Everyone has been told in schools that we evolved from monkeys. A well know theory called Evolution has been said to be true in the past twenty years by young folks, but the theory fails to be backed up by evidence. Now lets take a good look at some of its flaws.
-Evolution cannot account for matter. Matter cannot be created or destroyed, only change in form. Thus the ammount of matter in the univers cannot grow or decrease. How then did matter come into existance? It would seem that some super-natural force must have created it.-The forming of even the smallest bacteria is to complex to suddenly happen in some puddle somewhere. If all the molicules somehow came together is some way to make all the parts of the tiny bacteria, then how would all the parts fit together so they would work? Its like taking your car engine parts, throwing them into a swiming pool and having them all come together into your engine. There is no way it could happen on accident. Also the parts must all be intact at the same time for the machine to work, if the machines parts are only halfway there, they wont work.-The planet earth has just the right tilt and just the perfect distance from the sun with just the right ammount of oxygen and plenty of h2o. And on top of that, we are at just the right place in the galaxy too. There are hundreds of factors that are tuned so finnely so that we could live. I cant remember the exact number but it is far over 1 out of 1000000000000000000000000, that one has 25 zeros, the real number had around 64 or something. The sorce I get that info from is a group of scientists and mathmatisions who figured that out. -Genes in animals do undergo mutations. No one denys that. What is a mutation you ask? A mutation is when a gene is not present so the creature LACKS an ability. Mutations do not add a gene, it is a missing gene. Various creatures have variable genes, like if a whole bunch of people with red hair married, their children would have red hair and the red hair gene would take dominance. But new genes have never occured to change one creature to another. They have so many genes, they can lose genes, but not gain new ones. -The 2nd law of thermodynamics states that dissorder tends to increase in a system. So creatures that were little cells do not mutate into frogs, for that would require more order and things fall apart over time, not get better. Old cars dont get better than new cars. New cars are better and old cars get broken over time. Its all around us! -Saturns rings have been deteriorating rapidly, the inermost ring has shifted 200km closer to the planet. Neptunes rings are also deteriorating rapidly. If the planets took so many millions of years to form, then why are they coming into disarray so fast. -Fossils do not give evolution any legs to stand on, the layers of sediment are full of fossils which are in no aparent order. You find large highly soffisticated animals in lower layers, and small little crawlers up near the top.-Humans were around before dinasours became extinct, there are cave drawings and stories and writings recovered all about dinasours.Well, thats all ill do for now. Just write your oppinion and thoughts on the matter and we'll have a swig at this controversial issue [:P]
@herooftime
I dont think its that simple to pass off all those arguments, sounds alot like Avoiding the Questions to me. For one, no the question of matters origon is not a joke and it seriously does pose a huge problem for evolution, trying to by pass difficult stuff does not help the cause of evolution. Secondly, the billionths of chances are important to understand that it would be impossible to happen. And it is relevant to the subject. Good for it if there is a way to make cell membrain substances, that doesnt make a cell, the cell is irriducably complex, meaning the cells actually have little veins with cell like things inside of them carrying stuff arround the cell and all sorts of complex mechanisms that All Rely On Each Other. If one part wasnt there at a curtian time the cell could not function. So the cell would have to come together at the Same Time to work, along with all the protiens right. I learned this from a science DVD that I saw. Other kinds of life is not what Im fighting against, Other kinds of life dont exist here and have nothing to do with earth. And please pray tell, how many good mutations have you ever seen or heard of before? I have never seen an example of a mutation that helps the creature.If you read the whole paragraph about saturn, then you would see a question at the end which asks about the age of the universe. It has alot to do with evolution, for evolution suposidly took billions of years to happen. Please read it more closely before passing it off.I should have explained the fossil argument better, *ahem* The evolution theory takes fossils as evidence of the advancment of living things. At the bottem, or the oldest stuff supposedly millions of years old, we are supposed to find small amphibians and such, some ways up you should see reptiles, and you keep going while creatures get more sophistacated untill you are supposed to reach mammals and humans near the top. The surprissing thing is that there is no where on earth where that exists. People find all the various animals known to man now days all throughout the various layers of ground. There is no specific order of advancement to it. and now, finnaly, I dont know what you think a "christian" is but if your a Christian and you dont believe that the Bible is legitament then you need a different title. Also, If you say that you believe the Bible then you must know that God never made evolution. It clearly says in Genesis that God created creatures "after their own kind". And, none of my ideas here are thought up from scratch as alot of your thinking may have been. I have gotten this from many reliable sorces. I dont see why you think all my arguments are jokes, maybe you should research for some legitament answers instead of saying "this has nothing to do with the subject". Please k thanx. [:P]-mesenberg-I agree with most of this, but not:
teh proof is in teh pictures! [:P] Anyone here ever look for sorces outside their head?
Reference1Reference2Those are only the top two links google showed up when I searched "cave drawings dinosaurs" The facts are in pictures that people interacted with dinosaurs.A lot of nice points mesenberg!
"If natural selection were true Eskimos would have fur to keep warm, but they don't. They are just as hairless and everyone else. If natural selection were true humans in the tropics would have silver, reflective skin to help them keep cool, but they don't. They have black skin, just the opposite of what the theory of natural selection would predict. If natural selection were true humans at northern latitudes should have black skin, but they have white skin instead, except for the Eskimos. Many evolutionist argue that melanin is a natural sunscreen that evolved in a greater amount to protect dark skinned people who live near the Equator. They simply ignore the fact that dark skinned Eskimos live north of the Arctic Circle. Melanin in the skin is not a sound argument in favor of evolution. The theory of natural selection is wrong because it cannot create something in the DNA that wasn't there in the beginning."This point taken from.http://www.biblelife.org/evolution.htm(I haven't read the whole thing I just googled evolution to get some good points. So I don't know if I agree with all of it's points.)-Elmernitety elmernite for your contribution. And adding references is the best thing people can do to prove there points [:)]
About the dinosaurs:
Those pictures are kind of… well, not very convincing to be honest [:)]. I mean, 6-year-olds draw pictures of stegasauruses all the time, don't they? Perhaps the cavemen were actually just drawing what they had for breakfast that morning.-Evolution cannot account for matter.
