User Tag List

Page 1 of 12 123411 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 173

Thread: Scientists Question Darwinism

  1. #1
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    1,268
    Thanked 8,652 Times in 5,666 Posts

    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147829

    Scientists Question Darwinism

    “I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions.”

    The theory of Charles Darwin severely damaged the idea that the Bible should be understood in a literal manner in the eyes of many people but now more and more scientists are questioning Darwin's theory:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...nism-statement

  2. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Jerry Shugart For Your Post:

    Aimiel (February 11th, 2019),CatholicCrusader (February 14th, 2019)

  3. #2
    Over 6000 post club Aimiel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Detroit, Michigan
    Posts
    6,003
    Thanks
    123
    Thanked 219 Times in 152 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    102511
    Here's a list of modern as well as historical scientists who believe in creation: Creation Scientists
    "Surely the Lord GOD will do nothing, but he revealeth his secret unto his servants the prophets." -- Amos 3:7

  4. #3
    TOL Legend The Barbarian's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    9,410
    Thanks
    195
    Thanked 3,017 Times in 2,023 Posts

    Mentioned
    17 Post(s)
    Tagged
    3 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    401807
    Comparing lists from "Scientists who doubt Darwin"-
    https://evolutionnews.org/2006/02/ov...ts_proclaim_t/

    and "Project Steve",-
    https://ncse.com/project-steve

    - we find that about 0.3% of biologists with doctorates in biology or a related discipline don't accept evolutionary theory.

    Does this show you why the bandwagon argument is such a loser for creationists?
    Let's say that I suffer from a delusion. I will call this delusion "Fact-check Syndrome." I respond by citing facts.

    Most people online don't want to be corrected. They do not care about anything that does not agree with them.

  5. #4
    TOL Legend
    Join Date
    Sep 2015
    Posts
    23,812
    Thanks
    3,355
    Thanked 8,320 Times in 6,185 Posts

    Mentioned
    36 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    2147764
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    ... the bandwagon argument is such a loser ...


    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    ... we find that about (99.7%) of biologists with doctorates in biology or a related discipline (do) accept evolutionary theory.

  6. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ok doser For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 14th, 2019),Right Divider (February 20th, 2019),way 2 go (February 13th, 2019)

  7. #5
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    3,420
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1,632 Times in 1,215 Posts

    Blog Entries
    12
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Tagged
    5 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    354237
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    “I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions.”

    The theory of Charles Darwin severely damaged the idea that the Bible should be understood in a literal manner in the eyes of many people but now more and more scientists are questioning Darwin's theory:

    https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...nism-statement
    One would have thought that the Christian Church had learned by now not to pit itself against "science," particularly when there is no need!

    If one believes in God directed creation, the mechanics (instantaneous vs evolution) and the timelines (6 days vs 4 billion years) should be of minimal theological concern!

    Whatever Darwin's deficiencies, the geological record and carbon dating are not going to lend themselves to a literal interpretation of Genesis!

  8. #6
    Over 2000 post club way 2 go's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    2,030
    Thanks
    1,784
    Thanked 1,206 Times in 683 Posts

    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    405568
    Dinosaur soft tissue





    --



    * "65-million" Year Old T. rex Soft Tissue: The T. rex photos above are actually old news, whereas all the latest published journal papers, through 2014, are listed chronologically, below. As for these photos though, North Carolina State University discovered this original biological tissue from a supposedly 65-million-year-old Tyrannosaurus Rex thighbone, with transparent and pliable blood vessels containing red blood cells. See these and other T. rex photos at Smithsonian Magazine and MS-NBC, and see an early Nat'l Geographic report. Famed paleontologist Jack Horner of Montana State University worked the excavation site. In a 2011 development, ten leading universities and institutes including Harvard, the University of Manchester, and the University of Pennsylvania published in PLoS One, a peer-reviewed journal, that they had verified that presumed dinosaur material is indeed original biological tissue from a dinosaur! Creationists refer to dinosaurs as missionary lizards for many reasons including:
    - the short-lived Carbon 14 everywhere including in dinosaur bones
    - the 521-year half-life of DNA that helps date the actual age of fossils containing dinosaurian genetic material, and
    - the mostly left-handed amino acids that should be equally right and left-handed if they were "Jurassic", and
    - the research on Egyptian mummies that established 10,000 years as an upper limit for how long original biological molecules could survive. Interestingly, the renowned evolutionist PZ Myers ridiculed our Real Science Radio program by repeating what had been a widely-discredited secular hope that the "soft-tissue" dinosaur finds were "biofilm" contamination from bacteria. But as 60 Minutes shows and Bob Enyart sums it up, "This is dinosaur."

