When prominent biologists claim that \"evolution is a fact,\" they are stating a half-truth that means far less than what they would like the public to believe. The theory of evolution states that the development of life is a purely natural process, driven by known mechanisms. But this is simply not true. There is no evidence that life developed, or even could have developed, by a purely natural process.Quote:
Originally posted by burns91
So all the fossils and carbon dating (scientific evidence) is just a theory? Nice try, but no. It's actual tangible facts that proves that organisms on this earth have evolved and/or become extinct (long before the Bible says the world was created).
[- -]
Throughout the 1900's scientists continually studied the fossil records to try and determine if the theory of evolution was really the \"fact of evolution\". If the theory of evolution were fact, then the fossil records would clearly show the gradual transformations over long periods of time that Darwin spoke of. But despite intense research for over 150 years since the theory of evolution was proposed, no instances of a transitional form have been found in the fossil records. What the fossil records do show is each life form suddenly appearing, full blown, without any apparent relationship to what went before it. Why evolutionists look the other way and call this a lie is incredible.
Despite the fact that no facts have ever been produced making the \"Theory of Evolution\" the \"Fact of Evolution\", many people still blindly cling to it since they do not believe in creation and feel it is the best and only thing they have to go on.
This one gave me a good laugh.(nothing personal).Quote:
Originally posted by burns91
Getting into a debate with people who want to continue to believe what they will is pointless. I'm simply asking people to open their minds, don't get offended, and see that there could be a completely different beginning to the world as they were lead to believe in the past.
In the past there was the Church, which's authority couldn't have been questioned. And now we have the Science, which's authority can't be questioned. Is there a resemblance? Since You seem not to believe in Intelligent Design, why do you have to believe in the Theory? Seems to me more like jumping from one set of blind beliefs to another.
And, to be clear, I am not protecting the views of the creationists nor the views of the scientists - I'm against both of them. These two seemingly different things aren't different. Both are created in order to keep people's minds on something unquestionable.