A question to Evolutionists

  • Thread starter Thread starter FBI
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 19
  • Views Views 3K
FBI

FBI

IB Veteran
Messages
671
Reaction score
91
If we evolved from monkeys then why are monkeys still around in their present form today, why didn't there ancestors evolve into humans?
 
Genetic mutation.

Like a Virus evolves to a new form, it dosnt wipe out the old one.


Thats all.

:threadclo
 
Thread open again:D

Thats not realy an argument. There are still monkeys left cause some didnt evolve. Its like saying, If all fishes came from one fish, why are there still several fishes?

If you take out one apple out of the fridge, stick holes in it. It will become brown. But how come there are still apples that are not brown in the fridge?

Sounds unrelated to the queston? exactly.
 
Apples in fridges dont reproduce! :rollseyes

This isnt a winnable arguement.
A better one is "Ahh well..Allah made the apples"

Seriously!

:threadclo
 
Stop closing the thread youre not a Moderator cause youre a kafir:D

You might get a warning for closing down threads, people might actually not respond cause they belive that the thread realy is closed. Its not good what you are doing.
 
Sinbad said:
Stop closing the thread youre not a Moderator cause youre a kafir:D

You might get a warning for closing down threads, people might actually not respond cause they belive that the thread realy is closed. Its not good what you are doing.
Click to expand...

Oh right! Sorry folks!

It's a good job i'm not a Mod....i'd undelete about 250 of my posts!:D
 
Humans didn't evolve from Monkeys. Monkeys and Humans both evolved from one common animal. :)
 
FBI said:
If we evolved from monkeys then why are monkeys still around in their present form today, why didn't there ancestors evolve into humans?
Click to expand...

I think if you take a moment to read about evolution it should answer your questions.
One of the best sources i could recomend would be from berkley
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

But to address your statement.
There are several flaws.

#1 we did not evolve from "monkeys" , rather we share a common ancestry with modern monkeys but we are more directly related to apes.
#2 even if we did we did not evolve from modern monkeys.

evolution allows for species to split like branches on a tree so it is possible for certain branches to exists at the same time as similar past relative.
 
Last edited:
Greetings,
Fi_Sabilillah said:
Bro, check this insha Allaah :) a clear refutation alhamdulilah, with pics/slides, and all that.

http://www.allaahuakbar.net/ATHEIST/evolution/index.htm
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but do you seriously think that site is a trustworthy and intellectually rigorous source of information? I've never seen more ignorant propaganda in my life.

There's nothing clear about it, and to anyone with more than the merest passing knowledge of evolutionary theory and the history of ideas, the points put forward seem laughably incompetent.

I would have thought most Muslims would be ashamed and appalled to have their faith defended in such a weak manner.

How about this, from the same site but on a different topic, for a distortion of Muslim beliefs:

sex that occurs between a man and a woman who are currently married or who have ever been married is Zinaa and this is punishable by death
Click to expand...

Source: http://www.allaahuakbar.net/gay/index.htm

:?

Peace
 
Last edited:
Fi_Sabilillah said:
a clear refutation alhamdulilah, with pics/slides, and all that.

http://www.allaahuakbar.net/ATHEIST/evolution/index.htm
Click to expand...

I have to agree with the last two posters, that isn't a 'clear refutation' of anything; it's total drivel.

It is simply not plausible to deny the existence of evolution by natural selection with any scientific credibility. Attempting to do so by people who really should know better generally reflects a fundamental misconception, that evolution is somehow intimately and necessarily connected with atheism. It is not; evolution allows both atheistic and theistic understandings.

'Intelligent design' for example fully accepts evolution; where it differs from the mainstream view is in believing some complex processes cannot have evolved in the usual fashion and that some input from God must have been required. And what is so unpleasant about the idea that God designed the process of evolution to create exactly what he wanted to create when he wanted it created?
 
thanks everyone, for ganging up on me? :eek:


Can't a guy even make mistakes? And even so, don't i have the right to post a link?


I'm sorry if i offended you guys.



Peace.
 
Greetings,
Fi_Sabilillah said:
thanks everyone, for ganging up on me? :eek:
Click to expand...

Sorry. That wasn't my intention, certainly. I'm sure the others were just shocked, as I was.

Can't a guy even make mistakes? And even so, don't i have the right to post a link?
Click to expand...

You do have that right. You're a mod, so you can post whatever you like!

I'm sorry if i offended you guys.
Click to expand...

Not offended, just shocked. I think you might want to exert a little quality control over the sites you link to. That one definitely doesn't do your religious beliefs justice.

Peace
 
Fi_Sabilillah said:
thanks everyone, for ganging up on me? :eek:
Click to expand...

Sorry, I didn't mean to contribute to such an impression and I'm sure the others didn't either. As czgibson said it's just that.. well, never mind, enough said.

What I would like to do, again, is recommend a book to anyone who has trouble reconciling the science to a belief in God.. particularly to those who choose to to ditch the science rather than the religion, but also to atheists as well. It's called 'The Language of God' by Francis Collins, subtitled "a scientist presents evidence for belief". While I don't agree with some of what he says, it is an excellent and measured response to the scientific 'dis-proofs' used by people such as Richard Dawkins and shows that a belief in God is perfectly sustainable without the need to embrace such discrediting nonsense (sorry) as creationism. It's worth the money just to see the best exposition of 'scientific' intelligent design that I have seen anywhere.
 

Similar Threads

Back
Top