Comments on: Evolutionists: Two fundamental equations?

By: Zhimbo

Zhimbo — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:59:59 +0000

The first one is not evolution – it’s cosmology.

The second one is not evolution – it’s abiogenesis.

So, you haven’t even touched what biological evolution actually states. Sounds like you need a beginner’s introduction to the basic concepts.

Here’s a great web page:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

Don’t worry – just put a little effort into it. While an intuitive understanding of the time scales and population dynamics is difficult, the basic principles – which you don’t even touch on in your post, I’m afraid – aren’t too difficult.
References :

By: don

don — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 14:34:59 +0000

I think most of the answers already given point out the fallacies in your thoughts. I’d just like to suggest that you forget about evolution for awhile and concentrate on God. It’s clear that evolution is not what you think it is – it’s reasonable to assume that God is not what you believe either…. You may think you are defending the faith but your arguments are taking you farther and farther away.
References :

By: emucompboy

emucompboy — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:49:59 +0000

I answered this question yesterday. Aren’t you supposed to avoid vain repetition?
Anyways, we don’t know what things were like before the Big Bang, just as we don’t know what things were like before the Beginning:
In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word WAS God.

And, the human eye still doesn’t appear to have been intelligently designed. We went through that yesterday. My eye still has a blind spot today, and I didn’t miraculously grow focusing muscles overnight so I could focus my eyes without the need for glasses.
References :

By: Craig

Craig — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 13:05:59 +0000

You said: "accidental mishaps, random confusion" This alone tells me you know nothing about evolution. Evolution is far from random. It is a gradual, cumulative process through which the simple can become complex and the complex become simple, depending on the selective pressures present. If you really want to know more, go read some Richard Dawkins. If not, get off this site and stop bothering us.
References :

By: PaulCyp

PaulCyp — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 12:20:59 +0000

You are confusing evolution with Creation. The initial formation of the universe doesn't come under the heading of evolution at all. First of all, nothing biological existed in the newly formed universe, and evolution is a biological process. Secondly, evolution is not concerned with origins, but only with gradual change in existing things. Something can't evolve if it doesn't exist. Science can never deal with the origin of matter out of nothing, for it is not a natural process, and science is the study of the natural world and natural processes. But science can certainly look at the world as it is now, and the world as it was millions of years ago, and study the differences.
References :

By: ♥Mira♥

♥Mira♥ — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:53:59 +0000

Why are you posting this question again? Are you thinking maybe it will be correct on Thursday since it was incorrect on Wednesday?
References :

By: an athiest guy

an athiest guy — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:42:59 +0000

first of all you spelled fantasy wrong
second of all you don’t add dirt, water and time and get life. its the chemicals that react to other chemicals and will eventually amino acids will form. the amino acids are the building blocks for DNA now we need some bacteria to form and you have living organisms and evolution takes care of it now
References :

By: YDoncha_Blowme

YDoncha_Blowme — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:27:59 +0000

What part from yesterday did you not understand that your "theory" of evolution is mistaken and ignorant??? What part of evolution has anything to do with creationism????????? Yes, you asked this yesterday, and still your primitive view of evolution hasnt changed any. Why is that? Did you learn nothing from your responses yesterday? OBVIOUSLY not…..

Yes, there were no transitional fossils when Darwin wrote that in 1866. Its now 2006, 140 years later, and those transitional fossils have been found. Trying reading a newspaper….its all over the news.
References :

By: Sinyckel

Sinyckel — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:02:59 +0000

Nowhere in origin of the species does it state that we evolved from nothing. There has always been matter and/or energy in some form or variety. The same question could be posed about God. Where did God come from? As far as an evolutionary formula for making life... If we had one, there would no longer be an argument would there. It's the search for our origins that seems to offend, I have no idea why, but using a God to explain them away is more offensive to me than the prospect of being the cousin of a monkey.
References :

By: thewolfskoll

thewolfskoll — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 10:12:59 +0000

You have no clue as to what the Theory of Evolution is.

What you have ask is on the level of a 3rd grade understanding of science. Read a book on the subject and learn it before you try to disprove it.

The man who doesn’t read good books has no advantage over the man who can’t read them.
-Mark Twain
References :