[QUOTE="KH-mixerX"]
Man, this is hilarious, I post a few quotes by some random people and everyone leaps on it like crazy. I'm not trying to prove anything. Nor do any of you need to refute me. Here's some things that might get your feathers ruffled.
Science's Unexplainable Creatures
Have you ever wondered how anything could evolve by chance? I believe that if evolution were true, which it is not, then when creatures evolved, they would evolve to a state where they are completely independent. They would not depend on other creatures or the environment to live. According to Charles Darwin, "If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection."
Now, to prove this point I am going to go through some of the creatures living on the planet that scientists have been unable to explain.
Eolidoidea:
Before we go into what an eolidoidea is, first we must discuss what an anenome is. An anenome is a creature that lives in the ocean. For a form of protection from predators, it has spines that inject poison into the body of the predator and kills it. And so the anenome lives to face the next day. However, the eolidoidea have small pockets in their stomachs that store the poison and use it as a form of defense against its predators, and it eats the rest of the anenome. Thus far, science has been unable to explain this creature and how it could have evolved by chance. I have the simple solution to this: God spoke it into being!
Giraffes:
Amazingly enough, giraffes are also hard to explain. A normal giraffe has a long neck, but how does it keep the blood flowing out of its head, or when it bends down to drink, how does it keep the blood from rushing to its head? It is all in the neck. You see, there are blood vessels running up and down the neck that push the blood up to the head when the giraffe is standing up. But when the giraffe puts its neck down, the vessels close up so that the blood doesn't all go into the head. If a giraffe would have evolved by chance, isn't it obvious that the head would have exploded before the vessels had fully evolved? I certainly think so.
White-throated Warblers:
I am going to start this section with a story. There once was a man who had two white-throated warblers in a cage inside a closed up room. There was no window- the only light that came was from an electrical source or a candle. One winter, he noticed that the birds were moving towards the southern side of the cage. Now how on earth did they know that it was winter and that they were supposed to go south? This behaviour is very common among these birds in the wild. The warblers will lay their eggs in Germany, then leave and go to Egypt for the winter. As soon as the eggs hatch and the chicks are able to fly, they go join their parents. How do they know where to go? Scientists have looked at other migrating species and learned that it is not only warblers, but also pigeons, monarch butterflies and others that do this. In order to figure out how they do it, scientists decided to track a pigeon on its flight path. They noticed that the birds did not necessarily use the sun because the flight pattern didn't change when the day was overcast. To test whether or not it was the earth's magnetic field that they were using, the scientists tied an electronic device to the bird and let it loose. The bird did fine when the sun was out, but once clouds covered the sky, they didn't know where they were going. But yet how could they have learned how to use the magnetic field of earth to go south? Obviously it could not have happened by chance. Someone or something had to have told these animals that when the climate is this way, go that way or something. Is it really possible for them to have figured it out on their own?
Castorocauda lutrasimilis:
Scientists have recently found a fossil supposedly dating back millions of years to the Jurassic period. This creature is a mouse-type animal. It has (or had,depending on your viewpoint) the tail of a beaver, the teeth of a seal, the habits of a platypus, hair and sweat glands that modern mammals have, and was about ten times bigger than most mammals from that period were thought to have been. Scientists are now saying that this find proved that mammals were much farther advanced much earlier in the timeline that previously thought. It also supports the fact that mammals were here much earlier before the supposed extinction of the dinosaurs. This animal is just one more proof that God created the creatures of the earth almost simultaneously.
Jurassic Shrimp:
Scientists on the coast of Australia have just unearthed another 'living fossil.' The Jurassic Shrimp are a shrimp genus that was thought to have died out about 50 million years ago. The marine biologists were looking at the life in the Australian seas when they found one of these crustaceans. Scientists knew what it was because it was well known from the Jurassic and Cretaceous periods of time. However, these shrimp were supposed to be extinct. This is similar to another find in the Philippines in the 1970's. A team of fisherman were out getting their daily catch when they caught a ceolacanth. This fish was first rediscovered in 1938 off the coast of South Africa, and there was a second species of the ceolacanth found in Indonesia in 1997. The so-called living fossils did not go extinct during the time-period that was previously thought. Our world is a big one. Could there possibly be more finds like these out there?
