| Name |
Views and Comments | Date |
| Guillermo |
AMEN! |
4/9/2009 |
| peninah |
i personally believe in evolution and support it. i also believe that thru evolution, one can make da world a better place to live in. |
3/7/2008 |
| Intelligence |
Evolution is the one without "coherence and evidence." Evolutionists disregard chemical and biological data and put in their own ideas that are based on made up suppositions - not fact or science. There is zero fossil evidence - archaeopteryx, the only vague semblence of a transitional fossil, has been disproven. The bacteria flagella is an example of something called irreducible complexity. That means it is so incredibly complex and well-engineered that it could not have possibly evolved because if one part is missing the whole thing is useless. There is a motor made up of 36 parts, and even if by some magical hoodoo it assembled itself there would be no tail, which would make it useless and natural selection would kill it off. If the tail developed first, there would be no way for it to propel the organism...and would be useless and again picked off by natural selection. Both gradualism and punctuated equilibrium have been disproven, and they are the only possible ways evolution could take place.
The statistic that humans and apes are 99.4% genetically similar is also false. Gene sequencing shows that they are 96% similar and that 4% difference accounts for 40 million differences. The 'evolution of man' graphic that is commonly used is just fancy artwork, no fossil evidence supports the chimps to humans idea.
Speaking of false evidence, college textbooks are filled with flawed experiments (the famous peppermoth story, Haeckles embryonic drawings, archaeopteryx, etc.) and yet people say the Bible is unscientific? Try and prove the Bible wrong, you'll probably end up proving it right, like C.S. Lewis did (a notable atheist before he tried to disprove the Bible). The Bible mentioned the earth being round before anyone even considered it. The Bible has pointed to numorous archeological finds that people discovered because they wanted to prove the Bible false. The Bible's story of the sun being held for a day explains astronomical phenomena that previously confounded scientists.
But Intelligent Design (NOT "Creationism") is not based on the Bible. It is based on science. The foundation of science is observing the natural world, then experimenting, and gathering evidence from it. ID is a conclusion based on observation and data. Evolution is blind faith. It is a "science" of gaps and conveniently looking the other way or creating another implausible argument when data conflicts with it. Maybe majority of America believes INTELLIGENT DESIGN is intelligent because it is the only intelligent conclusion. |
11/11/2007 |
| Gordon |
If evolution had actually happened, the evidence would be in the fossil record, but that evidence doesn't exist. The evidence indicates things have been much like they are now, with no evolutionary stages in between.
I often wonder if those who push the theory of evolution actually think about what they have to believe to truly believe in evolution. They have to believe there was nothing then something happened and the universe happened. Then with no life arounf, a living thing just happened. Then that one living cell just grew and evolved into everything else. That requires far more blind hope than I can conjure up.
What are the odds that fertile male and female beings of just one species evolved (mutated) at precisely the same point in the past in close enough proximity to each other to then mate and produce fertile offspring who then would continue the process? Now multiply those numbers by just the number of species we know of and you can see how evolution really could not have happened. Yet there exist people who insist it did. They are the ones out of touch with reality and evidence, not those who believe in creation.
Evolution is really a religion designed to explain away God and the resulting responsibility that comes with believing in Him.
So stop calling the theory of evolution science when it clearly is not. America is to be commended for rejecting such a lie, not ridiculed for it. |
6/20/2007 |
| Anna |
It is so good to see intelligent thought on the web. |
5/14/2007 |
| Mark Hoerrner |
A couple of thoughts here...
One, the literal interpretation of the Bible is not as easy or literal to nail down. Not sure where you came up with the 10,000 year figure, but no Bible I have ever read indicates that number.
Two, we've yet to prove the origin of the universe. We have theories, but as we can't actually recreate the beginning of life, we really can have only theories. Since we know that matter can be converted into energy, we can speculate that the reverse is true. If so, could not a being with enough control over energy be able to create matter and form?
I have no problem with evolution being taught, but there are many questions that evolution does not answer. And some of our theories on macroevolution are simply leaps of faith where biologists couldn't make the link between to species and just assumed the connection.
A true investigator works off facts. But they also keep possibilities open. |
3/14/2007 | |
