tlcmel said:
First off, a theory is defined as "a belief or principle that yields action or assists comprehension or judgment."
Evolution is a theory.
You want to apply the same logic to the theory of gravity then? You want to say there's no hard evidence for gravity?
Secondly
1. evolution had never been observed, what hasn't been observed is one animal abruptly changing into a radically diferent animal,
Firstly, such a point demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding about evolution. Animals to not "abruptly change into a radically diferent animal". Evolution will never provide it, and evolution doesn't say it will happen. Changes are gradual over a period of time.
Tigers will never give birth to a housecat. Don't say that this fact is evidence against evolution because it isn't. You're trying to set up a strawman; you say evolution should provide something and then claim that evolution is wrong because it hasn't happened. The problem is that your original claim is flawed.
2.Evolution violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics beyond doubt.
That applies to CLOSED SYSTEMS ONLY. The earth is not a closed system as it is receiving a steady stream of energy coming in from the sun. Evolution does not violate the 2nd law.
3. There are no transitional fossils that life originated and evolution proceeds by random chance. Out of the millions of fossils in the world, not ONE transitional form has been found. All known species show up ABRUPTLY in the fossil record WITHOUT intermediate forms, thus contributing to the fact of special creation.
There are plenty of transitional forms, which you would know if you had bothered to do some of your own research instead of just reading fundamentalist creationist literature. Have a look
here for a bit about the evolution of the horse.
Evolution is unfortnately a mere possiblity, but not a mere fact. There's more arguments that I can present to disprove it being a fact, but like I said, it's possible but VERY unlikely and in my opinion, it will never be proven as a fact.
Evolution predicts certain things. We can go out and see if those things are actually there. If those things are there, then it is evidence to support evolution.
Think of it like this: I say I own a Porsche. If this is true, there will be certain things that will support my claim. There will be a car loan. There will be the paperwork. And there will be a Porsche parked in my garage. If you see that Porsche in my garage, would you not accept it as evidence that I do indeed own a Porsche?
Likewise, evolution says we will find things out in the real world. it tells us we will find
transitional forms, and when we have a look, we do indeed find transitional forms, such as the development of horses that I linked to above.
So, if evolution is so unlikely, why do we find what it predicts we will find?
Finally, I don't see how you can claim there is no evidence for God, and then turn around and cite the "intelligence and design" of the universe as though that was evidence for God.
My reference to intelligent design was merely a comment on how some people use the "evidence" of intelligent design to say, "And that intelligence is God."
I don't believe in God and I don't believe in Intelligent design.
So there is NO WAY you can prove God doesn't exist just as well as I can prove that he DOES exist because I can't, but the only explanation for GOd is the mystery of existance and creation that nobody can define or explain without theory. I.e. humans can't even answer the most complex questions and there is always a cause and effect for everything that we can see from what we DO know.
My goodness, you realise that's one whole sentence?
I can prove anything doesn't exist if that thing contradicts something we know for a fact.
Also, what do you have against theories? You seem to be saying that if something needs a theory to explain it then it's evidence for God. "We can't explain gravity without a theory, so it must be evidence for God!"
Now another example of disproving it as a fact, just like the law of physics "Matter cannot be created nor destroyed" yah it's a theory but can be proven since matter was never created out of a clear blue sky out of nowhere right in front of your face.
Oh, and I forgot that the only things that can ever happen in the universe are the things that can happen right in front of you.
Yah, a human can create furniture out of wood, but the elements that the matter is composed of can't even be created from man, or out of nothing, so if we came to this universe without any kind of assistance from a higher being then how do you explain cause and effect?
Quantum mechanics tells us that on a subatomic level things can happen without cause. The Big Bang - the singularity that created the universe - was a subatomic event, and thus it could have happened without a cause. A good place to start is the documentary series
The Elegant Universe.
And you can say how was God created but the beauty of that is, one would say that he is all knowing and that's where everything originates, or how evertything was created.
So, if I ask, "How was God created," you'd answer, "God's all knowing."
How does that answer the question of the origins of God? it doesn't.
PureMuslim said:
I am going to tell what is not a coincidence; the design of the mountains, the ozone layer, the chemicals, the human body (i.e. Liver, kidneys, Brain, Heart, Muscles, Stomach, Cells, Gallbladder, Trachea and etc.) , the positioning of the earth, the positioning of the sun, oxygen, the circle of life and many many more things. For an example let's take the Brain. The brain is a really complex part of our body. Think about it: Can the humans who technically dont even understand or even control there essential part of there bodies not have a god?
Yes, you elaborated on exactly what I felt was common sense but obviously not to some, thanks.
First of all, you are starting with the assumption that it is not a coincidence. If you do not start with that assumption, you will not reach the same conclusion.
Secondly, there is a theory which tells us that every single possible universe exists. If this is the case, then there was bound to be a universe where all those things happened. Thus, it is no longer a coincidence that it happened, because it was guaranteed to happen.
Yes, you elaborated on exactly what I felt was common sense but obviously not to some, thanks.
it appears to be common sense, but common sense can be misleading. Common sense also tells us that a bottle filled with water will fall faster that an empty bottle. But they both fall at the sme rate.
BTW, the universe does not operate so as to avoid us being scared.
