Replies

It never ceases to amaze me how quickly evolutionists jump to conclusions about those who oppose their opinions, but it does say something about the thought processes of such secular cheerleaders.

It is usually a direct result of some statement which displays a lack of science eduction, or that the poster has turned his back on the scientific method. Statements like, "Its only a theory" are a real clue.

Others:

"Most mutations are harmful"
"No new species have been observed"
"If humans evolved from monkeys why are there still monkeys?"
"There are no transitional fossils"
"The Cambrian explosion shows all kinds of life appearing suddenly"

And one of my personal favorites, seen on this very thread in this form:

"Second law of thermodynamics says that all tends toward disorder—that entropy is constantly increasing. Evolution flat-out contradicts science!"

But my all time favorite was a poster who referred to the "second law of thermal documents!"

And scientists are supposed to take these types of statements seriously?

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.

Interesting tag line, how about this one

consensus does not equal science.

If Evo is the truth I want a “scientist” to create life from a pool of amino acids.

[”It is usually a direct result of some statement which displays a lack of science eduction(sic)...”]

You cherry-pick those quotes that you find the most objectionable, but you have a tendency to ignore the bigger questions, or the more coherent statements.

For instance, what is the origin of life, from which all other life sprang?

Did only one organism start all present forms of life, from amoebae to whales? Or did several different primordial organisms form around the same time, spawning the diversity that is the hallmark of our world?

Is life still being spontaneously generated, or was that only possible a couple of billion years ago?

When most of life was extinguished during one or another extinction episode, did it all start over again from another primordial ooze, or did the few life-forms left over become the ancestors of all present life?

What type of evolution is responsible for the presence of non-living matter? Of energy? Of cosmic forces, etc?

Is it really possible for a species to become suited to its environment through a random process of mutation?

Etc, etc, etc, ad nauseum. To believe that all that exists merely came about through some random process more than strains credulity, it rips it to shreds.