I am going to keep it simple here.
“Our job in physics is to see things simply, to understand a great many complicated phenomena, in terms of a few simple principles.” – Dr. Steven Weinberg, UT, Austin
Lets agree the fossil record is the natural contiuum, adaption is the science or genetics and breeding, and mutations cannot evolve upward, then the question can be what causes the "macro" natural continuum of new species (bacteria to trees) and new functions (seeing, thinking, arms, etc.).
It seems that if natural biological creation was proven, that it would be demonstrated and that would be the end of the story. Right now it seems to be a politically correct hypothesis for scientists and others to accept.
I think that biologists should step back and set-up a valid hypothesis and see if natural creation is a realistic theory.
This is an important issue. If it is an unrealistic theory, this does not mean the genesis account is true, for genesis is unrealistic also.
2006-08-05
03:51:38
·
5 answers
·
asked by
Cogito Sum
4