In 1858,Charles Darwin, proposed that natural selection explains life’s complexity and diversity. Darwin's
theory of evolution and all of its modern variations have since then come under numerous and varied attacks from those who believe that the marvellously fine-tuned architecture of living organisms indicates purposeful design by God. Can we honestly believe in Design Without a Designer?
Things That Science Can't Explain...
There are many things our modern science cannot explain,and yet they occur anyway in life.These includes phenomena in what is known in the "hard sciences" as well as that which is paranormal.
These effects were being proven in laboratories, even though they defy present scientific theories.These unfolding mysteries point the way to a new, deeper science, a science which no longer denies spirit and consciousness,but acknowledges and embraces them.
Here are a few from Science:
1. DARK MATTER of an unknown form makes up most of the matter of the universe. This matter is not predicted by the standard physics models. The so-called "Theory of Everything" does not predict and does not understand what this substance is.
2. THE LAW OF GRAVITY appears to be seriously broken. Experiments by Saxl and Allais found that Foucault pendulums veer off in strange directions during solar eclipses. Interplanetary NASA satellites are showing persistent errors in trajectory. Neither of these is explained or predicted by the standard theory of gravity known as Einstein's General Relativity.
3. COLD FUSION. The Cold Fusion phenomenon violates physics as we understand it, and yet it has been duplicated in various forms in over 500 laboratories around the world. Studies by the Electric Power Research Institute, a large non-profit research organization funded by power companies, found that Cold Fusion works. A Navy study once also verified the reality of Cold Fusion, and the original MIT study which supposedly disproved Cold Fusion has been found to have doctored its data. Present day physics has no explanation for how it works, but it does work.
4. CHARGE CLUSTERS. Under certain conditions, billions of electrons can "stick together" in close proximity, despite the law of electromagnetism that like charges repel. Charge clusters are small, one millionth of a meter in diameter, and are composed of tens or hundreds of billions of electrons. They should fly apart at enormous speed, but they do not. This indicates that our laws of electromagnetism are missing something important.
5. COSMOLOGY. Quasars, which are supposed to be the most distant astronomical objects in the sky, are often found connected to nearby galaxies by jets of gas. This suggests that they may not be as far away as previously thought, and their red shifts are due to some other, more unusual physics which is not yet fully understood.
6. SPEED OF LIGHT,once thought unbreakable, has been exceeded in several recent experiments. Our notion of what is possible in terms of propagation speed has been changing as a result.
Certain phenomena, such as solar disturbances on the sun which take more than eight minutes to be visible on the earth, are registered instantaneously on the acupuncture points of instrumented subjects.
Acupuncture points apparently respond to solar events by some other force which travels through space at a much higher speed than light.
This covers just a few of the more glaring anomalies in the "hard sciences." Evidence has also accumulated in the laboratory that many paranormal effects are real, and can be verified and studied scientifically. Among these are the following:
7. ESP. Large-scale experiments by laboratories have proven that ESP is a real, statistically verifiable scientific phenomenon. Thousands of experiments have been conducted with dozens of subjects, which demonstrate that this form of communication is real, and that it does not weaken measurably with distance. This makes it unlike any known physical force.
8. PSYCHOKINESIS, OR MIND OVER MATTER. The ability to exert psychic force over objects at a distance has also been demonstrated in large-scale experiments. Even over distances of thousands of miles, the behavior of certain machines, called REGs for Random Event Generators, have been altered by the intention, or the psychic force of a distant person. The odds that these effects are real, and not due to chance, is now measured in billions to one. In other words, this phenomenon is real.
9. REMOTE VIEWING. The American military conducted a secret remote viewing program for almost two decades. It was supported because it worked, and evidence of its success has now become public.
The remote viewers have demonstrated that it is possible to view "targets" which are remote in space and time. In many cases details which were unavailable any other way were acquired by the viewers.
Rigorous statistical experiments have confirmed that remote viewing has accuracy far above chance, and represents a real phenomenon which defies present science.
10. TIME AND PROPHECY. One unusual aspect of ESP, Remote Viewing and Psychokinesis is that "time" doesn't seem to matter. One can exert an influence or acquire information in the past and in the future, almost as easily as in the present. In conventional physics, the order of events is very important, but in the realm of psychic phenomena there seems to be a flexibility to move in time that defies current physics.
11. OUT-OF-BODY EXPERIENCE. Experiments have been performed which show that, during some out-of-body experiences, the "astral body" or center of consciousness of the individual can be detected at remote locations.
When individuals go "out of body" and focus their consciousness at another location, physical disturbances have been measured at that remote location.
These include anomalous light, electrical, magnetic and other physical forces which indicate the "astral body" sometimes has physically measurable properties.
12. GHOSTS. Modern scientific ghost hunters use magnetic, electrical, optical and thermal sensors when they survey supposedly haunted sites.
In hundreds of cases, technically trained researchers have found measurable physical anomalies when ghosts are said to be present.
