Evolution: Fact or Fiction?

United States
January 30, 2016 9:25pm CST
I wanted to share something that I came across recently. Many people believe in evolution but have not thoroughly researched it. It’s a very involved subject and there are lots of different thoughts on this very controversial subject, which is why I wanted to share this information. Fact: It cannot be disputed that ALL scientific research indicates that life can NOT spring from nonliving matter . Question: What is the scientific basis for SAYING that the first cell sprang from nonliving chemicals? Fact: Researchers have RECREATED in the laboratory the environmental conditions that they BELIEVE existed early in the earth’s history. In these experiments, a few scientists have been able to manufacture some of the MOLECULES found in living things but not a living cell. Question: If the chemicals in the experiment represent the earth’s early environment and the molecules produced, represent the building blocks of life, whom or what does the scientist who performed the experiment represent? Does he or she represent blind chance or an intelligent entity? If it takes an intelligent entity to RECREATE something, who CREATED it in the first place? If it takes an intelligent entity to create and program a lifeless robot, what would it take to create a living cell, let alone a human being? What takes greater faith – to believe that the millions of intricately coordinated parts of a cell arose by mere chance or to believe that the living cell is the product of an intelligent mind? There is no contest when a person does the research on a living cell and DNA. Charles Darwin, while fascinated with the way that traits, such as the color of your hair, your eyes and your skin is passed from one generation to the next, he knew little about the laws of genetics and even less about the mechanisms within the cell that govern heredity. But now, 150 years later, biologists have spent decades studying human genetics and the detailed instructions that are embedded in the DNA. So, the big question now is: where did these instructions come from? Consider this: A compact disc is impressive. An instruction book on any subject is clear evidence that an intelligent person wrote it. DNA is the instructions contained in a cell that determines everything about a newly fertilized egg in the womb of a woman, as that cell continues to divide until an entire baby is formed and born into this world. Where did all these instructions come from? Does not the “writing” of these instructions REQUIRE a writer? DNA’s capacity to store information has no equal in today’s computer world. DNA contains all the instructions needed to build a unique human body and maintain it throughout life. For DNA to work, it has to be copied, read and proofread by a swarm of complex molecular machines called enzymes which must work together with precision and split-second timing. Imagine that you found a computer in a factory and the computer is running a complex program that directs all the workings of the factory and is also sending out instructions on how to build and maintain every machine there and is making copies of itself and proofreading them? Would you conclude that the computer and its programs must have made themselves or that they were produced by intelligent minds?
3 people like this
5 responses
@OneOfMany (12406)
• United States
31 Jan 16
Maybe you should edit your topic to be about Abiogenesis and not Evolution. Abiogenesis is about life originating from non-organic matter. Evolution is the change of heritable traits over many generations (which can be observed from bacteria populations in a laboratory, thus proving evolution to be factual). As for the first cell appearing out of nowhere? It's not possible to go from nothing to something that complex. Instead there were multiple phases of proto-life before cells came around. Think of viruses. They need cells to reproduce. It's probable that there were many other types of life out there that consisted of basic codes before they were ever more involved. You don't build a building without a foundation.
3 people like this
• United States
31 Jan 16
I titled it with the word Evolution so that people would recognize the word and MAYBE want to read what I wrote, but I do agree with you that evolution is a different subject altogether. Evolution, when it means slight changes in traits from one generation to another is factual, but evolution as it is being taught in schools today, is about one species changing into another species and that is NOT factual. There is no proof of that at all. No fossil evidence and no missing links ever found. The pictures in school books and other so-called scientific journals, of what early humans MAY HAVE looked like are FALSE and many other things that scientists have presented from time to time have been proven to be false also. I feel that any person can believe anything they want to believe. That's only FAIR, but the research that I have done has shown to me that while many scientists WANT to prove that one species "evolved" into another species, they have NO proof whatsoever and more and more scientists are now realizing that with the discovery of DNA, that an intelligent designer is much more likely than previously believed. Many people have to go back more than 150 years to Darwin's theory of evolution to hold onto their belief, but with more than 150 years of MODERN scientific discovery since Darwin, most people, including most scientists have been forced to conclude that intelligent design is the answer to the creation of life.
1 person likes this
@OneOfMany (12406)
• United States
31 Jan 16
@IreneVincent An interesting things about genetics would be the Russian fox experiment that was started several decades ago (I want to say 50 years, but I can't remember the exact number). They wanted to see the path to the common dog and how different breeds came about. No matter how you bring up a wolf cub, it will be wild when it gets older. So domestication had to have been generation. Because wolves were too long lived, they used foxes. They'd breed the more docile ones together and after about 10 generations their ears would be floppy, they would have different coloration, some had spots, and so on. Their whole bodies were changing because of the match of docile genes. They were still the same species, but looked completely different.
1 person likes this
• United States
31 Jan 16
@OneOfMany That's how they get ALL the different "breeds" of dogs and cats, etc. but as you said, "they were still the same species." And that's why breeders protect their animals from any chance of a stray dog impregnating their precious PURE BRED dog or cat. Any dog can breed with another dog but a dog doesn't breed with a cat. They are different species. That is the way God created animals. "According to their kind." One species does not breed with another species naturally. IF scientists force, by artificial insemination, the breeding of two different species, like a lion and a tiger to get a liger, that offspring is sterile and can NOT reproduce. Mules are sterile. Any mixture of species by human efforts produce only sterile animals that cannot reproduce. This was God's doing. This was the way HE meant animals to be. Genesis 1:24, 25 Each animal was created "according to its kind." No human has been able to change that LAW that God put in place. Its just one more HUGE piece of evidence that one species does not and CAN NOT "evolve" into another.
