Charles Darwin

Darwin Theory of Evolution gives us a remarkable ground on the origins of species. For this we can now accurately within scientific measure. identify how we came to be, giving scientists a clean platform to built and work from;thru this means the field of biology have benifited enormously from; thus from basic biology, taxonomy, natural selection to stem cell reasearch, Human Genome Project, etc.

The Theory of Evolution has survived attempts of refuting,but with the over whelming evidence and layers of facts after facts piled on top of each oter; that what makes the theory of evolution valid.

Darwin Theory of Evolution gives us a remarkable ground on the origins of species. For this we can now accurately within scientific measure, identify how we came to exist, giving scientists a clean platform to built and work from;thru this means the field of biology have benifited enormously; thus from basic biology, taxonomy, natural selection to stem cell reasearch, Human Genome Project, etc.

The Theory of Evolution has survived attempts of refuting,but with the over whelming evidence and layers of facts after facts piled on top of each other; that what makes the theory of evolution valid.

I Hope This Helped, Andres914.

Christians disagree about all kinds of things. On this issue (at the risk of being too simplistic) there are basically two different views.

All Christians firstly would believe that almighty God is the creator. What they disagree on is the 'How' of creation.

Those who take the Bible literally would reject evolution, since it is not found in the Bible and contradicts the Bible.

Those who do not wish, for whatever reason, to take the Bible literally, would incorporate, or seek to incorporate evolution, as God's method of creating the universe and all that is in it to the point of what we observe today.

There are thus two 'camps' on this issue. The 'literalists' would argue that Jesus believed in a literal interpretation of Genesis 1 etc and that God is capable (if He is capable of anything at all) of saying in the bible what He wants to say about the origins issue. They would also argue with some considerable justification, that if one does not believe what God says in Genesis 1 and following, what else does one not believe. The resurrection itself is, to many, another 'unbelievable' event that God has also told us about. The other point which is made by creation scientists on this issue is that science itself does not actually demand an old earth and there are many scientific problems with evolution and the evolutionary ages. They thus see that evolution is tied not just to a false belief about origins but to false science, or at least many who espouse it ignore the serious problems with the data.

Those who support a non-literal interpretation would argue that much incontrovertible science supports the evolutionary argument and so it is necessary to change or reinterpret Genesis to match what science has discovered. They would also argue that this 'infallible' evidence of science makes those who believe the Bible into a laughingstock.

In the end, it would seem that the question boils down to one of authority (even though others may disagree and hold that there is no contradiction at all between what the Bible says and what science says). One camp regards the Bible as the ultimate authority and that science must come into line behind it. The other would argue that scientific understanding must determine how the Bible is viewed.

Answer:

Evolution is not science. Empirical science is

1. observable
2. repeatable
3. measurable

Evolution is not observable, it is not repeatable, nor is it measurable. It contradicts the 1st and 2nd laws of thermodynamics.

1. matter and energy cannot be created or destroyed
2. everything goes from order to disorder

Life only comes from life. That is the only observable, repeatable, and measurable know way of life being created. It has never been observed to come from non-living substances.

Refer to the chart below to more fully see why Christians would disagree with the theory of evolution.

Creation

Evolution

Cause

God was the Cause

For every effect, there is a cause (observable)

There was not cause - 15 billion years ago for no know reason, the universe exploded itself into existence. Time, chance, and natural process created all things.

The creation of the universe is an effect with no cause (not observable).

Origin

The universe was spoken into existence by God's Word.

Matter cannot be created or destroyed by natural processes (observable).

Began with 'singularity', a tiny infinitely hot and dense point

Matter was created by a natural process (not observable).

Energy

We are devolving

Energy goes from a state of usable energy to less usable energy (observable).

We are evolving

Energy goes from a state of less usable energy to more usable energy (not observable).

Space

Earth created first (day 1)

Stars came afterwards (day 4) with the sun and moon.

