[RHINO369]

"There is evidence against the theory. here are some things to consider.

1. Natural selection is not a strong enough force to have changed us from bacteria to humans even over a zillion years. How come other animals/beings (like other bacteria) havent changed? What was wrong with their natural selection?
You evidence that evolution is BS is that you claim natural section isn't strong enough? Who says that? Other bacteria do evolve, quite frequently and much faster than humans. Many infectus diseases are evolving to become immune to antibotics.
2. The idea of evolution just being completely random doesn't wash. There has to be an Intelligent Force controlling it.
It isn't random at all. Evolution occurs when a single member of a species is mutated, and that mutation makes it better at surviving. This is natural selection 101 here. Take this over millons of years and you get radical changes, that cause species to adapt to their enviroment.
3. There was an issue with the propellors on the first organisms (one-celled.) The organism could not exist without the propellor, it could not survive, but the propellor had to have been brought about by natural selection, which couldnt have happened unless the organism was alive, which it couldnt be, if it didnt have the propellor.
One celled organisms were alive.
4.According to the theory of evolution, in the distant past there was no life in the universe -- just elements and chemical compounds. Somehow, these chemicals combined and came to life. How'd that happen, what caused it, what caused that, and how did the chemicals and other elements get there?
What causes chemical reactions to occur now? Chemical reactions happen all the time, there doesn't need to be a reason. The elements got on earth just like all heavy elements got on earth. Its space dust. These elements bond together due to the laws of physics. Chemistry 101 at any univeristy should cover that. If you want to go more indepth with that, take a quantum mechanics course.
5. Why do we still have appendixes?
Why not? Your projecting your simple view of the world on reality. There is not plan for evolution. Evolution is not a force, its a result. We have appendixes because at one point they were a funcitioning organ. Now they aren't, but there is no reason for them to disappear. When someone is born with a mutation (this probably already happened) that causes him to not be born with an appendix he will pass it along to his children. In a couple million years some humans will have appendixes and some won't. If for some reason appendixes hurt our chances are reproduction then those with them would be less likely to survive to pass on the gene to their children. Thats how evolution works
6. If evolution is caused by mutations, why are most mutations malignant and negative?
Why does gravity attract instead of repel? It just does. Thats not proof that Evolution isn't a good theory.
7. "Darwinists claim that the reptile-to-mammal evolution is well documented. But for reptiles to evolve into mammals at least some of these transformations must have happened:
• Scales had to have mutated into hair.
• Breasts had to have evolved from nothing.
• Externally laid eggs had to evolve into soft-shelled eggs that were nourished by an umbilical cord and placenta in a womb.
They had millions of years to develop. These things didn't happen at once, or even in a short amount of time.
• It has never been observed in any laboratory that mutations can cause one species to turn into another. Despite this, evolutionists believe that given enough time, some animals will eventually evolve into other creatures.
You would have to study thousands of generations of the spiecies, and introduce a major change in enviroment. Like I said earlier diseases have evolved into new strains that are resistant to antibotics. That it self is evidence that the theory of evolution is pretty accurate.
• Sir Fred Hoyle, of Cambridge University stated that statistically the chances of one cell evolving was the same as a tornado passing through a junkyard and giving you a fully functional Boeing 747.
One mans opinion. There are many who would disagree. Plus the chances of evolution in constant enviroment are incredibly small. However over a long time it does happen.
--There are many creatures that defy evolution. All of the examples below illustrate complex and sophisticated biological structures. It is difficult to believe that these creatures could have evolved, since all of their systems had to have been in place at the start for them to survive. Angler Fish; Chicken Egg
Beaver; Giraffe
Black And Yellow Garden Spider; Incubator Bird
Bombardier Beetle; Woodpecker
Why did these animals need to have a starting place setup for them? Because you said they did? I believe Giraffes evolved from the same animal that horses did.
more to come if I have time..."

[metmom]

Take this over millions of years and you get radical changes, that cause species to adapt to their environment.

That would work if the environmental changes occurred slowly enough. If they were too rapid, as many of them were, the species would not have time to adapt but would die out instead. The more rapidly breeding ones would be most likely to survive, but not guaranteed to.

If the environment were stable for that length of time natural selection wouldn't happen then because there would be no *pressure* for a mutation to be selected out.

So all this presupposes the rate of environmental change to be favorable to accommodate the occurrence of enough random mutations so that some *favorable* ones would be selected out. Doesn't seem to be very probable, or very well supported.