[SHIBUMI]

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we continue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

[retiredguy123]

A theory is:

"a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena."

Theories are not proven. They are either accepted or not.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Rich Iwaszko

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we continue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

So is the choice between evolution and creation? Did things "just happen" and then bumbled along haphazardly from there, resulting in the world we have today? Sorry, I don't buy it. The reason is as follows.

"Most people know about DNA (aka deoxyribonucleic acid) as the molecule that holds the information, i.e. the genetic codes, within our bodies. What some people don’t realise is that this equates to a seriously large amount of information being stored within a single biomolecule. DNA molecules can store up to 215 petabytes, or 215 million gigabytes, of data in a single doubled stranded molecule, making it one of the highest storage density mediums in the world. Simply put, the information storage devices within our bodies are much more capable than we can currently create, so there has been a lot of focus in trying to harness the power and data storage capabilities of DNA for our own man-made data storage systems." (Electro pages: storing information and data with DNA). ONE petabyte contains 500 billion pages of standard printed text. Multiply that by 215... I am not sure I can comprehend a number that large. That number is contained in a "database" if you can call it that, that exists on a submicroscopic level. Asking somebody to believe that that "just happened" is beyond ludicrous. The watch proves the existence of the watchmaker

That said, I'm not convinced that the fossil record is solid proof of anything. So few living things become fossils; conditions have to be just right for fossilization to happen. I recall hearing something recently that may be one in 100,000 animals or plants become fossils, and even with the ones that do become fossils, there is no guarantee that they will be found, or that they will not be destroyed in some natural event such as a flood, volcano, or whatever. To me, expecting the fossil record to be a reliable chronology of development is like depending on a calendar with maybe five numbers on it to be the reliable chronology of the number of days in a decade.

But we can use reasoning. We know, or think we know, two things. Fossils exist, and the earth changes. Oftentimes those changes in the earth are widespread and drastic. Assuming the existence of a creator God, we can also assume intelligence and foreknowledge on the part of that God. If God created the physical environment to change, as it does, then is it not reasonable to assume that God also provided the life he created to adapt according to the changes of the physical environment? Again, assuming the existence of that God, the answer cannot be no. The proof is that we are here.

I have never seen evolution versus creation as an either/or thing. In my mind they exist together working perfectly in tandem. They always have.

[Blueblaze]

They probably teach evolution because they've found "missing links" for nearly every line -- from humans to horses, to sharks, to whales, to aardvarks and dinosaurs. It's a "theory" the same way gravity is just a "theory". The proof is so obvious and everywhere that that you need to invent a religion in order to ignore it.

What's really amazing, is the incredible string of coincidences that must occur in order to preserve a fossil. I'm astounded that we have even one fossil of Lucy -- our ape-man "missing link" ancestor known as Australopithecus. In fact, we have dozens of examples. It's yet another example of the ludicrous impossibility of our universe.

And it's yet more evidence that our universe was engineered by a bored deity, and not the result of rolling a seven umpteen trillion times.

[Blueblaze]

I am amazed that a human being can watch a virus evolve from deadly to harmless in a mere three years, and still claim that there is no proof for the "theory" of evolution.

And I am amazed that a human being can understand that the same virus is comprised of the same chains of the same proteins found in a human cell nucleus, and yet, insist that we have no common ancestor with that virus -- because when Darwin first noticed evolution and described it in 1859, he didn't include all the answers to every question about evolution in his book.

And I am astounded that the same person will then point to his Holy Book, which was written 3,000 years before the discovery of DNA, and tell you that evolution cannot possibly be true because it is not mentioned in his 3,000-year-old Holy Book. He'll then go on to tell you that there has not been enough time for evolution to work because the Universe is only 6,000 years old. He knows this because he added up the ages of all the people mentioned in his Holy Book, and that's the number he got.

Simply astounding!

[Whitley]

Originally Posted by Rich Iwaszko

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we continue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

It is not even "A" missing link. There would be hundreds of links, transitional fossils, to fill in the evolution gap, and thousands of samples of each link. We have never come up with one. Some say there exists missing link(s) because of the incompleteness of the fossil record. That is the point. We have fossil records of of pre anthropoidal yet nothing from then to modern man. We made a jump yet there is no fossil record to fill in the gap.

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Whitley

It is not even "A" missing link. There would be hundreds of links, transitional fossils, to fill in the evolution gap, and thousands of samples of each link. We have never come up with one. Some say there exists missing link(s) because of the incompleteness of the fossil record. That is the point. We have fossil records of of pre anthropoidal yet nothing from then to modern man. We made a jump yet there is no fossil record to fill in the gap.

" We made a jump yet there is no fossil record to fill in the gap."

Yet.

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by Blueblaze

I am amazed that a human being can watch a virus evolve from deadly to harmless in a mere three years, and still claim that there is no proof for the "theory" of evolution.

And I am amazed that a human being can understand that the same virus is comprised of the same chains of the same proteins found in a human cell nucleus, and yet, insist that we have no common ancestor with that virus -- because when Darwin first noticed evolution and described it in 1859, he didn't include all the answers to every question about evolution in his book.

And I am astounded that the same person will then point to his Holy Book, which was written 3,000 years before the discovery of DNA, and tell you that evolution cannot possibly be true because it is not mentioned in his 3,000-year-old Holy Book. He'll then go on to tell you that there has not been enough time for evolution to work because the Universe is only 6,000 years old. He knows this because he added up the ages of all the people mentioned in his Holy Book, and that's the number he got.

Simply astounding!

Some of us think the Old Testament is a lot more than just a book.

[Stu from NYC]

Why do we need a deep thinkers two?

[ThirdOfFive]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Why do we need a deep thinkers two?

We do.

Maybe even three or four...

[PugMom]

any Family Guy fan knows the big bang was a result of God lighting his f@r+s on fire----

[PugMom]

Originally Posted by PugMom

any Family Guy fan knows the big bang was a result of God lighting his f@r+s on fire----

http://vignette2.wikia.nocookie.net/...20070122104113

[PugMom]

i can't seem to remove the duplicate post. help me Moderator?

[DAVES]

Originally Posted by Rich Iwaszko

hi,
the theory of evolution has never been proven. There is no missing link. Yet we teach it in schools. Why? In Darwins book, he left a bail out to his theory. It was the one thing he could not answer and he admitted it would be proof his conclusions were incorrect. Pre Cambrian fossils showed no signs of evolution to explain the over abundance of many animals in fossils in the Cambrian period. Animals just showed up out of nowhere in the Cambrian period. Why do we continue to believe this incorrect theory as well as aliens, Bigfoot, and the Loch Ness monster. Are we all that dumb or are we just looking for entertainment. Regardless, Darwins theory should not be taught in schools as it is not fact. Just tell them we don't know. We have enough fiction in the world today. Science is fact not fictional theories.

Taught in schools? "Science is fact not fictional theories." So much Science taught in schools is not fact but SPUN current thought. We all know the earth is flat and the planets revolve around the earth. Much of education is indoctrination. Few teachers are educated enough, bright enough or have the time to discuss these things.

[Gpsma]

Amazing that people still believe in some god...a sky daddy..that controls everything.