Stars formed first

Earth formed afterwards

Earths

Covering

Water

Fire

Time Constraints

6 Days - The creation of the World was FINISHED in six day and is no longer taking place (observable).

Infinite Time - 4.6 billion years ago the earth evolved by natural processes. The world is in a continuous process of creation evolution (not observable).

Quality

Very Good

Primitive, Violent

Planning of

Life

By design

Accident

Origin of

Life

God

Life comes from life (observable), no known exceptions.

Forces of Nature

It is possible for life to come from non-life (not observable).

Time needed

for Life

2 Days (Faith based) - all animal/human life was created on day 5 and 6.

Millions of years (Faith based) - They don't know how it happened but given enough time they BELIEVE it will.

Species

Kind begets kind (observable).

Kind begets some other kind (not observable).

Animal Life

Birds first, then

Reptiles

Reptiles first, then

Birds

Human Life

Man was created on day six

Man is made in the image of God.

3.5 billion years ago life evolved

Humans evolved from ape-like creatures.

Beginning

of Death

After Adam sinned, not a process of creation - it is a product of man's sin.

Always been present, part of the creation process - the means by which man evolves into a higher being.

Cause of

Death

Sin, there was no death before Adam sinned (plant life not included), the breath of life was breathed into animals but not plants.

Natural process, existed from the beginning of life

Spiritual

Death

Both physical and spiritual, you will give an account of your life after you die.

Physical only, no accountability after death.

Sediment Layers,

Canyons

Form rapidly (liquefaction). Witnessed during Mt. St. Helen (observable).

Form slowly. No evidence witnessed (not observable).

Fossil Creation

Catastrophic event, rapid burial in water, (observable).

Buried by dust over long periods of time (not observable).

Marine fossils on

Mountains

Global flood, Genesis account

Rapid 40 day/night event

Springs of the deep broken up

All creation perished

All mountains covered by at least 20 ft.

About 200 legends from cultures all over the world.

Local floods, earth sinking into the ocean and rising again.

No written record or legend

Trees through

layers

Fossilized trees spanning many layers indicates rapid burial by water, observable with Mt. St. Helen. Can be created in one week (observable).

Over many years plant life died, sank into the earth, and coal formed (not observable).

Coal, Oil,

Petrified

Wood

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood, can all be made in a matter of weeks, (observable).

Coal, Oil, Petrified Wood take millions of years to form (not observable).

Biblical Day

Recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours and accept it as fact

Hebrew word "Yom", in all cases, means short period of time

defined to be evening and morning

days are distinguished between seasons and years (Genesis 1:14)

God's own word (Exodus 10:11)

writing style of Genesis is narrative, not poetic

genealogy of human race given

Some, recognize that the Biblical day means 24 hours but reject the account as a myth.

Others, interpret the Biblical definition of day to mean millions of years.

Answer:

Evolution is a theory put forward by Charles Darwin. Some claim erroneously that he eventually discarded his own theory of evolution. One has to take into consideration that evolution is taking place, but it is the law of evolution which doubted by those who reject evolution. Men today are much taller, fitter and we live longer. Girls become women at an earlier age. This, according to some people, is the law of evolution. This phenomenon is not necessarily part of Darwin's theory. According to some, we did not evolve but were the sons and daughters of God. According to people who believe this, it was He who organized the first man and the first woman from elements that were already available to Him.

Another Answer:

Most all religious fundamentalists reject evolution and at present a growing number of scientists also differ.

Another View:

Religious people might take evolutionary theory - or any scientific theory, for that matter - as an affront to themselves, their beliefs, or their gods. This is because scientific explanations are not required to pay hommage to gods without evidence that such gods were involved or even exist, a property of science that might cause religiously-minded people to think of scientific theories as 'atheistic'.

Competition.

If the competition occurs between individuals of the same species it is called intraspecific competition.

If the competition is between individuals of different species it is called interspecific competition.

