Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Clint DeBoer
That's micro-evolution and it's easily observed... turning a lizard into a bird, however is quite a different thing and lacks any proof. There isn't a lack of fossil evidence, mind you - in fact we have millions of fossils... It's just that none of them are transitional forms.
While it may seem to "make sense" to people that macroevolution occurred - lack of evidence, and a revelation in the study of molecular biology have made evolution a statistical impossibility. There are too many interdependent things involved (i.e. one thing needs another simultaneous process in order to occur - it cannot happen gradually over time).
The truth is that there is more science behind the study of intelligent design than evlution simply because eveolutionist scientists are very often taking what few observable facts they have and bending them to fit their theory instead of following the scientific method and studying the wealth available data "as is".
Note - this has nothing to do with "age of the earth" discussions.
I consider myself welel studied in the subject (both sides) and it is amazing how many people take it at face value because the schools have been pushing it now for over 20 years - even though the latest science now clearly says evolution is impossible. The problem is that "intelligent design" is automatically ruled out as a "religious" study and so kids are left with misleading and bad information.
|
I think a little clarification might be in order.
First, it is thought that lizards turned into birds, not vice versa. There is some fossil evidence, found in China in the last decade, that indicates an evolutionary relationship...using microbiology.
Second, use of electrophoresis and other techniques to analyze molecular structure has for many years found statistical relationships amongst living diverse organisms, both floral and faunal. Evolutionary (including use of micro-) biology is nothing more than proving that two species are more closely related to each other than to some third thing.
Third, there is general scientific agreement that 'evolution' is not a gradual changing of 'things'. The evolution of a species, or any organized system is eventually caused by punctuated, dramatic, sometimes cataclysmic events, both genetic and environmental. (And multiple events can and do occur simultaneously to mark genetic shifts.) I offer the K Boundary layed down during the Cretaceous Period, a period that doomed poor T-Rex and his cousins. Successful (!) genetic shifts were cause for survival in worldwide populations (macro) as a result of a cometary impact.
Lastly, there certainly is not more science behind the 'intelligent design' principle than there is evolution. Of course, the definition of "science" can be whatever you make it...but you may not get consensus.
So, even with all that said....I agree. Evolution is a
theory. The
theory of evolution is just that.
But the preponderance of evidence and correct application of science says that the theory of evolution is the...gospel. (Sorry, I just couldn't resist.) It may end up being a conundrum in history when science reveals more about the process. But at least it doesn't presuppose 'intent' forced upon a happenstance, quantum world.
My .02. Good cheer.
Intelligent Design ruling
Linear Mode
