15 Questions for Evolutionists -- Question 3

Question 3 in CMI's '15 Questions for Evolutionists' flyer focuses on the inability of evolutionists to explain how the huge amount of complex coded information (the "blueprint") to build living things could come about by mutation, a mechanism is observed to destroy and delete genetic information. In this episode Richard Fangrad and Calvin Smith discuss the question and the attempts to answer it..


Related content
• List of the 15 questions with supporting information (http://creation.com/qe)
• It is not the amount of change mutations produce, it is the type of change that is a problem for evolution. See: http://creation.com/train
• Handane's Dilemma: a serious problem for evolution. (http://creation.com/haldane)
• Cost theory and the cost of substitution—a clarification (http://creation.com/cost)
• Natural Selection Q&A page (http://creation.com/selection)
• Download the "Mendel's Accountant" program (http://creation.com/sanford)
• Meta-information—An impossible conundrum for evolution (http://creation.com/meta-information)

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Genesis Unleashed
• CMI
• Genesis
• Bible
• evolution
• science
• 15 questions for evolutionists
• question evolution
• DNA
• genetic code
• mutation
• genetic mutations
• information
• Mendel's Accountant
• Haldane's Dilemma
• Cost theory
• beneficial mutation

[TWSYFree]

It would be great if conservatives allowed for coments or criticism on their videos. It seems at least unresting that you hide behind comment filters and create a whole Conservapedia article calling us cowards. We are here to answer to your videos and blind assumptions. You just won't let it.

[TWSYFree]

@chersharni Maybe you should consider that we, evolutionists, believe you are deluded. So this 'argument from delusion' is just silly.

[CMIcreationstation]

@harlexWTF If the Bible was invented it would never have been written in the way that it was. There would be inconsistencies and demonstrable errors, yet there are none. This is powerful evidence that it is God's Word. There are other evidences that support divine authorship as well. Here are a couple articles that may help clarify this creation.com/the-authority-of-­scripture creation.com/gospel-dates-and-­reliability

[harlexWTF]

@CMIcreationstation How do we know it was not invented? There is no living testament that the Earth was created in 7 days. The Big Bang Theory is more credible than that. Bringing in angels and omnipotence puts Creationism well into question, since these beliefs are circumstantial and conflict with many other ideologies.

And these prophets are basically the ancient 'ghost writers' for God, or so it seems to me. And 'ghost writers' are hard to credit, much less believe.

[CMIcreationstation]

@harlexWTF What CMI is saying is that the Bible's account of history, particularly the account of the origin of the universe is supported by observations from geology, biology, genetics, astronomy, etc. That support is one kind of verification that the writers of the Bible did not just 'invent' what they wrote but were actually kept free from making errors by God. That's why Christians call the Bible "God's Word".

[harlexWTF]

@CMIcreationstation You're saying that the Bible's version does NOT come from imagination, but evolution does... You do realize that the whole deal about prophets receiving revelations from angels and Jesus having supernatural powers is much harder to define as logical, right?

And you missed my point, because I was referring to psychology in the matter of sin, not fossils and rocks and such. Fossils will not help you analyze sin as well as psychology could.

[HolyRevelation]

Naturalists hijacked legitimate science and replaced it with their illogical religious philosophies. It's abundantly clear that evolution only exists in the hearts and minds of naturalists.

Evolution is philosophical doctrine used by naturalists to promote their Godless religion.

Naturalists try to disguise their religion of Evolution as science when in reality they are enemies of science, logic, God and truth.

[Frosttty]

So, there must be some kind of atheist agenda that's pushing this evolution stuff, eh?

[CMIcreationstation]

@harlexWTF The entire origins debate is a debate of two views of history. One comes from the Bible the other comes from people's imagination. The big question is, which one is the truth? We look at things today (rocks, fossils, living things, etc) and try to fit them into one of those histories (both of which are held by faith). One of them is wrong. Mutations, natural selection, fossils, etc all fit very well with the Bible's history and speak volumes against evolution. That's not psychology.

[harlexWTF]

@CMIcreationstation While I could swear that a part of my debate has not been posted, I'll disregard it. Anyways, you didn't say anything new in your past post, more you restated that which I know you to have already referred to.Again, sin is a matter of faith. Truth is only as it is named, and what one man sees as sin another sees as natural or even good. I point again towards psychology as a more credible field in analyzing such.

[CMIcreationstation]

@harlexWTF It is because this world is under the curse of sin that makes it fit so well with science, especially genetics. The Bible says that God created everything "very good" (Gen 1:31) and that the entrance of sin negatively affects His entire creation. We see mutations damaging and destroying the original genetic code. Mutations are creeping into all living things garbling their genetic information. This observation fits the Bible's account of origins well: a perfect creation marred by sin.

[harlexWTF]

@CMIcreationstation When you insert sin into this debate your stance in the scientific portion is diminished. Sin is more a question of morals and ethics, and is better investigated in sociology or psychology, not by genetics.