If mathematics teacher made a mistake, would it mean mathematics itself is wrong!
notsurewheretogo asking me to "read book on evolution."
Even in a grandmother’s story, we expect a flow. But if evolution theory is true, there should not be gaps where there should be transitions. Yet there are gaps all along. Hence evolutionists moved to promoting DNA and other genetic evidence as proof of evolution. However, this is often inconsistent with, not only the fossil record, but also with the comparative morphology of the creatures: “The elephant shrew, consigned by traditional analysis to the order insectivores . . . is in fact more closely related to . . . the true elephant. Cows are more closely related to dolphins than they are to horses. The duckbilled platypus . . . is on equal evolutionary footing with . . . kangaroos and koalas….. (lists go on and on…. "Family Feud," Roger Lewin, New Scientist (vol. 157, January 24, 1998), p. 39.
notsurewheretogo, I would also add the following:
It is irony that many approach evolution as a fact. Yet the leading evolutionists like Sir Julian Huxley called evolution a "religion without revelation" and wrote a book with that title (2nd edition, 1957). In a later book, he wrote: “Evolution . . . is the most powerful and the most comprehensive idea that has ever arisen on earth. (Essays of a Humanist, Julian Huxley, New York: Harper and Row, 1964, p. 125) Later in the book he argued passionately that we must change "our pattern of religious thought from a God-centered to an evolution-centered pattern."(p. 222) Then he went on to say that: "The God hypothesis . . . is becoming an intellectual and moral burden on our thought." Therefore, he concluded that "we must construct something to take its place."
Thus top guns of evolutionists know that they are trying to replace religion with religion of evolution which was mistaken as science by ordinary people.
Conscious energy is an invention of yourself, or your teacher, backed up by no facts at all.
Evolution is a theory backed up by facts.
The gaps in the fossil record are because fossilisation rarely happens, not because transitional species are missing. ALL species are transitional, including Homo Sapiens.
The Elephant shrew is considered an insectivore... because it eats insects.
Reading Venus' crap regarding evolution is like playing creationism bingo. You only have a few more tropes to go for a full set.
Either you are a troll or your ignorance really is off the scale.
But if evolution theory is true, there should not be gaps where there should be transitions.
Oh boy here we go with the old ignorant and staid contradictions concerning biological evolution.
I would guess that Venus hasn't read one accredited modern reference book on evolution except information selectively contrived by other biased thinking creationists.
Not going to go to into a long elaborate debate with this person, even if I do have information that would correct her bad evaluation of evolution.
venus - What you people are achieving by saying no God exists, I accomplish the same by saying God exists--nothing more or less.
Thanks for answering.
Sounds a bit of a thankless, hopeless and pointless task. Unless it's for self gratification. I kind of get that.
Cofty describes me as ignorant because I do not treat evolution as a fact! - no, Cofty described you as ignorant of evolution because you've never studied the theory. You've most likely only read stuff about it from religious people/organisations.
Evolution theory does not even qualify to be a grandmother’s story because it violates vital laws of Science - which scientific laws does evolution violate?
The main scientific reason why there is no evidence for evolution in either the present or the past is because one of the most fundamental laws of nature precludes it. The law of increasing entropy -- also known as the second law of thermodynamics -- stipulates that all systems in the real world tend to go "downhill," as it were, toward disorganization and decreased complexity - entropy is one of the laws of physics. We are discussing biological evolution. I'm not sure entropy has any bearing on evolution vs creation beliefs. And what's more, in bringing up entropy you're assuming evolution lacks a driving force. Well it doesn't - natural selection is the driving force behind evolution and is responsible for a whole array of weird and wonderful forms.
The way you use the word “ignorance” against me reminds me of Catholics who say the rosary “Hail Mary full of grace, hail Mary full of grace … thinking that repeating it for 53 times would work in favor of them. Just because you know the meaning of the word “ignorance” you think you can use against all those who disagree with you which shows how weak your position is. I encourage you to do the same even with more force.
@Venus - when Cofty said or implied that you're ignorant of evolution he didn't use the word 'ignorant' as a term of abuse. He used it as a description.
I also genuinely believe that your knowledge of evolution ranges from little to non-existent. Worse, you might have been misinformed by religious organisations. (The arguments you use against evolution are very similar to those used by JWs.)
If I asked you to explain the theory of evolution in your own words, how would you get on?