Replies

Great summary of some of the improbabilities with evolution. Do you mind if I "pile on"?

I like to maintain an open mind on evolution. Here's the problems it has that it must solve to convince me:

There is no known method by which life comes from non-life. People can't produce life by trying in a laboratory. The known conditions of the earth at the time of the first appearance of life are not conducive to the creation of life. (I'm an old earth/universe creationist, BTW)
There is no known method to produce the genetic drift or mutations at the rate required to produce new families of animals/plants/etc. Chemical and radiological means produce inferior mutations, as shown by countless generations of fruit flies. No new family of animals has arisen in 65 million years.
There is not enought time in the fossil record for the genetic drift to have occured that is necessary.
We cannot produce evolution in laboratories using short lived species under stress. Why should it happen in nature?
The fossil record shows the sudden appearance of new families and species, which is consistent with creation, but not with evolution.

In summary, there is no method to start life, no means to make beneficial mutations, no evidence it happened, and no laboratory experiments to show it can happen.

I personally believe speciation is "built in" capability of the "kinds" mentioned in Genesis 1. This accounts for the genetic variation we have observed in nature and through human breeding programs. But although we have Great Danes and Mexican Hairless from wolves, they're still dogs.

I think early earth creationists biggest failing is their lack of understanding of the Bible. Genesis 1 is a poem or a song format, very beautifully and succienctly written. It speaks of the six days of creation, but leaves out many details. Verses 1 and 2 are ambiguous about the time between the creation of the earth and the time of the earth being without form and void. I feel verses 2 onward speak of the recreation of the earth after a disaster, rather than the original creation.

The idea of a "mental virus" is also called a "meme"-- a contagious idea. One such is the idea of a creation without a Creator. A universe that came from nothing. Laws without a law giver. It's very popular with those who do not want to believe in a Supreme Being, and has been around since the time of the Greeks (2600 years) and before.

Your arguments are well put, thank you for being coherent and polite with your contribution to this thread. Would you be so kind as to read my earlier post #34? I believe that evolution is real, and explains some things, but I also agree with you in that evolution does not explain everything.

Stephen Wolfram is proposing some very interesting new ideas that you might want to read about, you can go to www.stephenwolfram.com to read up on it. It's late, but I'll check back tomorrow to see if you had a chance to look this up.