You perceive flaws in evolution...and that's evidence of God?

Question

Isn't that a bit like finding a pothole in your street, and assuming aliens have invaded? After all, what else could have caused a pothole?

Can someone please explain this inductive leap?

Answer 1

There are so many holes in "Evolution" that you could drive a T-Rex through.

The flaws, errors, omissions and holes in evolution speak volumes for them self.

The people who wrote the Bible were writing the "Book of God" they were not trying to write a science text book.

How did the species of animal that "evolved" into a bat ever survive the process?

A bat is the ONLY mammal to ever have the capability of true flight, (other "flying mammals" only glide)

An bat-like animal that is still not yet capable of flight , would not be able to hop, run, walk, or even glide successfully enough to escape predators or obtain food.

They would have become extinct long prior to flight capability and never "evolved".

Answer 2

Evolution makes no sense at all.  I just don't see how any intelligent person could believe such nonsense.  I mean, have you ever seen an ape that could be taught to do algebra?  No!  Other than the most basic skills (which a dog can also be taught), an ape does not have the capacity to learn anywhere near the human level.  Apes are dumb!  You can say a dog is smart (and it might be), but it can't logic like a human being can.

Furthermore, if we evolved from a lower species, then why is it that the apes didn't evolve in the evolutionary process?  Come on folks, you don't need a PHD  to figure this out.  Where are all those half man/half ape fossils which should be abundant in the earth's soil layers?  They don't exist.  This is what is known as the "missing link" by evolutionists.  Notice that I didn't call them "scientists" because there is NOTHING scientific about evolution.  Science by it's very definition means "the study of."  To "study" something, it must be observable.  Not only is evolution not observable, it is not testable or repeatable in a lab.  Do you realize that evolutionists CANNOT display even ONE single proof of evolution...NOT ONE!  Dinosaur fossils don't prove anything except that they existed.  Whether dinosaurs existed in Biblical times or during a pre-Adamic period is debatable amongst theologians.

Answer 3

That's a terrible analogy - even on surface evidence there are numerous things that could have caused said pothole.  This is where in depth investigation, trial and error and empirical data come in.

Fail.

I'm neither an apologist nor a dolt, I misread the question because I'm busy.  That's what I would have said had the two clauses in the first line been reversed, which was how I read it with half my attention.  

sorry for not paying attention.

Answer 4

I didn't see any answers from believers, did I?  That's who you asked, isn't it?

The flaws in evolution are just a fringe benefit.  All-in-all, I know you're refering to flawed logic.  But the faith that comes from a growing relationship with Christ doesn't need logic anyway.  That's the foundation of Christianity.

Answer 5

This is one of my favorite flaws in the creationist "logic".  Somehow, they envision this balance scale with evolution on one side and creationism on the other, and believe that if you take "points" away from evolution it becomes an extra "point" on the creationism side.  This is, of course, preposterous.  So-called flaws in evolution theory do not in any way bolster the argument that it all just "happened" at the hands of a supernatural being.  At the most basic level, creationism/intelligent design is intellectually lazy.  Rather than roll up their sleeves to try to find a better scientifc explnation, their preference is to throw up their hands and say, "Well, if Darwin was wrong, it must be God!"  

Nope.  

If Darwin ends up being "wrong", it will be because some other biologist using sound scientific methods found something more right...

EDIT: Kudos to starfish for an honest answer.  I get the shivers thinking about a world not governed by logic, but I give you credit for being a rare creationist who doesn't feel compelled to disprove science to bolster your own belief system.

Answer 6

It's the flawed assumption that God is the default.  They seem to believe that if science is proved wrong, then religion must be right.  They overlook the fact that there are other alternatives, not to mention hundreds of religions to choose from which each could be right.

Answer 7

And that's the problem when people use "evolution vs. creationism" as the title of the debate. It's flawed logic, but it also allows creationists to simply point out supposed faults and gaps in evolution instead of actually demonstrating proof of creationism (which is rather hard to do without proving god successfully, but they ignore that).

EDIT:

By ignoring the question and posting his ignorance-driven words, Dustin proved my point succinctly.

Answer 8

It's called finding 'irreducable complexity' in an organism, meaning they suggest a bird could never evolve a wing that allows it to fly, because what's the point of half a wing? The answer is that half a wing is generally better than no wing (see the chicken) if you're falling or jumping.

Referencing a deity is admission that the creationist is not creative, talented, or knowledgable enough to fill the gap.