Note: the heading of a key comment is emboldened and underlined.
Discussion Topic-What do you think is the greatest evidence for, or against, the Evolutionist/Secular Worldview?
I honestly think one of the things that proves evolution wrong is how broken carbon testing is. They say you can tell how old an object is by how much carbon is in it, but studies have shown that some things have tested to be millions of years old when they were fairly recently made.
In my opinion, the greatest flaw in evolutionary philosophy is: what was the cause of the first cause? what caused the universe to be created? The universe could not have spontaneously formed in as intricate a fashion as it is in today without some intelligent entity that exists outside the universe creating it.
Good one, you pretty much got the all encompassing answer!
True, this is correct, the Big Bang is inadequate because the initial cause of the speck remains in-explainable. Ultimately, some kind of Eternal Being is necessary along with intelligent design to produce the detailed universe we have today. God fills this void perfectly, and every facet of the creation screams his intelligent design.
I believe that the greatest evidence against evolution is that there is a complete lack of any concrete missing link. Such absences prove that evolution cannot have occurred as it is said to have. Even Darwin himself said that if missing links weren't found, his theory could not stand.
Even after Darwin's famous finches "evolved" they still remained finches. There is not physical evidence of one kind turning into another kind. Mutations? Yes. Natural selection? Yes. Different species within a kind? Definitely. Changes between kinds? No. Dogs make dogs. Cats make cats. Kinds produce after their own kind.
I believe there is a vast difference between science and scientism. Evolutionary philosophy attempts to offer up sloppy "science" in an effort to gain credibility for its philosophical worldview. This is not science, this is scientism.
I believe that one of the greatest hinderances to the Evolutionary worldview is the abundance of legends/drawings of dinosaurs found in places separated by thousands of miles of land and sea. If dinosaurs died out before people came on the scene, it would be impossible for such accurate depictions to have been created.
Homologous structures (similar structures found in different species) were a very strong evidence for evolution in Darwin's time. Darwin theorized that the fact that many vastly different organisms have similar bone constructions proved that they evolved from a common ancestor...modern genetics shows us that this is not the case. The homologous structures found in the different species are created and passed on by DIFFERENT genes. Therefore, the species with homologous structures did not evolve from a common ancestor.
Yes! In fact, many structures that evolutionists have declared to homologous are developed in very different ways as embryos!
I agree with J.E.S (see comment 2) in that there is irreducible complexity. Not only in the universe but in our DNA and throughout our bodies. A gathering of certain chemicals by chance could not have created life. Even the simplest of prokaryotic bacteria needs all of: DNA, ribosomes, a cellular membrane etc. to work properly. It would be practically impossible for one of these to just show up by itself, much less all of them! The more complex the organism, the even more impossible it becomes!