Creationists: If evolution is false, and life does not change...?

Would you be willing to accept vaccines for a strand of , let's say, flu from the year 1999? After all, it should be effective if life does not change.Creationists: If evolution is false, and life does not change...?
I'd love to see what the creationists have to say on this.





@ DC Maximus: What question are you answering?





@ God's servant: Well of course it wouldn't. A species will however change into a slightly different species of its own ';kind.'; However, over many generations, it may change into a whole taxa different then what it started.





@ What?!?: Special pleading is a logical fallacy.





@ Creation Detective: And what are most illnesses caused by?





@ Sweet Suzy 777!: Oh yeah? Gravity must be unprovable as well. Besides, evolution was not made-up by a atheist but by a religious man.





@ Pro-Life Teen: I suggest you watch ';Human Evolution Made Easy,'; by potholer54 on youtube.





@ aaronvgp: Again, I see special pleading on your point when it comes to evolution. But I also smell something fishy... maybe a Red Herring on your part again, on human development.





@ southern slickwilly: AiG? Really?Creationists: If evolution is false, and life does not change...?
im a huge fan of Answers in Genesis ministries, google them for their website, their purpose is to answer everything related to evolution.





back to your question, would i take the vaccine, no, i think flu shots are silly unless you are elderly. if it were for TB or something crippling then yes.





I assume you are asking to say that ';viruses evolve proving evolution.'; i say no. evolution is not mutation. its the creation of new DNA. for a fish to grow feathers, that's evolution. or for a virus to begin to change into a different form of life, that's evolution. dogs will always be dogs, rats will always be rats, and humans will always be humans and nothing more.
Pro-life teen: ';for the most part, ';creationists'; support other forms of evolution (i.e., in bacteria, plants, animals) because there is a legitimate, reliable record that can prove it';


Uh, about that. You can't selectively say one thing evolves but not the other. Bacteria evolve through the same mechanisms that plants evolve, which are the same as invertebrates, vertebrates, etc.








I think a large part of this is that people expect one animal to give birth to another. It doesn't work that way. I might have a mutation in one of my sperm that somehow increases the efficiency of my child's brain. Said child mates, spreading that gene, eventually, assuming it is dominant, it will become commonplace in the species. Now imagine that, except with TONS of different kinds of mutations. We already share 98% of our DNA with most of the Great Apes.








aaronvgp- About that, I do count microorganisms as life because they are alive. You must follow 8 guidelines to be alive. It must be made of cells, it must be able to reproduce, it must be able to obtain and use energy, it must be able to maintain homeostasis, it must be able to pass hereditary traits, it must be able to respond to the environment, they must be able to grow/develop, and it must be able to adapt. That being said, a fetus cannot perform a good number of those. It only meets 5, and that's with the mothers help. On it's own, it can only meet 3.
AA: Who among Christians, where in the Bible - are we told that life does not change? That is an evolutionist concept that is invented to explain the difference between yours and ours viewpoints - and it is false.





The Bible permits, actually demands - that lifeforms change. How else would God accomplish what he intended with just Adam and Eve to create so many nations and varieties of humans from just two?!





The problem with people who believe in evolution is that you may know, or not, your own beliefs, but those that have rejected God cannot comprehend all the facets of the Bible - because they never try and aren't really interested.
The logical gymnastics they go through can make a person dizzy.





For one thing, they mistakenly believe that evolution is a linear process, (A gives birth to B which gives birth to C, and so on) and it is not. They can't quite grasp the fact that it is more like a geometric branching, where some combinations survive better than others.





I've read too many ';creationist'; websites and they are filled with misinformation, fallacies, and outright lies. But this is all that they will expose themselves to, so how can they ever learn anything else?





The sad part is that faith and science can and should be working together.





The Catholic Church and most mainstream Christians, as well as most Jews, have no problem with evolution and still have faith in God.
no...I can catch the flu without getting a shot to give me the flu...





if it is supposed to protect against the flu it does a damn poor job...





will stick to the real flu instead of the flu shot thank you very much..





both make a person sick so how does that prove anything???
Some creationists delude themselves so far to deny observed, factual evidence. Speciation has been observed multiple times. It's willful ignorance at this point.





They'll delude themselves however far it takes to keep their primitive beliefs, I guess.
As a Catholic, I believe in creation and evolution.





Sincerely,


A Roman Catholic


http://www.vatican.va


http://www.osb.org


http://www.ocso.org
They need but ask their family doctor, ';Why is it important that I take all my antibiotics?';
most 'creationists', as you call us, are against the idea of human evolution, since there is not reliable fossil record to support it





for the most part, ';creationists'; support other forms of evolution (i.e., in bacteria, plants, animals) because there is a legitimate, reliable record that can prove it
we did not say life does not change we are saying macro evolution does not exist. no species has ever evolved into a completely different species.





a virus is still a virus it does change or turn into a completely different organism. It still remains a virus.
Everyone knows evolution is a false, unprovable theory of an Atheist.





God created Heaven and earth and everything in them.





The proof of God is everywhere.
Nobody has claimed that evolution does not take place at that scale, only that it is highly improbable that we are here because of evolution.
Nope. Only because I personally don't take any vaccinations I am not forced to.
I don't count flu as life. It's a sickness.
There's mutations, but not evolution. There is no evidence to suggest that a species can develop beyond itself.


At no point has anyone observed a species become another species.





I guess if you count a micro-organism as life then you count a baby in the womb as life from conception. So are you for or against the murder of babies?? Because you must consider them life too





';Why is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely – graduated organic chain; and this is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.” C. Darwin, Origin of Species, 6th ed. 1872 (London: John Murray, 1902), p 413





“The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persists as the trade secret of paleontology.” S.J. Gould, Evolution’s Erratic Pace, Natural History 86(5): 14, 1977





“I regard the failure to find a clear ‘vector of progress’ in life’s history as the most puzzling fact of the fossil record.” S.J. Gould, The Ediacaran Experiment, Natural History 93(2): 14-23, Feb. 1984





“Paleontologists have tried to turn Archaeopteryx into an earth – bound, feathered dinosaur. But it’s not. It is a bird, a perching bird. And no amount of ‘paleobabble’ is going to change that.” Cited in V. Morell, Archaeopteryx: Early Bird Catches a Can of Worms, Science 259(5069): 764 – 65, 5 February 1993.





Scientific American published a 10 page cover story in the March 2003 edition, pages 83 – 93. In it the authors Richard Prum and Alan Brush propose a new paradigm for bird evolution and propose abandoning the problem racked dinosaur – bird evolution. They state in the opening two paragraphs: “How did these incredibly strong, wonderfully lightweight, amazingly intricate appendages evolve? . . . Although evolutionary theory provides a robust explanation for the appearance of minor variations in the size and shape of creatures and their component parts, it does not yet give as much guidance for understanding the emergence of entirely new structures, including digits, limbs, eyes and feathers.”





Why do you try to complicate the definition of ';life';??? I'm alive, you're alive, a baby in the womb is alive. If it's alive then it's life. The only reason I can think of for people complicating it is so they can say ';well it doesn't meet this certain criteria, so lets kill the inconvenient baby and avoid our responsibility';. Disgusting