aTruthSeeker

CDarwin, Please do not take offense to what I write. I am not trying to be arrogant or condescending, and I know that you were trying to be concise. What I would like to do is examine in detail the the evidence for evolution one piece at a time. Lets break it down into small pieces and verify the integrity of each to make sure that we have facts before us, rather than speculation. We can start with whatever piece of evidence you wish. I will also briefly address the hypotheses you included in your reply. I do not intend to be comprehensive either, I simply want to give an alternative interpretation to the evidence that these hypotheses are based on. Or a common Creator/Designer... If you look at the work of an artist, you can see commonalities from piece to piece. Sometimes you can look at a piece of art and say " that looks like the work of..." only to later find out it was created by that artist. The fact that we have fossils does nothing if we misinterpret them. I believe that the evidence for the flood of Noah's day is very persuasive. We have fossils of animals buried in very close proximity that are not good roomates. Carnivorous animals found with the prey that they would eat, probably were buried instantly. Otherwise, they would not be found together unless they were in the stomach of the predator. If you look at the parts of a microwave and at the parts of a car, you will find commonalities. It does not prove that the car evolved from the microwave or vice versa. It simply proves that they have similar parts. We have created many devices with different purposes that are sometimes designed for a certain environment (ie. underwater). The environment that they will be in necessitates certain characteristics (ie. waterproofing). If a creature is to live on earth it is necessary for it to be compatible with its environment, regardless as to whether it came to be by evolution or intelligent design. There is a very interesting article about DNA here http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2070. It is a bit of a read, but very informative. There are many ways to interpret what we see. I think that it is interesting that the "geologic column" has only found in the "correct order" (as far as rock types and index fossils are concerned) in 7 +/- places in the world. Many times there are petrified trees standing vertically, through many of the layers. We know the trees did not take millions of years to grow through the layers. Also, some of the trees are found upside down! I feel that this is evidence for a very large flood. If you take a large jar and put different types of soil and different types of bugs and animals... then fill it with water and give it a shake... you will see an interesting thing happen in just a few moments. Layers will form and the bugs and animals will be sorted according to density in the various layers. If you did the same thing on a much larger scale, say the whole planet, you would also want to take into consideration the natural location of certain species (fish and other aquatic life at the lower places, land dwelling animals in the middle, and birds at the top) and the mobility and intelligence of each creature. These factors could greatly contribute to the order that is found in the fossil record. A great article concerning this is found at: http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/3017 Again it is a bit of a read, but also quite informative. Please notice that the finches never became another species. They are still finches and so are their offspring. Heredity should not be classified as evolution in my humble opinion. I feel this is misleading. If you must call this evolution, be sure to put "micro" in front of it. It does nothing to prove macro evolution which is a change in species.

Sisyphus I would love to have a discussion with you about this. I promise to keep an open mind. So, lets do our best to lay aside all presuppositions (knowing that it is impossible for either of us to entirely eliminate them) and begin. We can begin anywhere you like, but lets tackle one issue at a time. I don't want to believe in anything but the truth, even if it is painful. I am no troll, so throw me a bone. What do you consider to be the most convincing evidence of evolution? Phi for All Interesting site... I will be reading it as often as possible. It seems to be well organized. Thank you for pointing it out to me.

Better question is this... is evolution real and scientifically observable? If we evolved from apes, why do we still have apes... and why aren't they turning human? How do we know if the earth is really billions of years old? Have we concluded that by presupposing that life MUST have come from evolution? If we date the layers of the "geologic column" by "index fossils" and date the "index fossils" by the layer that we find them in the "geologic column", isn't that circular reasoning? Why are we still missing the "missing link"? Since we have so many species of animals and plants on earth, shouldn't there be a fossil record of transitional species... even a few examples would be nice. It sounds like we are missing the whole chain, not just a link. Why would we give unintelligent forces credit for creating life, when we as intelligent beings can not create life without borrowing it from something living? We know all of the chemicals that make up a living creature, but why can't we assemble them into a living being? Somebody make an amoeba if they really are so simple! What about irreducible complexity? If a creature can not live without certain parts, what did it do before it evolved to have those parts? And what on earth would the first living being eat anyway? Why is spontaneous generation of life still being taught in our schools when Louis Pasteur disproved it back in 1859?