Yes, but I ask you, what has naturally changed other than what man has merely changed of his own doing which is entirely against nature's pre-notioned cycle? Everything stays within a fixed species. There are no morphing monkies or catastrophic evolutionistic events booming the spotlight of man's time.
I turned out taller but that doesn't mean I'm evolving because the next generation could be smaller or taller as well. I could could have turned out smaller. Basically, it's chance and it changes nothing outside a fixed species.
I take on this large view because I'm human, not any other species, but human. Humans defy nature because they see beyond it. They always have and always will.
“Because fish have gills and birds have wings, because dinosaurs are extinct and snakes are not, because the duckbilled platypus and the spiny anteater have characteristics of both reptiles and mammals, because animals need the waste products of plant respiration to survive and plants need the waste products of animal respiration, because plenty of plants need insects for fertilization but earthworms don’t even need another earthworm, because dolphins are intelligent and whales can sing, because crustaceans look so much like big bugs and primates look so much like humans, and because nearly every meat on the planet doesn’t taste all that much different from chicken, the theory of evolution is correct.”-Marilyn Vos Savant
The same way people try to indoctrinate through old texts they try to indoctrinate through fossils. Same way.
They say "Well, oh, you weren't there so you don't understand."
"Oh, well you haven't lived for a million years." "Oh, well you aren't God."
"See, it was miracles that happened."
"No, it was evolution."
"No, miracles!!"
"No, evolution."
"I got the texts to prove it!"
"Oh, yeah!? Well, I got the fossils to prove it!"
"Oh yeaaah?"
"Yeeeeah!!"
Dinosaurs went extinct, so what? All we're left with is the theory that they were either morphed into creation or zapped or whatever.
Totally stupid. That doesn't happen.
If people were to stop reproducing they'd go extinct too.
Species reproduce y'know? Like, after their own kind.
It all dies off after a while, but nothing is clear as to what made it.
Not even Evolution.
I don't quite have a theory yet. I just know that they're wrong because fossils and books don't prove anything to me.
Fossils are dead species. Not the answer to life.
Books are written ideas. Not the answer to life.
Life had to come from somewhere even if species did intermix(which they don't). Creation is a lie. Nothing is created only renewed within species. If a species dies it dies. That doesn't prove anything. Fossils mean nothing to me. Nothing looks remotely close to a cross breed of any kind. Nothing just sparks from the sky either. The only thing we can be certain of is our death.
Species who haven't gone extinct are as we know them eternal because they go on without end as a species. There is a possible end but that doesn't guarantee one. Without death and total depletion there is eternity. Fittest species is obviously true in that respect. The idea of life on earth eternally must include death. Lively species still carry on.
Everything comes from somewhere but creation and evolution is another story.
How far are you willing to go without knowing hands on? How far into what you're told? Into one theory by one man about the entire property of life?
A human creature going beyond his human line? Do you realize how false it is to say the earth has been around for billions of years when humans haven't even been around that long? Or have they? We don't know! How do we know other species have been around that long? I mean do they pick up a fossil and look for the date enscripted?
There's your death and the death of your living species. Big difference. There are living species that show no sign of going extinct. From what we know, they may go on for as long as the universe does.
-What have you seen lately that came out of nowhere?
-Time doesn't record itself. Carbon dating can only be trusted to a degree of humanity's perception of time's relevance to carbon dated materials which may be at fault. You can't be certain, you weren't there, the living organisms themselves aren't here. We can only speculate and that comes at a great cost. Like one of factual accuracy.
I'm not doubting science. I'm doubting the guy with the theory, Darwin.
Darwin is the one who said we evolved from other species. Darwin is the one who said we have lived for millions of years. Darwin is the one who said the chances had to land at the right place at the right time.
Was Darwin there? Is he this god for which we should endow our trust? If this can't be proven within my means of time and my means of being I'm not going to accept it. It's false because the speculative attributes can't be proven within a time range that can't be proven. He was only a man who left a theory that people gather facts for. Facts can prove alot of theories. That doesn't make them right.
"Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things..."
Lovely little slip, wouldn't you say?
Darwin says that the fossils found mean we came from monkies millions of years back, I say it doesn't, and the fossils remain fossils no matter what theory you want to interpret from.
It's a theory not a fact. Facts are used to support it but they don't have to support the first anti-creationist theory that comes jumping around the bend. Facts are used to draw a conclusion but evolution is flawed and needs tweaked here and there. What you don't seem to want to admit is that it is just a theory. There is no sighting or proof that it happened or is happening now. Darwin only predicted and could not know for sure without the physical evidence or knowledge of it. It is a theory. It does not mean that the facts mixed into it make it true.
Yes, our genes vary. Yes, we adapt to climates. Yes, species go extinct. Yes, we have fossils. Yes, they are dated according to the theory and approximately based on chemical altering. Yes, they are matched and studied. Yes, I know all about the Homo Sapiens and this supposed partially evolved Lucy monkey/human skull that shares similar characteristics. People share similarities with monkies, and? Genes vary, and? Human skulls and monkey skulls alike crack and decompose and I imagine they are difficult to examine when they are in such a condition. What on earth does this prove? What it proves by itself. It doesn't need defined under a theory. It's a skull as far as we know. Nothing more nothing less than evidence of today. It doesn't determine whether or not evolution is true or it was there millions upon billions of years back. It doesn't show that it was once a monkey gone human.
You need not believe everything you're told, man. It's what Darwin thought but it doesn't have to be what you think.
If you were to look at fossils and study genetics without ever having known of evolution I can bet the theory would have never crossed your mind because the facts aren't what make the theory. Darwin made the theory.