Although some people have claimed to see ghosts, and many have reported anomalous cold spots and described a strange chill on their skin, modern ghost hunters have shown that unusual magnetic fields and strong voltages also occur in these same haunted locations.
Unusual orbs have been photographed at the same time that magnetic and electrical disturbances are measured. None of these can be explained by conventional science.
Things That Creation Can't Explain...
1.The position taken by many that believes that creation was recent and species are immutably fixed offers no explanation for the observed biogeographic distribution of species. However continental drift, island formation and species descending with modification explains the observation very well.
2.Creation does not explain the nested hierarchies of shared characteristics that clearly map into taxonomic trees weather using classical morphology, behaviour & distribution or modern genetic homology as the basis of comparison.Descent from a common ancestor explains this very simply.
3.Creation does not explain poor adaptation and odd complicated features with a clearly redirected use of structure. Adaptive constrains easily explains poor adaptation that work well enough, and it explains vestigial or repurposed organs.
4.Creation provides no explanation of the continuity of life with an imperfect conservative replication of DNA.Why have a mutation rate introducing infidelity into static species.
5.Creation does not explain the mechanism that limits the genetic change so species have genetic variation but cannot accumulate sufficient changes to speciate.
6.Creation does not explain the universal genetic code that has a few variant code terms for ciliates, invertebrate mitochondria, mycoplasma, yeast, and vertebrate mitochondria.However the infidelity of mutation combined with natural selection explains how the code is dynamic and still evolving.
7.Creation does not explain the observed instances of species responding to selective pressures with directional changes in the gene pool's relative ratios of alleles.
Does your understanding of what constitutes "can't explain" really matters?
If you mean by what "can't reasonably be explained",which pretty much is everything.Small amounts of problems with Creationism is perhaps their blatant historical inaccuracy of humanity being around for a few thousand years.
Many unconnected branches of science such as geology, palaeontology, biology, physics, chemistry unanimously agree on an old Earth and all of a similar timescale.
Science,however doesn't prove or disprove that much anyway. It doesn't aim to do so either.Science in many respects simply gathers evidence and deduces what the most likely explanations for that evidence is.
'Proof' is a nonsensical concept which always leaves room for doubt. When your story involves an all powerful being,like GOD,that can do anything without any restriction or any apparent motive,then you can make any and all evidence fit your story. An all powerful Being can create evidence against his own claims.
That doesn't make your defense of Him satisfactory though, nor is it any weakness for Evolutionary Scientist.If there were any evidence for Creationism or any evidence to suggest that their defense is accurate then that would be a totally different matter.
A claim being altered so that it doesn't necessarily contradict any evidence found doesn't make it a valid claim now does it, nor does it make any evidence for it.
However a theory like Evolution does have it's weaknesses.Evolution's an observed fact.
For Instance: Darwin's take on Natural selection that led to the creation of new species...
Darwin believed that what he called natural selection would favor those life-forms best suited to the environment, whereas less suitable life-forms would eventually die off.
Modern evolutionists teach that as species spread and became isolated, natural selection chose the ones with gene mutations that made them capable of surviving in their new environment. As a result, evolutionists speculate, these isolated groups eventually developed into totally new species.
However,research strongly indicates that mutations cannot produce entirely new kinds of plants or animals.What proof do evolutionists provide to support the claim that natural selection chooses beneficial mutations to produce new species?
A brochure published in 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences (NAS) in the United States refers to “the 13 species of finches studied by Darwin on the Galápagos Islands, now known as Darwin’s finches.
In the 1970’s, a research group led by Peter R. and B. Rosemary Grant of Princeton University began studying these finches and discovered that after a year of drought on the islands, finches that had slightly bigger beaks survived more readily than those with smaller beaks.
Since observing the size and shape of the beaks is one of the primary ways of determining the 13 species of finches, these findings were assumed to be significant. “The Grants have estimated,” continues the NAS brochure, “that if droughts occur about once every 10 years on the islands, a new species of finch might arise in only about 200 years.
However, the NAS brochure neglects to mention that in the years following the drought, finches with smaller beaks again dominated the population. The researchers found that as the climatic conditions on the island changed, finches with longer beaks were dominant one year, but later those with smaller beaks were dominant.
They also noticed that some of the different “species” of finches were interbreeding and producing offspring that survived better than the parents. They concluded that if the interbreeding continued, it could result in the fusion of two “species” into just one.
So, does natural selection really create entirely new species?
Decades ago, evolutionary biologist George Christopher Williams began questioning whether natural selection had such power.
In 1999, evolutionary theorist Jeffrey H. Schwartz wrote that natural selection may be helping species adapt to the changing demands of existence, but it is not creating anything new.
Indeed, Darwin’s finches are not becoming “anything new.” They are still finches. And the fact that they are interbreeding casts doubt on the methods some evolutionists use to define a species. In addition, information about these birds exposes the fact that even prestigious scientific academies are not above reporting evidence in a biased manner.
So does SCIENCE or CREATION either sound as though they are based on facts or on myths?