Matter cannot be created or destroyed, only change in form. Thus the ammount of matter in the univers cannot grow or decrease. How then did matter come into existance? It would seem that some super-natural force must have created it.And were did God come from then?, its just asking the same thing basicly and when the matter exploded into the universe the laws of physics may have been formed with it giving it a chance.Right, here we go.
-Evolution cannot account for matter.The theory of evolution is not meant to be a global theory of everything. The mass-energy conservation laws have nothing to do with the theory of evolution whatsoever, so this point is invalid.-The forming of even the smallest bacteria is to complex to suddenly happen in some puddle somewhere.No-one said that life began with a fully formed bacteria cell. Current theory says that at first, simple amino acids were formed, consisting of just a few atoms. These would just float around, in gas or liquid, until they came accross some other, different amino acids, and would chemically bond. This has been shown in labs to occur. Over time, these would get steadily more and more complex. At the same time, the same process is going on for proteins. Amino acids are the building blocks of DNA, by the way, and proteins are what make up the membrane, or 'skin' of cells. These would then chemically bond, and life is born. This has been shown to be quite likely to happen. Sure, the reactions need millions of years to occur, but that's what they had. millions upon millions of years.About your car point - that isn't a very good example. There is in fact a type of bacteria called Deinococcus Radiodurans, who's DNA you can blast to pieces with radiation, and it somehow reforms itself. Scientist's currently don't know how it does this, but the fact that it does is a strong point in favour of evolution.-The planet earth has just the right conditionsWell, of course Humans are inclined to think this. As we have evolved to fit the planet we live on, we cannot really say if these conditions are in fact needed to support life. The first life did not in fact need oxygen. Indeed, oxygen was highly poisonous to the first forms of life. There was no more oxygen on the earth at first than there is on mars. The first life is thought to have lived on hydrogen, of which there are huge amounts in water. They took in the Hydrogen, and excreted the oxygen, thus creating photosynthesis. As more and more oxygen was created by this, other life, formed by the same process in the previous point, evolved to use it. Oxygen provides a far more efficient way of generating energy than hydrogen, so these new organism's were more successful. Oxygen hating bacteria are in fact very close to you right now; they form part of your digestive system, and even the slightest amount of O2 is very damaging to them.The chance may be small of having suitable conditions, but there are billions upon billions of planets in our galaxy alone, and even the most pessimistic use of the equations used to work out the probability of life evolving on a planet still leaves room for another few million planets like ours to exist in our galaxy alone. And as the Universe is so massive, and contains many other galaxies, you can see that it is in fact, very likely that life has come about somewhere else as well.As I said before, just because we find the conditions on our planet just right to live on, does not mean that they are the only conditions that would be suitable.-Gene mutations do occur, but they are the removal of a geneI don't know where you got that from, but it's fundamentally wrong. A mutation is a changed gene - you can't remove parts of DNA and still have the same creature you started with - that is how different species come about. Evolution keeping within the same species occurs through a gene changing, say - the gene responsible for hair colour changing from a brown hair gene, to a blond one. If you remember what DNA is made of - amino acids - you can see how this can occur. It would just be a simple chemical reaction within the acid. Also, they can gain new ones. This was how DNA is supposed to have come about in the first place.-The 2nd law of thermodynamicsAh, the favourite argument. People who state this have not read the 2nd law properly. It states that this is true in a closed system. The Universe as a whole is not a closed system, so this law cannot be applied to it.-Saturns rings have been deteriorating rapidlyWhat?! I'd really like to know where you got this, as there is no evidence of this at all that I've ever seen.-Fossils do not give evolution any legs to stand onYes, they do. You say that fossils are found seemingly at random - this is not true. Certain types of fossil only appear in certain layers of sediment. You won't find a T-Rex in a lower or higher layer than the Cretaceous layer. You say that simpler organisms are found in the same layer as more complex ones… well, yes, but if you look around you at the world today, you'll see that this is the case anyway. There are simpler organisms living alongside the more complex, so of course we're going to find fossils showing this.-Humans were around before dinasours became extinctThere is no credible evidence of this anywhere. Sure, the depictions in the references you linked to are quite close to the actual dinosaurs, but do you seriously think that Humans of those times were incapable of uncovering fossils and imagining what they may have looked like alive? This is almost certainly how the legends of dragons came about - from people looking at fossils, having no idea what they were - and using their imaginations to think of what they might once have been.If you think about it, when it was discovered that the earth is not the centre of the universe, not even the centre of our solar system, there was a huge religious outcry. Why? Because it conflicted with their beliefs. I'm sure no-one nowadays would deny that we are not in the centre. I'm pretty sure what's been going on in the past few hundred years is basically the same thing. Evidence is uncovered that a view held by a religion is found, and people belonging to that religion immediately spring up to try to disprove it. This is exactly what happened with the argument of the earth being the centre of the universe.As a final point, can you honestly say that if you had not been christened at birth, and brought up in a christian household, that you would be a christian now?P.S: I really hope no-one takes insult at any of these points - if you find anything to be insulting, it was not intended as such.Snap. I agree with Tyranic.