Creationists: why does this bother you so much?

I am talking about creationism and the reluctancy to admit to one's own primate status. I don't understand what puts people off so much and why there needs to be such a devide between "man" and animal". I'm also talking about how people want meaning and purpose in life, and how evolution somehow go against that. There doesn't need to be meaning! Evolution itself is still awesome.

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• hominoid
• hominidae
• animal
• ape
• man
• creationist
• evolution
• natural selection
• nothing wrong
• beast
• genetics

[Mogley52]

APES ARE QUITE COMFORTABLE IN HOW THEY WALK, just as humans are quite comfortable in how they walk. Even a slight change in the position of a muscle or bone, for either, would be excruciatingly painful and would not be an advantage for survival. There's no hard evidence that humans evolved from an ape-like creature anymore than there's hard evidence that apes evolved from a four-legged dog-like creature. Read Internet article: MISSING LINKS THAT NEVER WERE.

[AbsolutelyCrackers]

@Mogley52 meh

[chemerblinker]

I think that Aspergers is the next stage of evolution

[AbsolutelyCrackers]

@chemerblinker If that's the case then the human race is fucked

[jacobpaprotskiy]

@Mogley52 lol yes evolution does not happen across (pre-existing)"kinds" and no one says it does. we have a common ancester with the worm. we did not evolve from modern worms. but what does happen is "kinds" give rise to other "kinds" and no we cant and wont see it happen(the way you creatards want), because it is like watching a child grow up: you cant see the day to day changes, but you will be able to notice the difference in years.The "year" of evolution is too long for one to see variation

[Mogley52]

Genetic information doesn’t happen by chance, so it's more logical to believe that genetic similarities between all forms of life are due to a common Designer who designed similar functions for similar purposes. It doesn't mean all forms of life are biologically related! "Junk DNA" isn't junk. These non-coding segments of DNA have recently been found to be vital in regulating gene expression. Read: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS!

[Mogley52]

NATURAL LIMITS TO EVOLUTION: Only evolution within "kinds" is genetically possible (i.e. varieties of dogs, cats, etc.), but not evolution "across" kinds" (i.e. from worm to human). How were species living and reproducing if their reproductive system and other vital organs hadn't evolved yet? Read my Pravda Internet article: WAR AMONG EVOLUTIONISTS! I discuss Punctuated Equilibrium, "Junk DNA," genetics, mutations, natural selection, fossils, genetic/biological similarities between species.

[YTSurferX]

@AbsolutelyCrackers

Again, the odds of a single protein forming from free-floating amino acids by chance is so small that it's mathematically impossible. And that's just one, non-living, protein. The odds of cells forming by chance is even smaller. Of course, the higher complexity of an organism, the smaller the probability. And remember the odds of the simple protein is already in the "impossible" zone.

Combine that with lack of fossil evidence: evolution is a weak theory.

[YTSurferX]

@AbsolutelyCrackers

"Evolution is a theory universally accepted not because it has been observed to occur or can be proved by logically coherent evidence to be true, but because the only alternative-special creation is clearly incredible."

And...

"There is no branch of zoology in which assumption has played a greater, or evidence a less, part than in the study of presumed adaptations."

DMS Watson

Chair of Evolution at the University of London

Darwin said similar things as well.