  9. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to way 2 go For Your Post:

    JudgeRightly (February 14th, 2019),Right Divider (February 20th, 2019)

  10. #7
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Oct 2015
    Posts
    964
    Thanks
    79
    Thanked 68 Times in 59 Posts

    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    They have even rationalized that the T.Rex is not a bird?! Its teeth are birds teeth like a chicken barely has!

  11. #8
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    1,268
    Thanked 8,652 Times in 5,666 Posts

    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147829
    Quote Originally Posted by jgarden View Post
    Whatever Darwin's deficiencies, the geological record and carbon dating are not going to lend themselves to a literal interpretation of Genesis!
    The subject under discussion concerns whether people were evolved or whether they were created by God.

    What say you?

  12. #9
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Under the Hill and Over the Hedge
    Posts
    788
    Thanks
    311
    Thanked 428 Times in 303 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    149525
    Well, we know that taxonomically, biologically, and genetically Humans are part of the family Hominidae, we are Great Apes. If Humans are a unique creation separate from that family then one or more of those links should not exist, particularly the genetic link.
    "Repubs must not allow [The President] to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress," Donald Trump

  13. #10
    TOL Legend Jerry Shugart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    San Luis Potosi,Mexico
    Posts
    13,350
    Thanks
    1,268
    Thanked 8,652 Times in 5,666 Posts

    Mentioned
    97 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Rep Power
    2147829
    Quote Originally Posted by Kit the Coyote View Post
    Well, we know that taxonomically, biologically, and genetically Humans are part of the family Hominidae, we are Great Apes. If Humans are a unique creation separate from that family then one or more of those links should not exist, particularly the genetic link.
    I think that many scientists today are also questioning whether or not the family Hominide came about from mutation and natural selection:

    I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions.

  14. #11
    Over 3000 post club
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    3,399
    Thanks
    1
    Thanked 1,110 Times in 777 Posts

    Mentioned
    35 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    274012
    Quote Originally Posted by jgarden View Post
    ...

    Whatever Darwin's deficiencies, the geological record and carbon dating are not going to lend themselves to a literal interpretation of Genesis!
    Exactly. People get bogged down in the mechanism of evolution, and where life came from. But the plain facts are that the living creatures
    of today are not the same as those of millions of years ago.

  15. #12
    BANNED
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    US of A
    Posts
    5,678
    Thanks
    512
    Thanked 761 Times in 625 Posts

    Blog Entries
    1
    Mentioned
    13 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Aimiel View Post
    Here's a list of modern as well as historical scientists who believe in creation: Creation Scientists
    Considering that almost all great men of science and learning throughout history have been men of faith, I would say that list should be quite long.

  16. #13
    Over 750 post club
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Under the Hill and Over the Hedge
    Posts
    788
    Thanks
    311
    Thanked 428 Times in 303 Posts

    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    149525
    Quote Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart View Post
    I think that many scientists today are also questioning whether or not the family Hominide came about from mutation and natural selection:

    “I think more scientists are realizing the limitations to Darwinism, specifically in regard to the origin of life and the complexity of the cell. So much of how cells actually work reveal how impossible it is that life arose from mutation and natural selection. As we have learned more and more about molecular and cellular biology, more scientists doubt Darwinism although they may not admit it for fear of repercussions.”
    An interesting quote as it is technically correct and yet does not say what you imply it does. Life did not arise from mutation and natural selection, those came afterward.
    "Repubs must not allow [The President] to subvert the Constitution of the US for his own benefit & because he is unable to negotiate w/ Congress," Donald Trump

  17. #14
    Over 2000 post club User Name's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    2,257
    Thanks
    549
    Thanked 490 Times in 347 Posts

    Mentioned
    6 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    232029
    Quote Originally Posted by The Barbarian View Post
    Does this show you why the bandwagon argument is such a loser for creationists?
    Why would anyone in their right mind want to believe the consensus of experts? It's much better to wing it.

  18. #15
    TOL Legend genuineoriginal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    On a sea of glass mixed with fire in front of a throne.
    Posts
    10,165
    Thanks
    1,746
    Thanked 1,752 Times in 1,284 Posts

    Mentioned
    9 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Rep Power
    523678
    Quote Originally Posted by way 2 go View Post
    Does it taste like chicken?
    Learn to read what is written.

    _____
    The people who are supposed to be experts and who claim to understand the science are precisely the people who are blind to the evidence.
    ~ Dr Freeman Dyson

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 7 users browsing this thread. (1 members and 6 guests)

  1. TrumpTrainCA

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
About us
Since 1997 TheologyOnline (TOL) has been one of the most popular theology forums on the internet. On TOL we encourage spirited conversation about religion, politics, and just about everything else.

follow us