Point taken

Heck the webpage debunks itself if you paid attention to the opening paragraph

“Note: This article is posted for historical reference purposes. Several people have written me thinking that I am totally endorsing this man’s quaint-sounding ideas! Of course I do not agree with everything the author claims, and I myself do not approach the subject of human origins in the debate style this man uses. I thought this was an interesting article reflecting on the long and tumultuous history of the creation-evolution controversy in the western world. I felt others might appreciate a view from 1925, regardless of their position on the issues. I have added at the bottom (4/19/02) another old article–from 1899–for historical purposes. See my web pages for what I myself believe–Lambert Dolphin.”

Genesis 2:24

“And God said, “Let the land produce living creatures according to their kinds; livestock, creatures that move along the ground and wild animals, each according to its kind.” And it was so.
NIV

I’m still searching for answers and trying to with an open mind.

Lets say for a moment that I had given up on a part of creationism. Do you all think think that there could be a God or higher being that created us to evolve? Just a thought.

Whatever floats your boat.

Correct me if I’m wrong, but what you are basically suggesting here is that you believe God set the universe in motion with the intent of evolution taking on the course it has to create humans. Well, there’s no way to disprove this because it’s unfalsifiable. In other words, there’s no way, based on our understanding of physics and the universe, that a creator did not do that. If that is what you want to believe, that’s no skin off my back.

On the other hand, I would like to submit to you that maybe you might consider Occam’s Razor for a moment, which states that the simplest explanation is usually correct. A creator setting forth all of creation and this mighty large universe to simply create humans on this one tiny little insignificant planet is probably not the simplest solution.

If you were referring to an even more hands-off generic God, that is what we call the “God of the Gaps” theory. That is, wherever science currently cannot explain natural phenomena, God may exist, because a supernatural explanation has not yet been disproven. Now, as with Sagan’s invisible dragons, this may be true, but proving a negative is impossible, so it leaves the question open-ended in a way that isn’t useful to think about.

In addition, if God is so hand’s off and detached from biblical literature, does he even want or need to be worshipped? Once you start throwing out parts of the Judeo-Christian mythology, where do you stop? What parts are still real and what parts are sitll parable?

Finally, you can mathematically prove that a completely non-interfering creator (ie, a creator that created the universe, aka the “uncaused cause”) is identical to no creator at all, because the end result, as far as any matter in the universe is concerned at this time, is exactly the same.

The wolves thing was pretty good. Makes sense.

Are there two Wades? Or just one big Wade Troll?

The wolves thing was pretty good. Makes sense.

No it doesn’t. It’s the hoariest of all misunderstandings of evolution. The fact that you fall for it shows where you are at in your understanding of the topic. Again, I refer you to any of the links in my sidebar under “Understanding Evolution”.

Still nothing on the debunking.

I’m not going to do your work for you. You have demonstrated that you misunderstand evolution to such a huge degree that you are woefully unqualified to make the determination whether the article you linked to poses any credible challenges to evolution.

I read a few paragraphs of it. Almost every sentence is completely out of date and has been disproven. Throw a dart. You’ll hit a factual error. Look up any of them at the Talk Origins archive, for example.

If you want to go through life denying the facts of evolution, you should at least know what those facts are.

And Jeff I’ve never really experience anyone who God has not answered. That’s why I don’t know what to say about that. But maybe those people are seeing what they want to see and that’s why.

Which people – the ones who think they’re being answered, or the ones who think they aren’t?

Experience has taught me that it’s far more likely that those who perceive an “answer” do so because they want God to exist and they want to exist forever in heaven, than it is that those who fail to get an answer are simply ignoring the evidence because they don’t want to be held “accountable” – the accusation evangelicals hurl most frequently at non-believers.

Again – I suspect you’ve spent most of your life surrounded by people who see things as you do.

The wolves thing was pretty good. Makes sense.