"Ithinkisee and 2050, I am surprised with what you are saying as far as I have always known evolution is based on random mutations which are based on sheer chance"
> Why is it an inevitable fact that the biggest opponents of evolution are those that understand it the least? Evolution has nothing to do with "sheer chance" ! Random selection is only "random" in so far as unpredictable environmental contingencies act upon existing genetic variation, selecting for genotypic traits that render a reproductive advantage on subsequent generations. Obviously if a given gene confers biological advantages on an individual within a particular set of environmental factors, those genotypic traits will be selected for. The genomes of most organisms are remarkably complex with inherent redundancies upon which environmental pressures may "select" certain genetic factors. Second, as other posters have pointed out to you, what you consider "complex" biological organisms are all, ultimately reducible to simple, component molecular elements.
"if some of these mutations happen to be advantageous the species progresses into something more sophisticated and overall the evolution of life to higher forms including man happened by a long (additive) series of such mutations over billions of years."
> Yes, now you're getting it.....
"I can't imagine this being anything other than a random process driven by chance."
> This sort of statement from "creationists" always boggles my mind. Evolutionary science constantly, on a nearly daily basis, makes new, exciting discoveries at the anatomical, anthropological, and molecular levels of analysis all of which are filling in the evolutionary history of this planet and its lifeforms. There are thousands of tested, proven hypotheses backing the tenets of evolution in addition to hundreds of thousands of pieces of tangible, hard evidence for the evolution of not only hominids, but nearly all multicellular lifeforms on this earth.....
Now, what does a "creationist" bring to the table? Lets see......an ancient, poorly translated book of legends and myths written by wandering desert nomads 2000 years ago that modern, scientifically advanced humans are expected to take as a "factual" history of life on this planet. Constante "special pleading" arguments based purely on the emotional need to believe in a "sky-daddy" that somehow, for no apparent reason, decided to wave his magic wand, and create an "Adam and Eve" in a magical "garden", replete with talking snakes. This is in addition to a complete and utter lack of ANY tangible evidence (outside of the literary world) for the existence of ANY god in the universe.....
In summary, my only conclusion is that in the face of incontrovertible, hard evidence for evolution, Greendawn persists in the "belief" that there is a far greater "probability" that some undefinable, omnipotent god creature floating in the sky, who somehow, did not himself require a "designer" or "creator", one day, out of universal boredom, decides to create organic life-forms on some random planet in the cosmos so that he could have an "audience" to worship his supreme ego for all eternity. Yup, makes sense to me!!! LOL......