[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Evolution vs. Creation
> figure evolution goes a long way past "theory" or "hypothesis" and
> gets full status as a "postulate". Some would even grant it the status
> of "scientific law". Creationism doesn't rank as even "wild conjecture"
> when measured by scientific criteria.
Steve- Go back and read the last chapter of "Origin of the Species". You
know the one by Darwin. It lists specific fossil evidence that needs to be
found in order to substantiate the theory. Stuff like the progressive
development of eyes and other complex organs. None of that has been found.
These things just kind "poof" into existance. Like magic, or miracles, or
the work of a higher controlling power.
Since the substantiating evidence is still missing, Darwin went, and I will
go, into the next life as Creationists.
As for evolution as a currently ongoing event, I don't know of any variation
of Creationism that denies it. Creationism simply requires the existance of
a Supreme Being to control, direct, force, etc the emergence of new
biological stuff, like eys, ears, etc. The existence of misquitos
demonstrates to me that there must be a controlling hand. How else would a
proboscis that sucks blood from vertebrates come into existence through slow
gradual changes? Think about it really hard, and with an open mind. I think
you will realize the foolishness of such concept.
Cichlid Trader List Administrator