Challenge to Creationists

cofty

In response to the 37 threads in my Evolution is a Fact series - see bottom of OP for links - Perry posted a link to an article "44 reasons why evolution isn't true".

I offered him a challenge on the thread and by PM. Predictably he is totally ignoring it, so I am offering the challenge to any evolution-denier who thinks they have evidence to support their position.

Please present one specific piece of evidence for creationism.

My task will be to refute it with evidence within 24 hours.

Then I will present one piece of evidence for evolution and your challenge will be the same.

All posts must be as succinct as reasonably possible. Entirely in your own words, without copy-paste, videos or links.

Please post your interest to take part and we will set it up before the first actual post in the exchange.

shepherdless

Cofty: Please post your interest to take part and we will set it up before the first actual post in the exchange.

I am certainly not a creationist, but I can think of an argument. Am I eligible to take up your challenge?

TheListener

Wait!? Cofty, you believe in evolution?

I never would have guessed.

Sanchy

Are evolution and creation mutually exclusive?

snowbird

For those who doubt/spurn the Creation narrative, I've asked this question, and have never received an answer:

Whence evil?

Now, I've got another one:

Why evil?

Sylvia

KateWild

Are evolution and creation mutually exclusive?

No they are not to many people. But Cofty likes definitive solutions to questions.

I believe that a creator guided certain parts of the evolutionary process.

Cofty hasn't been able to refute my points with science and just uses phrases like 'it's bucket chemistry' there is no definitive answer and I am ok with that.

Anders Andersen

The context of the OP makes it clear that cofty invites those who deny evolution to prove their point.

Of course those who accept evolution but think it was guided by a divine being can also be called 'creationists' , but the point of the challenge is not to (dis)prove the existence of gods, but to show that evolution-deniers really don't have any evidence to back their claims.

Vidqun

Cofty, two hypotheses offer explanations of the origin of eucaryotes from procaryotic ancestors. The autogenous hypothesis states that organelles, e.g., the nucleus and Golgi complex, evolved from internal membranes derived from the plasma membrane. According to the endosymbiotic hypothesis, organelles, e.g., mitochondria and chloroplasts, evolved from symbiotic procaryotes living in other procaryotic cells. I wanted to scan some illustrations as examples, but I was unsuccessful. Just as well for the OP forbids this.

Why are these classified as hypotheses and not facts? Because these findings cannot be replicated in a lab. If that is the case, then we have to consider a third hypothesis. I suggest that in the field laboratory, earth, eucaryotes were gradually introduced by their creator, a Prometheus-type character (a superior alien intelligence as in the movie) or God, take your pick.

Challenge to Creationists

Share this