evidence for creation

I realize that my evidence isn't going to make sense to everybody.But you can give me your input on it.
The reason I don't think evolution ever happened is because it takes 100% of something in order for it to work.(at least as far as the earth is concerned)But according to the evolutionist at one time 1% of earth was functioning and due to that percent, 2% of it started working,then 3% and so on.So take your eyes for instance.If only 25% of your eyes are working are you going to be able to see?No!(if you don't believe me talk to your eye care professional )Even if only 90% of your eyes are working you're not going to be able to see.Because it takes 100% and then something to make it start.And that evidence suggests that the earth was created by something all at once.Another peice of evidence is sorta common sence.If you walked into a room and saw a chair sitting in the middle of it,how would you think it got there?Would you think at one time that chair was a constepated atom that formed that chair or would you believe that it was put there?Obviously you're going to believe someone put it there.So why do we go on believing something that's so unbelievable???

Well... I don't agree... but I'm glad this makes you feel better.

Peace be with you.

gtrsgrls;

Have you ever heard of ?The Enuma Elish??

The reason I don't think evolution ever happened is because it takes 100% of something in order for it to work.(at least as far as the earth is concerned)

Click to expand...

Support your positive claim.

according to the evolutionist at one time 1% of earth was functioning and due to that percent, 2% of it started working,then 3% and so on.

Click to expand...

Huh? 100% of everything has always been functioning.

No!(if you don't believe me talk to your eye care professional )Even if only 90% of your eyes are working you're not going to be able to see.

Click to expand...

Really? If the cones in my eyes stop functioning, I'll be color blind. If the Iris stops functioning, I'll be light-sensitive. If the lense sphincter stops functioning I won't be able to focus.

Of course this is a mechanical removal, not a de-evolution. Want an order of evolution that works? OK.

- Nerve ending becomes triggered by light (eyespot).
- Group of nerve endings like this form in same spot (also eyespot)
- Group dimples to collect more light (flatworks have eyes like this)
- Dimple formes into complete spehere with pinhole opening (Nauteloids have these)
- Lense forms over opening to focus light (squid)
- Iris forms to control light levels (dog)
- Shaped-light cells form which respond to specific wavelength (cones) (you and I).

Want to try again? Try the next creationist standby: blood-clotting.

Another peice of evidence is sorta common sence.If you walked into a room and saw a chair sitting in the middle of it,how would you think it got there?Would you think at one time that chair was a constepated atom that formed that chair or would you believe that it was put there?

Click to expand...

So when you walk into a field and there is a tree there. Do you believe someone planted it?

When you look at a snowflake, and it's obviously complex and structured, do you believe that someone crafted it, or that it happened by itself when the water froze? Your position is hypocritical.

my eyes don't function at 100%... I did talk to my eye-care professional... he gave me glasses to make up for the malfuntional nature of my eyes.

Human eyes arn't eaven the best design avalable.. the peacock shrimp is by far superior to us in eye power. They see in 17 'channels' of light... we are limited to just 4... all with a more 'primitve' style of eye and a more 'primitive' brain.

frankly there is ever increasing evidence for the evolution of the eye and the old 100% argument is frankly inherantly flawed. What use is 'half' a heart... the Crocodyle has a three and a half chambered heart... works fine for them... a lizard with his three chambered heart... or a worm who has but a single chamber.

wa:do

painted wolf said:

my eyes don't function at 100%... I did talk to my eye-care professional... he gave me glasses to make up for the malfuntional nature of my eyes.

Click to expand...

Sounds like you optomitrists just likes to play God

hey I can see things other than blurrs so he's ok in my book... god complex or not. :biglaugh:

on a side note: about the chair in the room analogy... who is god in this equasion?
Is he the guy to put the chair in the room?
the guy who built the chair?
they guy who shaped the boards the chair was made from?
the guy who cut down the tree?
the guy who planted the tree?
the woman who gave birth to the guy who put the chair in the room?
the guy who built the room?
the tree itself who gave his life so that you may sit?

this creation stuff gets pretty complex...

wa:do

since it came up I thought I'd add some helpful links on eye evolution...

http://www.embl.org/aboutus/news/press/2004/press28oct04.html
http://www.origins.tv/darwin/eyes.htm
http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/evidence.html
http://www.mbl.edu/animals/Limulus/vision/Wald/vision.html
http://www.maayan.uk.com/evoeyes4.html

happy reading...

wa:do

gtrsgrls said:

If you walked into a room and saw a chair sitting in the middle of it,how would you think it got there?Would you think at one time that chair was a constepated atom that formed that chair or would you believe that it was put there?Obviously you're going to believe someone put it there.

Click to expand...

Or not at all...
If there is a considerably higher amount of evidence to support that it is made of atoms, you might believe that that is the truth

'Obviously'? Not obvious at all; at least not to those of us who have been lucky enough to not be coerced into believing in God form birth. To us, the more obvious option is the former of the two you mentioned.

If there is a God, and if he created us, one of the great things he gave us was our rationality.

Let's use it