Natural selection ISN'T RANDOM...........!!!!!!!!
I see this MISTAKE over and over.
It is a passive, unintentional PROCESS<---------------
whereby genetic traits that benefit the surving creatures, the ones who don't die from ice, predator, heat, dehydration, malnourishmnet, lack of sun, over-salination, etc, LIVE to reproduce, whereas those that have genetic traits that are poorly adapted to their environment tend to die off.
It is not random.
It is not random.
It is not random.
Lack of reasons as to why a Penguin 'knows' to travel in the peculiar way they do, DOES NOT SUPPORT THEIR BEING AN OMNIPOTENT CREATOR. This is an appeal to ignorance, which is a logical fallacy. Lack of proof cannot be used to support a theory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_ignorance
The preponderance of EVIDENCE suggests that natural selection demonstrates how an organism develops a capacity to have such beneficial "instincts".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baldwin_effect
2006-08-06 16:03:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by -.- 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I believe in creation.
Just look around you. See how everything works together so well.
Now imagine this; B A N G !!!
and all of the bits and pieces ordered themselves into a world which Supports life of Animals, Birds, Fish, Plants, Insects and People. And they can reproduce themselves.
Watch the nature channel.
Or watch the movie; MARCH Of The PENGUINS.
You have to believe in Intelligent Design or How would penguins know to travel and share responsibility between mother ad father to survive and reproduce?
Intelligent Design, in other words, Creation.
I know that when something blows up it makes a mess and is distructive. If a Big Bang can create new stuff. Where are the new beings from the collapse of the World Trade Center Buildings in NY?
I don't see them either.
Read and watch other unbelievable stories of how things work together in out world.
It is absolutely undeniable that our world is unbelievable orchestrated to compliment the environment and the life it sustains.
God Bless You, ;-)
2006-08-06 22:14:25
·
answer #2
·
answered by Deena 5
·
0⤊
1⤋
For the same reason it took catholics 200 years to realize that the earth revolves around the sun and not the other way around.
Catholics used the same reasoning too:
They said: "would not it be perfect that earth would be the center of the universe and everything revolves around it in circles?". And guess what, universe is no where as "perfect" as they believed it to be.
Now they say that the nature is perfect as a proof of creationism. While in reality there is nothing perfect about the earth.
2006-08-07 17:16:41
·
answer #3
·
answered by hq3 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your so called fossil record is not in contradiction of scripture. I suggest Adam and Eve were in the garden for possibly a million years before they were cast out. Maybe longer. Things didn't begin to die until they sinned and God turned the world upside down.
2006-08-06 22:25:30
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bimpster 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Coz when you really want to make a point you can turn things around, take things out of context, and/or show only part of the evidence to prove something. Parts of science is supposed to be in line with creationism, but not as a whole. and they keep on changing stuff to coincide with science, reasonably or not i don't know (example: the whole 7 day creation thing).
2006-08-06 21:45:53
·
answer #5
·
answered by highway25s 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
The discovery of the Atom. No chance happening there!
DNA leading back to two human beings.
Check out language of the genes' Dr. Steve Jones BBC archives, radio 4.
All known strange phenomena, We don't get to here about it all! Our own 6th sense.
2006-08-07 01:25:00
·
answer #6
·
answered by Leigh 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Evolution and Big Bang are fool's imaginations. I can make a better story than that. Will you believe?
Fossils? It is from the material of earth which is recycled to form present earth. It is my theory.
2006-08-07 00:37:12
·
answer #7
·
answered by latterviews 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
People often only see what they want to see and hear only what they want to hear. The creationists you speak of more than likely only look at enough scientific evidence to prove their point, and then look no further. Either that, or they find ways of misconstruing the evidence to fit their views.
2006-08-07 00:29:41
·
answer #8
·
answered by Jay B 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
One cannot deny experimental science. That means the only choise you have is to fit it into whatever you believe, or change your beliefs. Creationists are not changing their beliefs, obviously, otherwise they seise to be creationsts. That leaves only one option - fit science into the creationsm somehow. This is my only guess.
2006-08-06 23:53:31
·
answer #9
·
answered by Snowflake 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Like you said, the debate is over, we won....we have the fossils!
2006-08-07 15:54:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Its not me Its u 7
·
0⤊
0⤋