Do you believe this?

Question

one of the most senseless animal like an ape, lacking intelligence, reason, and judgment, lacking the ability to speak, turned into a human being by the operation of chance.

Is this commen sense?

What unconscious natural mechanism could have given an animal the ability to think?

Or who could have endowed a monkey with the superior intelligence needed to invent a microscope, television or a computer?
Have a look on this link and tell me what is you answer:

http://www.harunyahya.com/books/darwinism/darkspell/darkspell3.php

nobody is answering my question, most of you are just jumping up and down by anger.
I'm asking you if you have any other answer please give me other than what is there in the link . Did anybody of you ever care to go through it and have a look!.
Ok consider that I'm ignorant , then tell me the right answer and I will see wether I can be inteligent enough to accept it. I need answers not blashes

again my question is:
What unconscious natural mechanism could have given an animal the ability to think?

Or
who could have endowed a monkey with the superior intelligence needed to invent a microscope, television or a computer?

Answer 1

Great link!!! I do consider the idea of evolution but I also believe in a greater power behind it. However, if indeed there is no such thing as this "God", then I believe that we are aliens, which is why we destroy our natural environment and why we have the desire to build the tallest buildings we can towards our sky, the sky that we stare at some nights, feeling unsettled on earth, wondering how we truly got here and where we are really from. Then again, we could just be sensing the energy of the universe, that we are a part of. In any case I don't think we will ever know the answer and if we ever do come to the answer, I think perhaps history, time, all of life would be over or it would start right from the beginning again.

Answer 2

Apes are more clever than you think. An ape's natural habitat is filled with obstacles and problems that it has to overcome in order to survive. Now you are right that an ape cannot invent a computer, but can you? Do you really want this to be the criterion for establishing intelligence? For most human beings, like most apes, the intelligence needed to navigate the world comfortably is sufficient.

But perhaps I can offer a thought that will relate to your question more directly. Some people believe just in science and they do not understand how anyone could believe in God. Other people believe just in what their religion says, and they don't understand how anyone could believe in evolution. There is another group of people, though, who are just as sincere and equally reasonable. This group believes that both could be true. They would say that God created all that exists, including our amazing brains that are so smart we can even develop something as wonderful as science. From this perspective there is nothing to fear from evolution because to understand the way the world works, is to understand a little more about how God works in His creation.

Answer 3

You are stupid... You don't understand Evolution...

Evolution NEVER has implied that we ACTUALLY evolved from APES... What an IDIOT you are...

What Evolution ACTUALLY proposes is that we, along with apes, evolved from previous life forms. We share a common ancestor, which was PROVEN by DNA testing...

The ability to THINK came from increased social structure... As you will find in nature, all species have SOME kind of social structure, and it was OUR social structure that gave way for the need of communication... And, from then onward, we became better at thinking. Because communication is a big part of who we are and how we operate...

Answer 4

Evolution is a farce that has more holes in it that I can count,
More and more scientist are realizing this, a large amount of evidence exist's to support intelligent design despite the attacks from the "left" to suppress it. The truth WILL come out. Accept it.

It is agreed on all sides that there are only two possible solutions to the riddle of origins. Either Someone made the world, or the world made itself. A third option, the world is eternal and without origin, contradicts Natural Laws such as Thermodynamics and has been disproved with mathematical certainty in the 20th century. As the universe is obviously complex and seemingly well-designed, a Designer should be the scientific default. In everything we observe today, concept and design are the result of a Mind. Furthermore, Natural Laws such as Gravity, Inverse Squares, Cause and Effect, and Thermodynamics imply a Law-giver.

Unless a natural mechanism constrained by Natural Law, by which the entire universe could come into existence and further develop through random process, is found, a Creator must be the theoretical default. It doesn't matter whether an individual scientist has difficulty accepting it or not. As Sir Arthur Conan Doyle so eloquently stated in his Sherlock Holmes series, "Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth."

Creation Evidence - A Few Brief Examples:


