Hi guys was just browsing around and thought I would drop in, interesting forums you have here......evolution cannot be used to explain bodily symmetry for one simple reason...In the evolution theory, all things in nature are supposed to be in balance...equal spacing of matter...so it really isn't a fair question that evolution can answer because we know all matter in the universe is not in balance and or equally spaced...trying to use evolution theory as a unit of measure to weigh an argument against or for, is like trying to measure in centimeters with an imperial ruler.
I see lots of talk about evolution here but alot of people are unfairly tagging all kinds of naturally occuring things "Variations" (Development) and are assimilating it with the term evolution, the fact is, there really is ony one recognized form of evolution and that is Micro-evolution.
Here's the 6 common definitions so that it can be cleared:
1)Cosmic Evolution: The origin of space, time and matter.
2)Chemical Evolution: Origin of higher elements from Hydrogen; If the "Big Bang" produced H2, how did all the other elements form from Hydrogen and Helium?....so evolution definition #1 has not been observed and or been proven.
3)Stellar & Planetary Evolution: No human has ever witnessed the "birth" of a star. There are assumptions being made that we are witnessing what could possibly be the pre-quil to the birth of a star but again falls into the "well it takes millions and millions of years for the birth of a star to happen so we won't see one in our lifetime".
4) Organic Evolution: There is absolutely no evidence to support organic evolution whatsoever.
5)Macro Evolution: Changing from one "kind" to another not a change of species.
6) Micro Evolution: Variations within "kinds" only this one has been observed and should be re-defined as "Macro Variation" not evolution.
That is pretty much the definitions for evolution but unfortunately because those who study and believe in evolution have witnessed Micro Evolution they try to say that Micro Evolution proves all the other 5 definitions.
So basically from reviewing the discussions, clearly evolutionists are still trying to attach the first 5 definitions to the 6th definition, attempting to establish them as fact, when in fact even the 6th definition is not true evolution it's "Variation" within the species or better defined as "D-E-V-E-L-O-P-M-E-N-T"
Development, which again, provides no substantiated evidence for evolution, no matter how you break it down with genetics, that elusive "Missing Link" continuously rears it's ugly head...apes and man for example have 2% of the genes that cannot be linked so scientifically it doesn't exist until the 2% has been proven to make it 100% fact, other than that, it is in error until proven otherwise.
Christianity came first, gave birth to science and unfortunately the theory of evolution, but fortunately, the same science is also paving the way back, not to common ancestry but to a common "Designer" and the more evolution uses science to dig for the facts the more it just keeps pushing towards "Intelligent Design".
All cars are manufactured with the same materials but were all designed by the same group of designers...humans, so they have uniquely similar traits to one another, if God created all living things then yes everthing would have been created with quite similar biological and chemical compositions but ultimately each and every car being different but yet still an automobile.
One thing is for sure the terminology and definitions for evolution are being severely played with by the evolutionist community. Attempting to keep calling theories fact, when every theory still has it's missing link is just not scientific whatsoever.
This message has been edited by MrSmee, 07-03-2005 10:51 AM
™ Version 4.2