I'm not here to prove creation, I've never claimed I can. I'm here to have some questions about evolution answered that so far have been met with comments like "I would explain it to you but you're too stupid" or "Here, read this book" or "Well, at least I don't believe in a sky fairy" etc.
I WILL address creation but I'd like to have my questions on evolution answered first and I'd like to hear logical answers.
And can we take one point at a time instead of several, so we don't have to spend a lot of time on each post?
Just one point about your post, I think in order to make your case for evolution you have to address the origin of life. If the claim that all creatures came from one (the common ancestor), then you have to be able to tell me where the common ancestor came from. Otherwise, you can't dismiss creation. I'll be back in a while.
That's fair. I understand that we don't live on USMB, and other things in real life are more important than you and I debating this topic. We can start with evolution and then move on to creationism.
The theories of evolution don't encompass origin of life, the same way the theories of relatvity don't encompass the origin of the universe. The theories of evolution have to do with why life changes (evolves), not why life exists in the first place.
However, the origin of life and the origin of the universe, if or when these are discovered or theorized, had either fit with evolution and relativity, respectively, or we're wrong about origins or evolution or relativity or all of it. We aren't wrong about relatvity, at least not very wrong, as it is continuously tested: GPS satellites have to be re-calibrated constantly because of the effects of relativity.
No one knows the origin of life. It could be that it was seeded by extraterrestrials, that God did it, or that the early conditions of the planet were such that carbon-based, organic molecules spontaneously began to self-replicate. Either way, that does not have to do with how life
evolves.
The theories of evolution are attempts at explaining bio-diversity, cancer, why species seem to fit their natural environments and adapt to new environments (like laboratories), why bacteria develop resistances to anti-biotics, fossils of life forms which no longer exist, why animals have certain forms and characteristics and are different not only to other species but between genders (beards, antlers, breasts, etc.) and yet have so much in common (fetal forms, organs, nervous systems, DNA, etc.).
When Darwin (and others at the time) came up with the theory of natural selection, it wasn't to explain how life came to
be but how life forms came to be so different from eachother and yet so alike (Darwin's famous finches) and also seem to fit into their environments so well.
I don't dismiss creationism when it comes to a potential source for the spark of life. And if life was created, evolution undeniably happened to that life. That is a
fact.
The theories of evolution, when examined, at this point seem very much on the right track if not 100% accurate. And they probably aren't 100% accurate. Even if they are, we will never know and it will never be proved to be.
)
