSV. The NWT is published by Jehovah's Witnesses. For instance, Catholics use the NIV but this is an evangelical translation.

      For more on the NRSV see:

      http://www.biblestudytools.com/nrs/

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      I stand corrected on NRSV - there are so many acronyms that I can't keep up. I saw NRS and RSV when I went to study tools and didn't realize you were referring to one of them.

      I believe the story of Jonah to be true.

      I am a teacher and give hypothetical situations and "suppose" examples all the time. I don't think it is a contradiction.

      I'm glad we have interest going on this thread. Thank you Eric and Newengland!

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Thanks Newengland and Diane, I am learning a lot that I needed to know. I have written a hub on, should bibles be copyrighted, and I think I need to update that work with what I am learning here. I think just like our constitution, strict constructionist and liberal readers should bridge the gap of opinion with love. I think that since Adam and Eve we are learning by the errors of their way and therefor evolving.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      "I believe the story of Jonah to be true." No man can be swallowed by a whale and live.

      " am a teacher and give hypothetical situations and "suppose" examples all the time. I don't think it is a contradiction." You never asserted a "hypothetical situation". You never said, "Maybe these verses are saying what I think they are saying", you said "They ARE saying what I think they are saying".

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Newengland, Jonah and the whale ... a miracle. That's what a miracle is ... the unbelievable happening.

      I think we are blessed and fortunate to be able to have our own beliefs and voice them.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Jonah and the Whale??? Of course it is not possible for man. Perhaps that is why God did it that way. But Jonah is not a parable, it happened says I.

      I preach I do not teach, so I say, "These verses say what I tell you they say............ to me" Each heart is different and each heart hears my message their own way. I cannot crush the spirit in each so that it conform to my understanding.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Eric, belief is the basis of the Christian faith. I agree with you that it should not be debated. I am not upset when people don't believe. I don't think anyone should be upset that I DO believe. Thank God we have the freedom and free will to make our own choices.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Diane, we are loved in personal growth. Should not every generation say the same. I have millenniums of knowledge and my quick beck and call.

      May I suggest that is the evolution of man. Certainly Paul and St. Francis did not have what i have. I believe that you can grow beyond what your great great grand pappy knew. My God, none of your great great grandparents were openly allowed to read. That is evolution.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      I'm a witness Eric!

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      I don't believe in miracles. It's "God of gaps" theology.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      Wow, have you never seen one?

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      "Wow, have you never seen one?"

      Ummm...no. Everything in the universe is naturally explainable. There is no such thing as a "miracle" in the truest sense unless you apply a "Godditist" theology into your mindset. "God caused the rain" "God caused the sunrise" etc., etc.

    • Ericdierker profile image

      Eric Dierker 4 years ago from Spring Valley, CA. U.S.A.

      I can even explain the feeding of the 5,000 using naturally understood phenomenon. I certainly can physically explain how my children were conceived and born. And I understand Love has a distinct bio-chemical correlation in the body. But they are still all miracles to me. While I (being adopted) was quite actually an accident of nature, the love I received in my adopted family was a miracle. As for evolution, definitely a miracle no matter how or why it happens.

      But I guess miracles can only be observed by love. If you don't have it, you just can't observe it.

    • profile image

      newenglandsun 4 years ago

      Are you saying I don't have love? I have love it's just when I disagree with something, I REALLY disagree with something! And love is NOT a miracle!

    • Felipe717 profile image

      Felipe717 4 years ago from Philadelphia, PA

      Awesome! I thought evolution was true until I had to study it. I found great information from the sources you mentioned as well as Answers in Genesis which runs the Creation Museum in Kentucky. They are also working on creating a full-scale replica of Noah's Ark.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for reading and your comments Felipe! I'd love to visit the Creation Museum.

    • RonElFran profile image

      Ronald E. Franklin 4 years ago from Mechanicsburg, PA

      I really appreciate you addressing this subject. Most people who speak of those who believe in creation as being scientifically ignorant, have no idea of the evidence that undermines the theory of evolution. Darwin's own statement about what the fossil record should show if his theory is true vs what it showed then and still does now is something most people who uncritically accept evolution because it is "science" never heard of. Thanks for a good hub.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 4 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for reading and commenting Ron!

    • Rob Lattin profile image

      Rob Lattin 3 years ago from Born in Chicago, now I'm in Mostly Michigan

      Hi Diane. Don't you just love it when evolutionists ASSERT that evolution is fact yet there is no evidence or proof of it. They take proof of creation and force it into their so-called "fact". There are more reasons and proof against evolution yet they don't refuse to believe it's false. Evolutionism is a "Belief" not a science - it is a fabrication, like the belief that the government will take care of you when you get old (yeah right!!). Keep writing and don't let the evolutionists bully you.

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 3 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for reading and commenting Rob! I think it takes more faith to believe in evolution.

    • Rob Lattin profile image

      Rob Lattin 3 years ago from Born in Chicago, now I'm in Mostly Michigan

      Hi Diane! Just re-reading your wonderful hub. You know, we hear that evolution is a fact. Actually, where do we see this "fact"? If it were true then there'd be no argument. No, they really mean it is supported by facts - but when you want specifics you don't get it. It's a house of cards. Facts can also be proven wrong so their argument is even weaker. All you have to do is look at a courtroom trial - evidence and facts are brought in, some don't even apply, some are tossed out, some are incomplete, and then they chooose which facts to use to just to sway the jury to their belief. Keep writing more on the fallacy of evolution so I can report them on social media. Thanks and have a great day!

    • dianetrotter profile image
      Author

      G. Diane Nelson Trotter 3 years ago from Fontana

      Thank you for your comments Rob! I would like for evolutionists to explain how intelligence evolved.

    Click to Rate This Article