GCT
Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005
|
1. Abiogenesis is separate from evolution. I'm glad you are finally getting it. Life arose, somehow, and evolution took over from there. It's that simple. That's not to say that abiogenesis is not a area of research that is worth studying, because it is, it is simply not part of ToE.
2. You've already been shown links to papers and sites that talk about the transitional fossils. Putting your fingers in your ear and shouting, "There aren't any transitional fossils" won't make it true.
3. A) You can't argue common design due to similarities and also argue that there are no similarities to support common descent. B) Examples please.
3. (again) Please define "code". Until you define the terms that you are using, your complaint is wholly vacuous.
4. Must we point out (again) the problems with your statistical ramblings?
5. I would say that scientists that get their science from the Bible should not be taken seriously. Since Creation Science has been shown to be based on Biblical literalism, it is not viable science.
Finally, how does one use ID to make cochlear implants? Also, to say that random mutation should be used is to erect a blatant straw man. But, it should be noted that through the process of studying evolution we learned about the processes that are necessary to make these implants possible in the first place.
|
