Most of the arguments from that link seem to be along the lines of “it’s complicated…therefore God did it”. Is it too much to ask for something a little more specific?
How about this, ASSUMING that through some miracle of spontaneous accidental "evolution" a one-celled amoeba just "happened" to start existing, how did that amoeba, floating around in the primordial ooze, with no sensory mechanisms suddenly "decide" that it needed a spine? Or any nerve endings. Bumping into other objects with no sensation doesn't cause it...
Okay, the great god "oooze" of the primordial era said "let there be a spine!" and it was so... Or how about smell. A one celled entity does not have any sense of smell, or touch, or any other sense, and "miraculously" from the great god "oooze" of the primordial era all of the senses developed through "accidents."
And this is just the physical realm, it does absolutely NOTHING to address the composition of thought processes, emotional processes, reason, or sentience [sp?].
Amazingly, just as was predicted, none of the substance is being addressed, only the silly religious rants from evolutionists that everyone must bow at the alter of rejecting intelligent design is done...
How about explaining some of the "accidents" that created the senses? Then again, the more I debate evolution, the more convinced I am that it is totally, absolutely, and completely a secular fundamental religious belief. There is no reason and no science to it. It is a theory that can not stand up to scrutiny and only creates fundamentalist backlash from evolutionary zealots.
ANTI-DNC Web Portal at --->
http://www.noDNC.com "How about this, ASSUMING that through some miracle of spontaneous accidental "evolution" a one-celled amoeba just "happened" to start existing, how did that amoeba, floating around in the primordial ooze, with no sensory mechanisms suddenly "decide" that it needed a spine? Or any nerve endings. Bumping into other objects with no sensation doesn't cause it..."
How about lying about what evolution is in order to mask the weakness of what your interpretation of your religion says?
You know damn well that this pathetic caricature is not what any biologist is saying (as it has been explained to you numerous times on this site), yet you feel compelled to lie about it anyway. Does *Lying For the Lord* somehow get you a better seat at the feet of God?
Let’s move away from the daft idea that a basic organism suddenly popped into existence with a spine. That’s a pretty complicated structure to come about in one fell swoop.
Suppose, on the other hand, an organism mutates a light-sensitive organ. Just a basic little thing. That basic ‘eye’ enables to move towards light where there’s more food (you can use your imagination to work out what it might do with it). More food = better chance of survival and the ‘eye’ gets passed on to the population through breeding. Over time this eye gets more complicated.
Now, that’s not so ridiculous is it? Maybe you would grasp the idea of evolution better if you didn’t think basic cells suddenly grew the complicated organs that we, the most powerful life forms on the planet, have today.