magic wand wielding mathematical unicorn
Eight thousand othere dieties, sprites, and leprechauns
All intelligent.
Literally, it could've been anything, a car driving in the street,
this pc I'm typing on, and I could go on and on.
You are.
gluadys writes:
That's a bit of a misrepresentation.
Unicellular forms did not hang around for billions of years unchanged.
Blue green algae was supposed to be the first life form over 3500000000 years ago, It's still around in exactly the same form today, if thats not unicellular forms hanging around for billions of years, what is?
Bluegenes writes:
Have you never heard of Lamarck?
Yes, an evolutionist.
rbp writes:
Lucy, there is no such thing as a default position in science.
Evolution is not science, it fits in somewhere between finger painting and story telling.
rbp writes:
The fact that there is no evidence towards ID, dosent
[sic] lend any credibility towards evolution, evolutionary theories have their own evidence to support the theories.
[i][b]Evidence[/i][/b], a word bantered around by you group. Evidence is for jurors. Real science deals with cold hard facts.
Percy writes:
The fact of the matter is that here in yet another thread about the evidence of
intelligent design, its proponents can only offer evidence against evolution.
See, that word again. There is evidence everywhere for creation, its
just that atheists interpret the evidence from a position of no
God (you can't say you don't) and creationist from the contrary position.
The creationist belief that disproof of evolution will cause the
scientific world to embrace supernaturalism, or even just
accept mechanisms for which there is no evidence, can only
be based upon massive self-deception.
But of course it's alright for evolutionists to assume the same
inexplicaple assumtions, say like abiogenises.. or wait.. that's right,
thats not biology, thats chemistry!
1. Genes should be found that have no apparent predecessors.
Based of course, on the assumption that they do.
2. In species change happening today, we should find evidence of genetic changes that are completely unrelated to natural mutational mechanisms.
We should see hundred and even thousands of new species appearing every year;we find the opposite.
3. In the fossil record, new innovations should appear suddenly and wholly formed and with no more primitive antecedents.
Like the construction of temples.
4. In the fossil record, new innovations should appear in groups that are completely unrelated.
Humans
5. More generally, we should evidence of processes with no possible naturalistic explanation.
The creation of the universe.
No matter how you use your box of broken science tools and tricks, science itself can
never explain the mystery of the universe and us.
There no doubt exist natural laws, but once this fine reason of ours was corrupted, it corrupted everything.Pascal
™ Version 4.2
