Contour Enthusiasts Group Archives Forums General Common Interests Creationism vs Evolution

Wow..

you leave for a day or so.. and lookie what happens.

Micro evolution as you put is simple adaptation, however that is a key component of the first part of evolutionary theory. (Since no one seems able to understand this.. let me explain it further) A species moves into a given environment(from a different one.. for those needing everything spelled out for them..i.e. can't think of it on their own), and subtle changes occur that allow that species to adapt to that environment. Now take it further, (which is what evolutionary theory does.. which is why I said it's the first step) The species crosses over into another new environment and adapts yet again.., then a strange thing happens a slight genetic mutation occurs (it's called genetic drift) and while the species is still able to breed between group A and Group C.. they are separated by environment B which neither is very well suited for. So they don't intermingle.. a few more genetic variations occur for whatever reasons and soon you end up with distinct species. Maybe able to reproduce with each other.. but they'll only be able to make mules. (do I have to say what a mule is???) So that's it in a nutshell. And to say that genetic drift doesn't occur what do you say to the epiphatic fold (i think i spelled that right.. not sure though) Sickle-Cell, etc.

Species variation comes from isolation over a long time (unable to interbreed).

So again.. adaptation is the FIRST STEP.. in evolutionary theory..

Some people here don't quite seem to understand that examples are made in science to prove each part of a theory. Then they are tested and retested.. Everyone seems to agree on adaptation.. (which I find wildly impossible) I mean why would God create something only to have it fail/destroyed??? Isn't he all-powerful and all-knowing so why would any rational being create something to kill it?? The only answer I can come up with is that God is irrational and well.. You can see how that wouldn't make sense (I hope). I mean God may be testing humans (again though same question) but why would he test something that doesn't even have the intelligence to understand a test???

Again Evolutionary THEORY (I'm not sure people understand the idea here behind a theory.. the reason it's a theory is because there is doubt as to it's validity.. ) has many parts. Each part of it is taken apart and examined, if it's found to be faulty.. which admittedly parts of it can be found.. new ideas are postulated and tested to be included in the THEORY..

So evolutionary theory is in itself in a process of adaptation and evolution as parts of it are proven and/or disproven. The problem with creationist theory is that like God, it cannot be proven or disproven. It's just a statement.. God created the world in XXXX amount of time. Which to me is patently absurd and a very primitive way of looking at the world.

So yes you can poke holes in evolutionary theory, after all it's not a fact, however it does fit the facts as we know them today. Each scientific endeavor from astronomy to engineering to chemistry has facets that support evolutionary theory. I've as of yet to see a single one that supports creationist theory.

And again.. I'm not going to bother quoting examples.. because in truth all the counter arguements here just raise doubts about evolutionary theory... they do nothing to prove creationism. And as I admitted from the start evolution is a Theory, which means it's imperfect and not a fact. But at least it has more going for it than the primitive creationist stories from 2000 years ago. So go ahead poke holes in it.. that's part of scientific endeavor, to question and not take blindly it's tenents. It still fits what evidence we do have better than any other theory that exists today. And if someone comes along with a better one.. that fits the scientific evidence better.. great.. I'm all for it, until then though, I fall on the side of evolution.