Apostate Kate
Yes I do. I did not demand evidence but He gave it anyway.
Well Kate, as sneering about stuff you know nothing about is clearly what passes as well informed in front of your keyboard I doubt very much you would believe in a person of a different faith who also claimed their god had given them evidence of its existence, nor be able to demonstrate any difference between your claims about your imaginary friend and theirs.
This has been fun but I am done here.
What on Earth gave you the impression you had started here? To even start off discussing this subject you would have to have an open mind and some knowledge of the topic. You have neither.
I find it interesting that I have been called names, told I was ignorant and all from people who I doubt have put much more research into their beliefs that I have except save maybe Leolai.
Why do you find it neccesary to blame other people for the reception your ill-informed arrogance receives?
All I said is I don't accept this theory as proof of the evolution of any organism into a higher more complex life form because I have never seen proof of this.
You don't know jack-poo about the subject, so what you have or haven't seen is of no relevence.
The fact remains that with all this supposed evidence, it is not enough to name it the "Law" of evolution.
This would men something if you could now provide the law of god. No, not god's law, the law of god, a clear and supportable explanation for the imaginary friend you say proved its existence to you.
A bacteruim can be effected by the environment to survive, all life wants to survive, but it will never grow a central nervous system. It will adapt to its surroundings, not grow a brain, it is bacteria and has been bacteria since God created it.
Missing links are still missing.
If you had read/understood what I wrote about ring species you would understand that 'missing links' are largely much ado about nothing, as transitions are so gradual and fossilisation so rare that a discontinuity of evidence is to be expected. But as you know nothing about the subject you have no comment on the massive coincidence that occured in evolutionary sceince in the past few years.
You know all these trees showing what decended from what that were made using claudistics (the similarity of bones)? Well, somehow these (according to you) imaginary family trees match the genetic evidence we now have the technology to analyse in the vast number of cases; the animals that were said to be related due to their bone struture are almost always proven to be related genetically.
Although you have nothing to say about this due to your willful ignorance (i.e., you're too complacent to pick up a book, not too stupid, that's a different thing) you shouldn't take your silence on this remarkable coincidence personally, as even those rare birds, Creationists and IDots with some degree of knowledge about evolution, have little to say about it either.
Abadon if you have a new gene sequence doesn't that mean you also have an old gene sequence?
Yes and no - but the point is your claim was wrong, and that despite this your beliefs do not change.
In mapping the two genetic diseases in my ancestors, there is no evidence that we developed new information that caused us to be more highly evolved and disease resistant. The mutation happened and has been passed along since before the Vikings were raping and pilaging.
Who said there is ("evidence that we developed new information that caused us to be more highly evolved and disease resistant") in your case? In someone with sickle cell anemia in the land of their ancestors a genetic disease DOES make them more disease resistent. Many other genetic diseases without any know benefit persist because the number of people carrying them is low and therefore they remain heterogous in the vast number of instances, only becomeing chronic or lethal on the rare occasions two carriers get it on and have homogous offspring.
Adam and Eve (scientists named) have been mapped all the way back to Africa. Again, show me any scientific evidence that shows a living human can pop up out of no where.
There isn't, but nor has anyone said there is. Why do you persist in dishonestly or ignorantly making false claims about evolution? It's like me saying I don't believe in Jesus because of the way he treated chickens.
I understand the theory completly, and it makes no sense to me.
You do NOT understand the theory completely, as every time you say anything about it you show you would be totally incapacble of passing the most elementary examination on the subject.
So Eve popped up, a gigantic mutation from an ape and Adam did at the same time, just popped up and the human race was here.
More lies or ignorance; why? Why is this it SO important to argue for a primative god who makes the Universe like a potter rather than (say) an elegant intelligence that can set the dice rolling and have what it wants eventually appear because of the way they set things rolling?
If this works for you fine! It doesn't for me. I have no desire to defend my position on this, nor am I asking anybody here to defend theirs.
Yeah, right. For someone who has no desire to defend their position you sure work hard at it (effort and results are however two different things).
::gone and not looking at this thread again::
In my experience anyone so devoted to 'forcing' their opinion and ignorance on others is very unlikely not to read the responces to their posts. It very obviously isn't about the evidence it is very obviously about you, you'll read this alright...
