- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,976
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
So unless the police SEE THE CRIME, and even then they have to see the bullet at every single gradation of space from the gun to the victim, then we must assume that the alleged shooter is INNOCENT?
You see, in any science of a forensic nature you have to make the best hypothesis from the data at hand. So when you see:
![]()
you can infer quite a bit.
Or when you see this:
![]()
You can draw some conclusions.
Common design, common designer.
One of which is basically that: if I wish to go across the street I must first travel halfway across the street. But to get to that point I must first travel halfway to that point, but in order to get to that point I must first travel halfway to that point which would, in the end, result in an infinite number of tasks making it impossible to achieve my goal.
This is how Creationists see evolution. Unless they can be shown the infinite number of points along the line then surely it must not be true.
This is why if a Creationist demands a transition fossil be shown between animal 1 and animal 2 then all you've done is provide the creationist with two more demands they will make for transitional fossils. And so on and so-forth.
But this is what must happen for evolution to proceed. Just the ability to open and close one's hand requires an uncountable number of evolutionary processes. Every cell of muscle, bone, and nerve must evolve to accomodate every minute movement. Even the movements themselves have to evolve from some need to do so. The need to grasp, feel, etc.
Walking across the street requires that each step, if only slightly different from the one before it requires that it evolve according to that need. Science admits that it would require a computer as large as a warehouse to enable robots even a rudimentary menu of hand movements that we use every hour. The example I read was that of randomly 'brushing away a fly', which would require so much computing power as to be unattainable.
The utter impossibility of it is staggeringly obvious.
The only way 'evolution' is remotely possible is to replace it with the theory of 'metamorphosis', where a species goes to sleep and wakes up an entirely different critter.![]()
Last edited:
Upvote
0