Posted on 06/18/2006 7:59:34 AM PDT by tomzz
HEY, NOW....
Let’s not insult the chimps.
To me, one of the biggest flaws in your logic is your finding that the similarity in structure to an ostrich bone is proof that it is evolved from one. It could also be proof that it wasn’t properly identified in the first place.
Looking more closely at the genetic code is the core issue... people want to defend evolution to the exclusion of common sense, even if all you do is strip everything down to basic DNA.
I suppose that you consider it to be more intelligent to find that you have evolved from primordial goo to have the distinct DNA that you do, and that every living creature that exists with its own distinct DNA pattern evolved from that same primordial goo.
Yes, and you find the flawed findings of Lucy’s fossils to be your smoking gun. Where are the rest? Surely with the billions of steps between primordial goo and every other living creature, the intermediary creatures - all of them - must be somewhere.
And if Darwin, who actually already believed in evolution before he went to the Galapagos Islands, truly discovered a principle upon which to base science for all eternity, why didn’t Robert FitzRoy, who was examining the exact same ecological evidence at the same time, arrive at the same conclusions?
Evolutionists refuse to consider that their methods of dating could be wrong, despite evidence to the contrary. They refuse to understand that you can’t make something out of nothing, although quantum physics can lead them there.
Yes, we do have a Divine Creator, but no, we’ve never been an accident.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.