GabuEx
You seem to have a lot of simple solutions. Might you have an equally simple solution for the fact that humans cannot synthesize vitamin C? The natural synthesis of vitamin C requires four enzymes. Most plants and animals on Earth have all four, which is why they do not need to eat anything containing vitamin C. Humans do not - humans only have three (and, completely coincidentally of course, this trait is shared by several other great apes as well, although not all). In addition, there is present in the human genetic code a faulty sequence that, were it formed properly, would cause humans to have the fourth, and would cause humans to be able to synthesize vitamin C.
So the obvious question comes, then: why did God create humans with three of the four enzymes needed to synthesize vitamin C and with a faulty genetic sequence that would give humans the fourth? Just for the lulz?
See, the powerful thing about science is that it doesn't need to have all of the answers to be able to have some of the answers, because it goes from the evidence to conclusions. Evolution is maintained because the evidence supports it - that being the fossil record, the interconnectedness of life on Earth through like traits, the existence of DNA, and the existence of thousands of fossils bearing properties found in two different types of animal, to name a few of the most compelling pieces of evidence. The fact that there are a few fringe spots left not wholly explained to date no more invalidates evolution any more than missing two pieces in a jigsaw puzzle makes you unable to make out the picture contained in the puzzle.
EDIT: Oh, and regarding the opening post, it contains so many misrepresentations of science that I think I'd die if I tried replying to it. :P
You make very valid points with this paragraph. Now, I'm definitely not a scientist, and I often attempt to sound smarter than I actually am. So when I say this, know that it is entirely my opinion.
I think that most of the evidence that supports evolution, in fact, supports just the opposite. That life was indeed created by an intelligent creator. Take for example the interconnectedness on life on Earth. You believe that it means evolution took place. That two fossils containing similar properties means that it must've evolved. I would argue that the interconnectedness is simply proof of a clever creator using a system that works between different species. The fact that our world works as well as it does on it's own is not simply a product of millions of years of chance evolution. The odds against such an idea are staggering. I actually do believe that evolution is real on a micro level. But not on a macro level. Research has shown that mutations are never positive. The few mutations we see today are evidence of that. Take Cancer for example. Cancer is essentially just cellular mutation. Harmful cellular mutation might I add. The concept of an entire species evolving positively into an entirely new species is, frankly, ludicrous. There is absolutely no record of species evolution. I find it hard to believe that evolution, which went on for millions of years to get to the point it's at right now, we have never actually recorded in human history. Why is it that the only evolution we see anymore is in microscopic bacteria and the like? Now, there may be answers for my questions, and I expect GabuEx here to provide them. Like I said, I am no scientist.
I like your analogy at the end of that bolded paragraph. I'm a big fan of analogies. Which is why I'm going to use one right now to close out this post.
When you look at any object or appliance in the modern household today, it's an automatic fact that someone had to of made it. It doesn't need to be debated. A universal truth. Now, a machine is very different from biological tissue, I know. So don't bother pointing it out to me. But why is it that the human body, which is made up of trillions of cells each more complex than a factory the size of a city, can carry the label of random chance? Shouldn't it be assumed that someone had to of made it as well? Humans evolving from a pile of primordial goo is akin to a mother board plugged into a wall evolving into a super computer. It's just not possible. And even if it was...Let's just assume for a moment that it is possible. The human form came into existence completely by chance. This would mean that all of it's complexities such as the brain and central nervous system that all work together in perfect order to keep it alive just randomly happened by chance over millions of years. I'm sorry, but I reject that concept.
Just a side note for anyone who wants to respond to this...
Please be respectful. I'm not trying to start a war. I've been in enough of these debates before though to know that they often turn into wars.
PS: Could you friend me when you get a chance Gabu? I wouldn't mind debating this with you in a more private arena. You seem to me like on of the few people on this sight that actually knows his stuff.
Log in to comment