Replies

"1) Define "lack of order"."

Order lack of confusion. A tree is a tree and there are numerous "species" of trees. A cow is a cow and may well come in all colors and sizes and body shapes.

"2) You are aware that there are a number of "species" that are very closely related to one another, such that Species A and Species B can produce viable offspring, Species B and Species C can produce viable offspring, but Species A and Species C cannot produce viable ofspring? Such occurances show that "species" is just a term we have invented to define when a group of organisms has more or less genetically isolated themselves from related organisms. It's not a predefined property of life forms."

Based upon what authority do you claim no predefined property of life forms? We in flesh bodies can only see in one dimension, evolution is about what has happened to the "flesh" over a vast amount of time. The status of what is found at this point in time does not change the origination of "flesh". Evolution does not explain the "spirit" body.

"Your statements do not expose flaws in evolution. They merely expose the flaws in your understanding of evolution."

Evolution keeps evolving, no way possible to understand something that ignores the whole picture. Evolution gives power to those that elevate themselves to positions of power and authority and upon that basis alone I reject that because through whatever means possible an individual becomes a dictator can claim that he/she is superior because they drew life's evolution lottery.

Order lack of confusion. A tree is a tree and there are numerous "species" of trees. A cow is a cow and may well come in all colors and sizes and body shapes.

Ah, so this just ties into your fallacy that species are anything but human definition.

Based upon what authority do you claim no predefined property of life forms?

Based upon observable evidence, such as that which I explained to you.

We in flesh bodies can only see in one dimension, evolution is about what has happened to the "flesh" over a vast amount of time.

We in the "flesh" can see in three dimensions, actually. And we can remember things fourth-dimensionally. Moreover, our perception of three-dimensional space allows us to extrapolate reliably about events that occured in the past.

Your response is an attempt to use what you think are fancy words to hide your lack of a real answer.

The status of what is found at this point in time does not change the origination of "flesh".

What does this have to do with anything?

No, observing things now does not change what happened in the past. No one has claimed this.

Evolution does not explain the "spirit" body.

No, it doesn't. It also doesn't explain gravitational attraction. That doesn't make it false either. And, unlike the "spirit body", gravitational attraction can actually be demonstrated to exist with some degree of certainty.

Evolution keeps evolving, no way possible to understand something that ignores the whole picture.

Once again, you make absolutely no sense. You're throwing out words in the hopes that you'll make me think that you're speaking too intelligently for me and I'll concede the point out of confusion. I'm not that dumb. You're not making sense, and you're not even trying to make sense and I am not falling for it.

volution gives power to those that elevate themselves to positions of power and authority and upon that basis alone I reject that because through whatever means possible an individual becomes a dictator can claim that he/she is superior because they drew life's evolution lottery.

In other words, you reject evolution because you don't like the consequences -- a logical fallacy. Moreover, the "consequences" that you don't like are utterly bogus, not actual consequences of the theory of evolution but rather your hopelessly wrong idea of what evolution is.