I believe in evolution but it's not a fact

It's not a fact, but it's a theory that I think is true

Here's a thought: What if a God created types like birds and apes and fish, then [b]they[/b] evolved into what we have today? Hmm hmm?

Watch COSMOS with neil degrasse tyson It explains [b][i][u]EVERYTHING YOU ARE QUESTIONING[/u][/i][/b] WATCH THE WHOLE SERIES Its on netflix

You don't actually expect me to read all that?

Well the only proof about Creation is a book from how many years ago?

25% of you kids have Down syndrome.

I'm not arguing against any of your points, I just want to note certain hybrid species do exist, mules being a very common example (horse x donkey). A less common, though also donkey related hybrid is a zedonk (zebra x donkey).

I'm in the middle of a astrobiology course and I can tell you that you have no idea what you're talking about. Can i suggest you take a look at basic chemistry. And if you can grasp the concept of molecular formation maybe you can look into how carbon molecules form amino acids. Then maybe you'll learn how amino acids form proteins. All just through chemical reactions without any life form present. Maybe after all this if you understand it you can look into vesicles and RNA forming prebiotic cells. But you won't do any of this, there's too much confirmation bias in the OP. Those few scientific sounding anecdotes are ridiculous. Where did you get those odds for cells existing? If something isn't infinitely impossible then it's possible! Do you know what carbon-14 is? The carbon element always has 6 protons. Carbon-12 is carbon with 6 protons and 6 neutrons; 6+6=12. It is stable like this. Carbon-14 is an isotope. An isotope is a element with a different number of protons to neutrons. Carbon-14 has 6 protons and 8 neutrons. This makes it unstable and undergoes nuclear decay. It decays at such a predictable rate, that is why it's used in carbon dating.

[quote]Macroevolution has NEVER been observed.[/quote]. Try taking literally any paleontology class and try to tell me that again kid. Good luck lol.

Evolutionists don't realize they have just as much faith as any other religion. xD

Lol the creationist argument. How can 100% reach 100%?! That needs like... 100 numbers! Ever consider the probability of all things is more likely to equate to a literal one? As in, cells seek out "contentment" and we're just caught in the middle of it? We don't know chaos until we don't exist and even then, how can we call the condition in which we live [i]not[/i] chaotic? This moment that were currently in the middle of just works. It won't when it ceases and our perception of this point in time won't matter much. Your definition will cease. [i]No one[/i] will know the truth of it all. It so happens we are "lucky" to be conscious. It's unfortunate we take that time to preach about a "loving" God while destroying our ozone and driving other species to extinction. But "hey! We're special!" says the homo erectus.

1. Even if the chances of life developing on this earth were one in a trillion, it's still bound to happen somewhere in this expansive universe of ours. It really doesn't matter if it happened, what matters is it did happen. 2. I think you're confused. When people say we came from apes but didn't, what they're saying is [i]we came from lesser apes, not monkeys. Monkeys are simply our cousins.[/i] 3. The half life of carbon, while it may not be all [i]that[/i] long, still leads us back billions of years for the sheer amount of it we find in rocks. 4. Dogs never turned into whales. You don't seem to understand the concept of change over an extremely long period of time. If what you call "macro evolution" can occur, than why can't those small changes build up over a much longer period of time until the species is profoundly different-looking? It also doesn't have to be directly observed in order for us to find fossil and genetic evidence. 5. If I have deciphered your jumbled English correctly, you are supposing that because species can't produce hybrids because of the rule of genetic dominance, therefor evolution is wrong? No. It isn't a matter of species two having hybrids or whatever, it's a matter of mutations occurring in a population that better adapts them to their environment. 6. Evolution doesn't require faith because there's [i]evidence[/i] going for it. It isn't a religion because there are no deities, no place of worship, no ceremonies, nothing like that. If your standard for religion is simply faith, than anything can be a religion. Having faith in that a movie will be good can be a religion. You know, I see a lot of creationists asking us for proof, when their standard of proof is so high literally no one can possibly deliver. Where is your proof for creationism? PS, you said 6 out of the 6 have been observed. Thanks for contradicting what you've just stated.

1.) Dating is very accurate due to the ability to analyse a newly formed object with an object from long ago and analysing the percentage of C14. A half life doesn't mean one half is gone by 5700yrs and then another 5700yrs there is none. Radiological dating works by: 50%, 25%, 12.5%, 6.25%, etc. and by analysing the exponential decay of this graph, we can analyse the age of the Earth. Half lives do not split things in a half like we would colloquially think but rather literally. 2.) If Creationism was to be true, assuming we are using the Bible, there should be no temporal stratification of organisms throughout the rock layers. This means that we should find fossils of humans and poodles in the same rock layers of the earliest trilobites and precambrian fossils. This is due to the sudden genesis, which is not viewed in nature, and gives credence to Evolution. Now I know that Creationists love to say that Satan made fossils/rock layers can form in the span of 200yrs, so... 3.) Civilisations. We have human civilisations that are currently around and older than Creationist theory. 4.) No accurate models can be made with Creationism. It is ergo not science. Creationism deals with the past, not the present or future. 5.) Fails to subject itself to Evolution's weaknesses that it itself experiences. Such as the "nothing cannot spawn something! (6)" argument that is generally employed. If God can come from nothing or can have always existed, why not the Universe? There is no reason except for mindless Double Standards. 6.) "Nothing cannot spawn something" Actually, if you know anything of radiation, you will realise that Gamma radiation, which is random and ergo not considered matter, interacts with particles upon emission from a black hole and achieving a velocity above the speed of light. Gamma radiation interacts with particles, and even us, all the time and seemingly creates energy through interaction/movement and requires not a single cause, as has been observed. See: Hawking Radiation 7.) Pascal's Wager If you read the few Givens in the Proof, the first specifically, you will see that God is given. You cannot prove against a Given. 8.) Macroevolution has been observed. Many plants do this constantly as well as bacteria. 9.) "You can neither prove or disprove God/Creationism!" [b]"That which is asserted without evidence is as easily dismissed without evidence." -Christopher Hitchens[/b] The issue is, Evolution has evidence. We see it in the vestigial tail bones of humans [spoiler]I have recently learned that the tail bone of humans is not quite vestigial, so use the leg things of whales instead [/spoiler] to the temporal stratification of fossils that are easily accessible to all.

[i]In science, a "fact" typically refers to an observation, measurement, or other form of evidence that can be expected to occur the same way under similar circumstances. However, scientists also use the term "fact" to refer to a scientific explanation that has been tested and confirmed so many times that there is no longer a compelling reason to keep testing it or looking for additional examples. In that respect, the past and continuing occurrence of evolution is a scientific fact. Because the evidence supporting it is so strong, scientists no longer question whether biological evolution has occurred and is continuing to occur. Instead, they investigate the mechanisms of evolution, how rapidly evolution can take place, and related questions.[/i] (U.S. National Academy of Sciences,Science, Evolution, and Creationism, pg. 11 (National Academy Press, 2008).)

Okay. Evolution is not a fact. I understand and accept it to be true, but it isn't a fact. It is a theory, and by definition can never be considered a 'fact.' Nothing in science is ever fact, nor is it claiming to be fact.

Ironic that your name has Darwin in it, is it not?

Its called darwins theory of evolution. What bothers me is schools are teaching kids that its fact when its theory and shun any religion. Kids dont even say the pledge of alligence anymore because u say under god. This is just -blam!-ed up