What I can’t understand is why all these “Creationist” sites ignore the Bible:
Ge:30:37: And Jacob took him rods of green poplar, and of the hazel and chesnut tree; and pilled white strakes in them, and made the white appear which was in the rods.Ge:30:38: And he set the rods which he had pilled before the flocks in the gutters in the watering troughs when the flocks came to drink, that they should conceive when they came to drink.
Ge:30:39: And the flocks conceived before the rods, and brought forth cattle ringstraked, speckled, and spotted.
(Basically, if you put animals next to striped sticks, you get striped animals -> what’s not to like? It explains everything and is obvious when you think about it.
Except of course, it isn’t obvious, so the “creationists” still believed creation and still believed why there are different skin colours:The Curse of Ham:Ge:9:20: And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:
Ge:9:21: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.
Ge:9:22: And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.
Ge:10:6: And the sons of Ham; [were] Cush, and Mizraim, and Phut, and Canaan.Cush
-> from Eastern’s Bible Dictionary:
Cush: black. (1.) A son, probably the eldest, of Ham, and the father of Nimrod (Gen. 10:8; 1 Chr. 1:10). From him the land of Cush seems to have derived its name. […] The term Cush is in the Old Testament generally applied to the countries south of the Israelites. It was the southern limit of Egypt (Ezek. 29:10, A.V. "Ethiopia," Heb. Cush), with which it is generally associated (Ps. 68:31; Isa. 18:1; Jer. 46:9, etc.)
This led to slavery of Africans justified by God Himself.
However, it was far clearer that God's genetics were a fantasy and a lie. How to explain it?https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intelligent_design#Origin_of_the_concept
By 1910 evolution was not a topic of major religious controversy in America, but in the 1920s the Fundamentalist–Modernist Controversy in theology resulted in Fundamentalist Christian opposition to teaching evolution, and the origins of modern creationism. Teaching of evolution was effectively suspended in U.S. public schools until the 1960s, and when evolution was then reintroduced into the curriculum, there was a series of court cases in which attempts were made to get creationism taught alongside evolution in science classes. Young Earth creationists promoted creation science as "an alternative scientific explanation of the world in which we live". This frequently invoked the argument from design to explain complexity in nature as demonstrating the existence of God.
See? In 1910, everyone was happy with Darwin’s explanation and peer reviewed scientific papers. It was common sense. Even Darwin’s grandfather, a fundamentalist himself, had seen that “like begets like.” All that happened was that Darwin, discovered the varieties of the same finch in the Galapagos Islands: isolated populations that had [shock-horror!] “evolved.”
Had the fundamentalists finally broken through and actually discovered something? Well, “No.”
Since the middle ages, discussion of the theological "argument from design" or "teleological argument", with its concept of "intelligent design", has persistently referred to the theistic Creator God. Although ID proponents chose this provocative label for their proposed alternative to evolutionary explanations, they have de-emphasized their religious antecendents and denied that ID is natural theology, while still presenting ID as supporting the argument for the existence of God.
Again, they had again failed to progress from the Dark Ages.
There has never, ever, been any proof of ID/IC. There has not been one single experiment. No observation has ever been made that would support the theory. However, there are countless of observations and experiments done in support of Darwinian evolution.
Educated scientist have now refused even to consider ID/IC, so stupid is it.
And it is not only living things that are affected by evolution: ideas are too. ID/IC has had 100 years to make a case… any sort of case… and has failed. It lies dying in a dirty garbage heap of ignorance and stupidity, unable to move but surrounded by people defending the indefensible urging the gullible to believe a lie.
A fitting end for an idea that was the product of a failed mutation – ID/IC proves Darwin right – ID/IC was unfitted for a world that had intelligence.