@DWDavis (10774)
• Pikeville, North Carolina
31 Jan 16
Your argument is very persuasive, but the fact that scientists haven't been able to create a living cell from what they "think" might have been in the primordial oceans under conditions they "think" might have existed on the planet two, three, or four billion years ago does not conclusively prove that such a thing did not happen. The truth is, no one on Earth knows exactly what happened all those billions of years ago and we probably never will.
3 people like this
@Mike197602 (13363)
• Worcester, England
31 Jan 16
I agree. We may discover more about our creation but doubt if it'll be in any of our lifetimes.
2 people like this
• United States
31 Jan 16
I'm not REALLY concerned with what happened billions of years ago. While the Earth has been in existence for who knows how long, and even LIFE on Earth has been in existence for who knows how long, HUMANS have been around for a much shorter time, according to the Bible. I'm a Bible reader and I realize that many people are NOT, so I don't argue that point, but the Bible is VERY specific about life spans and genealogies so that's what I USE as a guide. The Bible is the MOST respected source of information in the world, in my humble opinion. No one has ever proven the Bible to be wrong, even though it has been highly criticized and maligned. It's still here even though many have tried to destroy it and it's still distributed by the millions year after year in hundreds of languages. God had it written and God has been preserving it intact, whether people believe that or not. It's HIS only message to mankind and it contains a "sacred secret" that is now being revealed and it means life to those who take the time to read it and understand it. While scientists are very intelligent and have done a lot of research, they weren't HERE when life on Earth began, but God was. And while I respect the work of scientists in their QUEST to FIND answers, unfortunately they don't agree on much of anything, and they are only human, just like me, so why should I take their word over the word of God?
2 people like this
• United States
31 Jan 16
@Mike197602 All a person really has to do it read the Bible and it tells us EXACTLY how the creation of man came about. It's really VERY simple. God created man and woman and all humans descended from them. That is so much easier to believe than anything that scientists can come up with that has no proof.
1 person likes this
@Mike197602 (13363)
• Worcester, England
31 Jan 16
possibly we were created but we certainly were not created as the bible describes it. Way too many things it says about creation have been utterly disproved for any reasonable person totake it seriously. Small example...where were the dinosaurs in the bible and also the age it claims the earth to be is just slightly off
2 people like this
• United States
31 Jan 16
The Bible doesn't give the AGE of the Earth. It only gives the age of MAN. And it's VERY specific with life spans and genealogies. What Genesis 1:1 says is "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." It doesn't say when that "beginning" happened. The six days of creation also do not mean six 24 hour days. A "day" can mean thousands of years or any number of years. Creationists are the ONLY ones who believe that God made everything in six 24 hour days. Those who study everything the Bible says about creation disagree with them. Have you ever said: "in my day, we did such and such." what did you mean by your "day" ? A 24 hour period? NO. The Bible says at 2 Peter 3:8 "...let this one fact not be escaping your notice, beloved ones, that one day is with Jehovah (God) as a thousand years and a thousand years as one day." You said that "too many things it says about creation have been utterly disproved for any reasonable person to take it seriously." That's a BROAD statement. I'd like for you to NAME just ONE thing that has been disproved and by whom has it been disproved? The Bible has NEVER been proved wrong. As for the dinosaurs, the Bible only mentions a few animals by name where there are in fact, thousands of creatures that were created by God who are not mentioned in the Bible. Skunks for instance. Just because they aren't mentioned doesn't mean that they weren't created by God and who named them dinosaurs anyway? Modern scientists, who found some bones. Perhaps God had Adam name them something else, since Adam was given the "job" to name the animals. Genesis 2:19,20 Most people who criticize the Bible have NEVER read the Bible in it's entirety and really studied what it says. The Bible actually contains a "sacred secret" and those who really read and understand it, KNOW that what it says is true. Learning that "sacred secret" means life to those who understand it and live by it.
1 person likes this
@Mike197602 (13363)
• Worcester, England
31 Jan 16
@IreneVincent I'll get back to you. I have read the bible cover to cover more than ten times.
1 person likes this
• United States
31 Jan 16
@Mike197602 Then tell me how it has been proven wrong? What part is wrong? Do you know what the "sacred secret" contained in the Bible is?
1 person likes this
@aju007 (1471)
• Thiruvananthapuram, India
31 Jan 16
You have done a great job here. Yeah sometimes it is little bit crazy to believe in this. If we look at the new postualte of this theory, which is called Pucntuated Equilibrium, it makes no sense. They now say they dont need a common ancestor to evolve but its like a jump from one species to another. That means one day if a bird lays an egg and what hatches out is a lizard (my example). I dont know much about it. this is what I understood from reading about Punctuated Equilibrium. Also Im asking for your permission to share this on facebook with credits? Thanks in advance.
2 people like this
• United States
31 Jan 16
I wonder if Facebook is a good place to share something like this, although I don't mind you sharing it with others.. I also hope that you will read all my responses to those who commented on what I wrote. It's a very involved subject. I have spent a LOT of time researching the facts. Many volumes have been written on the subject and many more are yet to be written. I have to say I'm not familiar with the "Punctuated Equilibrium" theory, but I will certainly spend some time researching it.
1 person likes this
@aju007 (1471)
• Thiruvananthapuram, India
31 Jan 16
@IreneVincent Yeah check that out. Its a bit in contrast with the gradualism which they kept there for a long time.
1 person likes this
• United States
31 Jan 16
@aju007 I definitely will check it out. I really enjoy gathering information on different subjects. Especially about evolution because it is being taught in public schools with fake pictures.
1 person likes this
@jstory07 (65293)
• Roseburg, Oregon
31 Jan 16
The simple truth is God made man and than women and all life was made by god.
1 person likes this
• United States
31 Jan 16
That's what I believe also Judy. It's very simple and the Bible, explains it so well.