Lack of Transitional Fossils. Charles Darwin wrote, "Lastly, looking not to any one time, but to all time, if my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking closely together all the species of the same group, must assuredly have existed. But, as by this theory, innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?" (Origin of Species, 1859). Since Darwin put forth his theory, scientists have sought fossil evidence indicating past organic transitions. Nearly 150 years later, there has been no evidence of transition found thus far in the fossil record.
Lack of a Natural Mechanism. Charles Darwin, in his Origin of Species, proposed Natural Selection to be the mechanism by which an original simple-celled organism could have evolved gradually into all species observed today, both plant and animal. Darwin defines evolution as "descent with modification." However, Natural Selection is known to be a conservative process, not a means of developing complexity from simplicity. Later, with our increased understanding of genetics, it was thought perhaps Natural Selection in conjunction with genetic mutation allowed for the development of all species from a common ancestor. However, this is theoretical and controversial, since "beneficial" mutations have yet to be observed. In fact, scientists have only observed harmful, "downward" mutations thus far.
Time Constraints. Both Creationists and Evolutionists agree that if evolution is at all possible, there needs to be an excessive (if not infinite) amount of time. For much of the 20th century, it was thought evolutionists had all the time they needed. If the earth ever looked too young for certain evolutionary developments to have occurred, the age was pushed back in the textbooks. In 1905, the earth was declared to be two billion years old. By 1970, the earth was determined to be 3.5 billion years old, and by the 1990's, the earth had become 4.6 billion years old. However, Young Earth advocates have identified quite a few Young Earth chronometers in recent years. Currently, there are approximately five times more natural chronometers indicating a "Young Earth" than an "Old Earth." Each discovery is a separate "Limiting Factor" that places a constraint on the possible age of the earth. For example, moon drift, earth rotation speed, magnetic field decay, erosion rates, chemical influx into the oceans, ocean salinity, etc, all constrain the possible age of the earth. Each Limiting Factor is distinct. If one were successfully challenged, there is still the problem of all the rest. Furthermore, there are Limiting Factors constraining the possible age of the universe, such as spiral galaxies where they're maintaining their spiral shapes despite their centers spinning faster than their extremities.
Unacceptable Model of Origins. The Big Bang Theory is the accepted source of Origins among the majority of Evolutionists, and is taught in our public schools. However, the Big Bang does not explain many things, including the uneven distribution of matter that results in "voids" and "clumps," or the retrograde motion that must violate the Law of Conservation of Angular Momentum. Furthermore, the Big Bang does not address the primary question at hand, "where did everything come from?" Did nothing explode? How did this explosion cause order, while every explosion observed in recorded history causes disorder and disarray?

Answer 5

Seeker,

As you have accurately observed, there seems to be no contemporary evidence for the theory of evolution. I myself have often wondered, where all the "inbetween" species are hiding. How come we don't see various species becoming something else? I think the answer is obvious. You must remember, that the whole point of the theory of evolution, is not to explain our origins. It is to remove God, from the equation. Those who refuse to accept God, and His status as King and Father, don't want to have to deal with His existence. If He is real, their future is not too bright, and they might have to give up a few cherished sins. Rather than change, they have clung to an unfounded theory, that in essence, sets them free from all moral responsibility. They will go to their graves, denying the Truth that they fear most of all. Only a truly deceived person, would think that redwood trees, humming birds, whales, flowers, and babies, all came from a pond of scum, billions of years ago. Only a deceived person, would attribute the unbelievable complexity of the web of life, to the forces of chaos. Where, in all the universe, do we see order and beauty and love, coming from explosions and chaos? To each their own.

Answer 6

You are not really looking for an answer. You have an ax to grind and positing your point of view in the form of a question to propagate your beliefs.

This is so transparent and phony.

I feel there is such thing as intelligent design. Just ask "Do you believe in intelligent design as opposed to classic Darwin evolutionary theory?" That is a real question.

Answer 7

An ape is hardly of the most senseless animals, and arguments like this for "creation" through divine means do more to hurt the cause than help it.

Answer 8

Is it your opinion that apes are one of the most senseless animals? Apes are actually fairly sensible, social, and capable of simple reasoning. And unless we have been duped, some primates have mastered basic communication in the form of sign language. Perhaps you might want to rethink your statement about primates.

Answer 9

God is the creator of all things big and small. He gave the people the ability to create and invent al that has been done. There is no mystery when you give God the credit He is due

Answer 10

pretty much...anything to kill the idea of God. the ideal that the world can get along just fine without God. anything to downplay the importance of his creation, like "people are just glorified monkeys" and are just "animals". we should follow our "natural instincts" for the "survival" of the race, like weed out the weak, honoring natural selection. and men instinctively look for the most capable women to reproduce with and spread as much of their seed as possible because this is the natural thing to do.

hey...maybe hitler's ideas weren't so crazy. maybe we should start killing the old, they can't contribute to society, in fact, they just mooch off of it, they hold everyone else back. we already justify offing the handicapped, in "mercy killings" because "what kind of life is that?", ESPECIALLY if they're not born yet. "your child will have down syndrome, you can still abort" or hey, "your child will need glasses, you can still abort" (it's coming) or hey, "your child will have brown eyes, you wanted blue, you can still abort", or "i can't possibly bring a child into this world, i work too much, what kind of life would that be, i need to abort" or "i can't bring a child into this world, not now, i haven't finished school or achieved what *I* wanted to achieve yet, i need to abort" or "you can't bring a child into this world, i don't want kids and we barely make ends meet as it is. what kind of life would that be for it? if you don't abort now i'm leaving" or "wow, i didn't use a condom last night, i could be pregnant, that wouldn't be a good thing right now, if that happened to me," (taking out all responsibility for thyself) "i'd better get that nifty little pill that makes it so easy and stress-free for me to abort"........what is this? looks like human "cleansing" to me, minus the dictator.