Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: FastCoyote

Actually, I'm not anti-evolution, but do believe that God created this universe for a purpose. From the literature that I have read (both in public school and on my own), I can only come to one conclusion.....creation seems more rational.....more believable and seems to take less faith. As I stated in previous posts, everything that I have read about Darwin seems to contradict itself in the end (especially his own experiments with pigeons and fruit flys).
I also recently read that the moth experiment was absolute bogus (this has always been a halmark of the evolutionist agend). The photo, of this touted classic illustration of natural selection, was found to be faked (the photo of the white moth against the soot colored tree). In fact, the article went on to say that the pepered moths fly about in the upper branches of the trees and don't perch on the trunks at all. In fact, Theodore Sargent of the University of Mass. admitted that he glued dead samples of the moths onto the tree trunks for a NOVA documentary. The respected journal Nature says the moth example, once the "prize horse in our stable" to illustrate evolution by natural selection must be thrown out.


212 posted on 02/05/2005 4:41:08 PM PST by NDGG
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies ]


To: NDGG

Well, let me suggest the second law does not exclude evolution, but neither does it exclude the existence of "greater" entities than ourselves. The difference between creation and evolution also becomes confused once you start looking at string theory a physical causality.


218 posted on 02/05/2005 4:49:18 PM PST by FastCoyote
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 212 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson