Why do so many continue to believe Darwin's mistake?

Question

Evolution is not real science. It is pseudo-science. The scientific method cannot prove evolution. There is no experiment that can prove it, like there is that proves water is made up of H2O. It is still a theory.
Darwin used micro-evolution or development within species to invent macro-evoluion or development from one species to another.
Macro-evolution is impossible. An offspring cannot have an organ that did not exist in the parent.
Sadly most people including scientists, live in confusion.

There has never been any proof that demonstated that one species can evolve into a different new species. Darwin just assumed it was possible. We now have DNA that shows his mistake.
How many agree?

It is not "magic". It is God. The etrnal being who created everything. How can a creation not have a creator. Just look at one flower and you know there is a God. There will be no excuse at the end of life.

Micro evolution can never turn into Macro evolution, because Macro evolution does not exist. Micro evolution can never "evolve" into something that is impossible.

A concept of God and creation can be proven by revelation. There are other ways to arrive at truth besides science.

Answer 1

I know why. It is quite simple. It is easier for someone to believe in Evolution. It give a peace of mind. Versus ... having to know you will be accountable for everything you do here on Earth ... hence Heaven or Hell.
Many scholars have since denounced darwinism. Did you know that?
I'd die for what I believe in . But not by committing suicide. I hope I live to be 100. By then ... I'd only see my family evolve ... and although a little cutier .. they'd still reflect a smidgit of me... lol

Answer 2

Their has been proof, in labratories their have been countless controlled breeding experiments proving evolution. Scientists will get small organisms that reproduce quickly and set some kind of parameter, which 99.9% of the time they evolve through natural selection to adapt to whatever the parameter was. The thing is that macro and micro evolution are really the same thing. An organism that mutated to have a simple, maybe 1 or 2 celled, organ that is beneficial will have offspring and some of them may mutate to have that organ expand making the organ even more beneficial. It has been proven that a species will evolve through natural selection through extremely slow small steps, eventually leading to a somewhat different version of the same species. These changes will continue and wether or not you want to call them micro or macro evolution. DNA in no way disproves evolution, it actually helps it. Mutations in DNA that are beneficial will allow an organism to survive and reproduce. As for evolution still being a theory, the theory of gravity is still a theory. All a theory is is a conclusion of a collection of facts. Facts and theories actually work with each other, not against.

Answer 3

The existence of atoms is also a theory. Yet that theory forms the entire foundation of science. We teach how atoms move and interact, the parts of atoms, their mass and physical properties. Yet no-one has ever seen an atom, and their very existence is entirely theoretical. But like evolution, atomic theory has mountains of supporting evidence. Therefore that theory, like evolution, can be taken as fact for all practical purposes. In science a hypothesis doesn't achieve theory status until it is well tested, and well supported by evidence.
.

Answer 4

You are exactly right. Micro-evolution occurs in all species. Look at humans! Look at the appendix! It is believed that it was once used in digesting improperly cooked meat, based on findings when the "Ice Man" found in a glacier was autopsied. Now, the appendix is useless and quite often needs to be removed to save a person's life. There have even been children in recent years born without one to begin with.

Darwin had theories. There is nothing wrong with that. Every good scientist worth their salt has them. However, science has disproven the theory of evolution from microscopic plankton to modern man to be false.

Answer 5

permit's see how many techniques you're incorrect. Evolution meets all standards to be a scientific self-discipline. Darwin replaced into no longer an atheist. Evolution has been demonstated in distinctive experiments per scientific approach. No proposed mechanism for gravity has been shown (in assessment to evolution). Darwin reported progression of organs ("macro-evolution"), besides by way of fact the smaller scale modifications that effect in new organs. New organs can arise from present strucures by the years. DNA and all cutting-edge technological know-how (till via "cutting-edge technological know-how" you propose "for my area") help (no longer prepare, and surely no longer PROVES) evolution. organic pholosophy is technological know-how. You made 8 assertions and you acquire one outstanding (via success, by way of fact it extremely is sparkling you do no longer understand the courting between philosophy and technological know-how). To outstanding it off, the only fact you acquire outstanding replaced into accompanied via a sentence fragment. Seven real and a pair of grammatical errors in 8 assertions. that's greater errors than assertions.

Answer 6

there is no such thing as micro evolution. only christians invented it... there is only evolution.

ok, so people can walk on water. fine...
i hope you understand this one:

ID is not real science. It is pseudo-science. The scientific method cannot prove ID. There is no experiment that can prove it, like there is that proves water is made up of H2O. It is still a theory. And a flawed one at that.

Answer 7

DNA doesn't show that its false and if it does how? Your not making sense. There is no way of proving that Darwin's theory is fake because it is A THEORY which hasn't been proven to be fiction or face . I believe in it, why not? Is it better to believe we came from only 2 people Adam and Eve who had two sons then one killed the other and so the first murderer did it with his mum. We are ape people and it sounds more real then from a book about dumb *** people yes i mean the bible.

Answer 8

The asker would still not be persuaded even if he saw a monkey evolve into a human before his very eyes. There's really no point in discussing this.

What millions of scientists have accepted through clinical trials means nothing and the asker's vague understanding of some of the ID movement's propaganda and lies is all that's important.

Shame on you, sir, and the way you insult all of the scientists and their life works...

Answer 9

Agree with you it was an assumption and hasnt been proven beyond doubt. But obviously creationism is in the same category of evidence. Since we also cant ever prove beyond a doubt---anything.

Answer 10

I concur wholeheartedly! and wait with you for the evolutionists to be a little "open-minded" and not so dogmatic in their preaching and desire to convert everyone to their outdated religious belief system..Time seems to be the almighty power to evolutionists who do not question the young trees found rising through stata equaling 10s of thousands of years....and what about the accumulations of dust on the moon which should have been several feet thick by the time we landed there(assuming everything is as old as people thought)..or, how about the salinity of the oceans...or, the accurance of more breakdown of DNA....what about the 2nd law of thermodynamics?...Just to name a few.....Admit that Uniformitarianism is truly a fool's paradise!!