Christians increasingly do accept the science on the origins of the world, and some major Christian denominations say they support teaching the scientific theories. However some Christians continue to fear that if the scientific theories are true, it will undermine their faith in the Bible. They insist the Bible is literally true and inerrant, believing that the Book of Genesis tells us all we need to know.

However, Christians increasingly are compromising, just because they are convinced that the 'evidences' for evolution is genuinely supporting the evolutionary theory.

Contributors, please keep the question in mind. If you have any kind of material that answers the question, go for it. There are already several lively discussion entries; maybe what you would like to say should go there. Remember too that whatever your opinions of religion, the question is in the Religion & Spirituality category. Religious opinions are welcome, and consideration for others is never out of fashion.

_________________________

Much, if not most, of the structure of contemporary evolutionary theory, particularly as it is expressed in modern evolutionary synthesis (MES) is difficult in the extreme to refute. Biologists are on board with the theory, and now researchers in genetics are joining the supporters of modern evolutionary systhesis. But there's a problem with evolution. A most serious one.

The smoking gun points at the origin of life. Did it evolve from "non-life" here on earth (abiogenisis), or did another "type" of life begin the process here by arriving from somewhere else (biogenesis)? Even in its most simple form, a living thing presents a long and complex biochemical molecule. Nothing with the size and complexity of this basic chemical block of life can be manufactured in the laboratory. And how, if we cannot make something like, say, RNA, in the controlled environment of a lab, could such a large, complex chemical engine arise "naturally" on the planet - or anywhere else? Evolutionists cannot answer this question.

The one condition we cannot "artificially create" in the laboratory is the great length of time over which the earth changed geologically before life appeared. Who knows what could have happened throughout a time span we can barely imagine. We cannot set up experiments and "simulate" a billion years of passing time on our project to see what kind of outcome we will get. Even though we can do just about everything else in an experimental setting, letting an experiment run for the length of time the evolution "experiment" has been running is out of the question.

How could life have been created here? How could life have been created elsewhere to get itself trucked here to spread and evolve? There are a number of theories regarding the beginning of life on earth. But none of them comes even close to explaining the generation of the "magic" complex molecule that is a biochemical machine which is alive, which can grow and reproduce itself. Can a lightning bolt be made to animate a puddle of mud? We don't know how life began, but we do know it has been extant on earth for billions of years. Throughout this time, the earth has changed, and life changed with it. If it did not change, did not evolve and adapt, it became extinct.

This is no credible argument against evolution. It is the best that science has to offer, and it best fits all the evidence around us. This includes the billion year time frames given by evolution scientists and cosmologists alike. There is a mountain of scientific evidence supporting evolution, and let's be clear that the evidence wasn't "manufactured" to support the theory. No, the theory is derived from that huge pile of evidence; it comes after all the facts are spread out and examined. There is little of substance that can be proposed to challenge what we know as modern evolutionary synthesis.

There is evidence against evolution. While there are many facts that support it, there are also many facts that contradict it. For example, many of the chemicals in a cell would destroy each other if they were not already in the form of a cell. How could these chemicals then form a cell? And while Evolution is accepted by many people, so is its top competitor, Creationism, and there is no more evidence against it that there is against Evolutionism.

1.He once ate an owl!

2.He wanted to be a doctor, but he couldn't stand the sight of blood!

3.Darwin got a mountain for his 25th birthday (it was called Mount Darwin)

4.He married his cousin Emma Wedgwood

5.Darwin has the same Birthday as Abraham Lincoln

• Charles Darwin got married to his cousin.
• He once ate an owl.
• When he first presented his theory of evolution, the Church of England attacked him ferociously, then apologized 126 years later, after his death.
• He lost his faith in Christianity when his daughter Annie died at age 10 of Scarlet Fever.
• He has the same birthday as Abraham Lincoln does (February 12th).

there is a mountain named after him
he was dead when he sdf