“Science follows evidence. “
There is no actual evidence for evolution. For instance:
The fossil record shows no transitory life forms.
There is no example of species becoming other species.
We can’t even make it happen when we try, let alone see it happening randomly.
You CAN take fossil records and posit billions of years of evolutionary theory out of it. Or, you can take them and see catastrophic flood layers.
It all depends on your presupposition.
And I’m not paranoid. I believed in evolution for my first 21 years. It doesn’t freak me out. I just happen to think it is wrong.
There is no actual evidence for evolution.
Do you have any idea how absurd this statement is? Only the hardest of the hardcore Young Earth Creationists who have never, ever taken a basic biology course in their lives and were raised in the church, homeschooled, and barred from television, newspapers and magazines their entire lives can possible believe there "is no actual evidence for evolution." The entire drug industry, the entire farming industry and its attendant industries (ie, pesticide and seed companies), the entire medical industry, the entire medical, pharmaceutical and medical research industries (to name a few) are based upon basic evolutionary principles.
So whether you believe your particular god created those principles or not, the evidence is quite clear to anyone. Including you.
For instance: The fossil record shows no transitory life forms.
Please define what your idea of a "transitory life form" is. Seriously. For someone to discount the near weekly discoveries of "transitional fossils" is borderline insane. Most get no press; only "sexy" ones
like this and
this make headlines. What's a lungfish? A mudskipper? Heck, what are amphibians in general?
Are you demanding a half chicken, half frog or some nonsensical beast only creationists dream up? Or do you simply say, "Oh, tiktaalik was created and then went extinct and that's that, have a nice day." Or then there's the playground tactic most often employed wherein a creationist views a "transitional" and then demands now the two "transitionals" that came before and after it. Then, when that is discovered, lookee thar! Now there are FOUR gaps to fill! It gets tiring.
There is no example of species becoming other species.
Hand-wave of the year. The tactic here, when shown one of the tens of thousands of examples is to either a) define "species" as creationists see fit to comply with their belief or b) call it ID if a scientist did it and then bizarrely surmising ID is an actual theory with merit, or c) shake their heads and say what you said.
We can’t even make it happen when we try, let alone see it happening randomly.
Well, if you want a time lapse movie of speciation, that hasn't happened yet. But maybe someday... like when H5N1 mutated into H1N1 recently, necessitating all sorts of smart people to search for evolutionary reasons.
There are clear examples of cichlid speciation in just a few thousand years when populations are geographically separated. Not fast enough for you? Sorry. There are tons more, but why bother? You want to see a crazy creationist canard speciation event that no one in their right mind would ever say has ever occurred.
You CAN take fossil records and posit billions of years of evolutionary theory out of it. Or, you can take them and see catastrophic flood layers.
True. You can do that, and you can be egregiously, hopelessly, embarrassingly wrong when you do that (re: flood) too. My kid could tell me his cup is blue when it's actually red - and every human who knows their colors and can see color properly agrees it is red - but that doesn't make him right. It makes him wrong... or a creationist.
And I’m not paranoid. I believed in evolution for my first 21 years. It doesn’t freak me out. I just happen to think it is wrong.
And I happen to know it's "right."