A. Fossil Record: why don't we see the intermediate changes of evolution in the fossil record? The answer is simple, only 1/1000 organisms are fossilized, and yet we even have seen the stages. Archaeopteryx is a good example of the remaining dinosaurs becoming birds.
B. The Mendelian Law: I love this one because they use evolutionary experiments against "evolutionists". Basically the argument is that recessive genes stay in the gene pool, thus evolution cannot fully occur but only add. But that's where the process of evolution comes in; if two recessive genes were to be unhelpful to an organism that one would die out thus discontinuing that gene. An example is, what if a species had a recessive white gene from previous generations. Lets also say that this species lives in the rainforest. Once a member of the species received two dominant genes, its predators would most likely kill it before it has a chance to reproduce. This will take time, but the evolution theory never said it wouldn't.
C. "We haven't seen any evolution". But haven't we? Penicillin was once a great way to stop most diseases, but now is becoming less effective. Evolution takes time, and in fact, it is estimated that there are 5000000 species worldwide. The earth is 4.1 billion years old. Math then dictates that every 820 years, a new species will form. I doubt we have been keeping track that long, and if we were to find one, it would just be classified as another since only 1500000 species have been found.
D. The sun is declining in size, so the earth cannot be that old.
Preposterous, if you knew how the sun worked you would not be so quick to believe this lie. The sun works by nuclear fission, by turning hydrogen into helium. Not by burning itself away.
E. Two non-organic particles cannot become organic
refer to 7
F. The Cambrian Explosion. "Cambrian explosion" refers to the great quantity and diversity of life found in what is called the Cambrian layer of the geologic column. The Cambrian age in the geologic time scale is dated by scientists as being about 560 million years old. Now, the Anti-Evolution part of this is that there was just a sudden birth of life at this period. Easily explained. I have to ideas, 1 is that this is the first time life forms were easily fossilized. My other idea is that there was a mutant gene causing many mutations at once, and that the mutant gene that continued to be passed down then would continue to make both bad and good mutants, the bands eventually died out with the gene. These are just my ideas, I am sure real science has better ones but I am too tired to research any further.
Another little ditty to go hand in hand is people who do not believe in gravity. The reason is that "science cannot be proven, so why believe it?" Wha? They explain the pressure exerted to hold the planet together as the force caused by it spinning�. Yeah centrifical force continues an object on a straight, forward path (away from center) and even if this is true, then why does the earth revolve around the sun?
Oh, if you want me to stop believing in evolution, disprove it thoroughly, or give me a better theory that would be more likely to be the source of life.
Conclusion: I believe that people are too egotistical, stubborn, ignorant, or just had a very religious upbringing, to be able to accept evolution as truth. But, if you wish to argue me with scientific fact or theory, go right ahead. People treat science like an anti-religious conspiracy, which it is in no way that. It is simply the same as a religion. But this religion has proof behind it, so its what I choose.
Anton Shavlik-12/13/04
Revised 12/14/04
So crucify the ego, before its far too late.