Difference between revisions of "Talk:World History Homework Ten Answers - Student Two"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(reply re: evolution)
Line 2: Line 2:
  
 
But I don't see why creation must necessarily be direct, rather than through evolution. I already consider literal Adam and Eve and original sin to be foregone conclusions. My question is why living organisms need to be separately created. I want to understand why creationists reject this possibility. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 16:21, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
 
But I don't see why creation must necessarily be direct, rather than through evolution. I already consider literal Adam and Eve and original sin to be foregone conclusions. My question is why living organisms need to be separately created. I want to understand why creationists reject this possibility. [[User:AddisonDM|AddisonDM]] 16:21, 19 April 2009 (EDT)
 +
 +
: Several reasons for rejecting it:
 +
 +
:* it's virtually impossible to construct the complex from the simple.  No one would build a car from a bicycle, for example.
 +
:* evolution requires enormous time even if it were possible, time that contradicts evidence and the Bible
 +
:* flooding, which is occurs often (and was referenced by Jesus), destroys any possibility of an evolutionary process
 +
:* there are too many [[Counterexamples of Evolution]] for it to be plausible
 +
:* why the urge to embrace an atheistic, deceit-ridden theory?
 +
 +
:--[[User:Aschlafly|Andy Schlafly]] 13:35, 20 April 2009 (EDT)

Revision as of 17:35, April 20, 2009

This talk page? To start, we need a definition for evolution. By evolution, I mean the biological process by which less complex organisms slowly become more complex. Of course I reject the standard, naturalistic Theory of Evolution.

But I don't see why creation must necessarily be direct, rather than through evolution. I already consider literal Adam and Eve and original sin to be foregone conclusions. My question is why living organisms need to be separately created. I want to understand why creationists reject this possibility. AddisonDM 16:21, 19 April 2009 (EDT)

Several reasons for rejecting it:
  • it's virtually impossible to construct the complex from the simple. No one would build a car from a bicycle, for example.
  • evolution requires enormous time even if it were possible, time that contradicts evidence and the Bible
  • flooding, which is occurs often (and was referenced by Jesus), destroys any possibility of an evolutionary process
  • there are too many Counterexamples of Evolution for it to be plausible
  • why the urge to embrace an atheistic, deceit-ridden theory?
--Andy Schlafly 13:35, 20 April 2009 (EDT)