There are several examples (I can quote some if you like) where scientists have thought that they detected artificial structures and other evidence of design on the Moon and the planets. More detailed observations have shown that these phenomena are of non-biological origin, or that they were...
This is incorrect. Protons (hydrogen nuclei) and neutrons were formed about one microsecond after the Big Bang, and deuterium, helium and lithium nuclei were formed about three minutes after the Big Bang.
What happened 380,000 years after the BB is that the universe cooled enough for ions and...
According to reports by the few people who have eaten them and survived, death cap mushrooms taste nice. All right, I know that mushrooms aren't fruit, or even plants, but a good taste is not a guarantee that a fungus is safe to eat.
First, we can be certain that every fossil had parents, grandparents, great-grandparents, etc. back to the origin of life.
Second, whether any fossil had offspring or not, for every fossil that has been preserved and discovered, there were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of individuals...
Don't scientists, or at least physicians, use scientific methods to enable infertile couples or women who suffer from recurrent miscarriages to have healthy children? Do you approve or disapprove of such interference with nature?
Who are 'they' in this context?
When did the first bat live? What chiropteran species did it belong to? What non-bat species did its parents belong to?
When did the first gorilla live? What non-gorilla species did its parents belong to?
According to Origin of birds - Wikipedia , T.H. Huxley 'proposed an evolutionary relationship between birds and dinosaurs' as early as 1868 and 1870, less than ten years after the discovery of the first Archaeopteryx. This is not a new idea plucked out of the air.
Do you accept that living...
I am surprised that you were taught items 3 and 6 during your schooldays, in the 1990s and early 2000s. So far as I can remember, Haeckel's 'Principle of Recapitulation' was regarded as doubtful when I first started taking an interest in science, during the 1950s. Also by the 1990s it was clear...
Although evolutionary concepts have changed over the years, the essential components of the neo-Darwinian theory remain valid. Living things have changed over the last 3.8 billion years through a process of descent with modification driven by natural selection of small changes in their genomes...
This does not answer my question. I asked what things you were taught in school as facts about evolution that were eventually changed. I did not ask what your reasons are for rejecting evolution.
Isn't this contradictory? How can man be the supreme being and, at the same time, human life can have no intrinsic value?
This, again looks contradictory. Sacrificing human lives inevitably entails a great deal of human suffering.
What things were you taught in school as facts about evolution that were eventually changed? What new hypotheses or interpretations replaced these supposed facts?
The fact that what you were taught about evolution has changed does not necessarily overthrow the whole theory. For example, during...
I don't know. However, the fact that I don't know doesn't mean that nobody else does, or that the evidence that the universe is 13.8 billion years old is invalid.
Briefly, the age of the universe follows from measurements by WMAP and Planck of the power spectrum of the anisotropy of the cosmic microwave background and the Lambda Cold Dark Matter cosmology. The age of 13.8 billion years is also consistent with measurements of the Hubble constant (the ratio...