Hello everyone again. I see alot of my questions were answered lets talk about it...Okay just one or two, but still :P
If talk is all we have to go on, then we have no were to go.
Now heres some thing that was used for evolution. It was the theory used for acquired characteristics...Anywasy this is just one example. I wrote this little summary thing awhile ago....
Ever heard of Jean Baptiste Lamarck? Well if you haven't he was a French biologist of the early 1800's. Lamarck was the one who proposed the theory of inheritance of acquired characteristics, which is used as a method of biological evolution. These acquired characteristics are traits that have been caused by an organism's enviroment. To proof his point Lamarck used the giraffes' long necks. He simply supposed that long long ago giraffes all had short necks. Then a drought came which destoryed many of the low-growing plants. To survive many of the animals ate the lower leaves of the trees. Since the lower leaves were eaten by the short animals, the short necked giraffes stretched to eat the upper leaves of all the trees. Eventually, the giraffes necks and legs became longer until the modern giraffes came into being. Lamarck's theory also states that an animal can lose a feature through the lack of use or disease.
The problem is is that an organisms acquired traits do not change the organism's genetic material. See, if a woman pierces her ears, she will not have babys with pierced earlobes. Her acquired characteristic did not change her genes. If a man lifts wights and builds up some large muscles, the son is must exercise if he wants to have muscles like his father. August Weismann "de-tailed" mice to test the theory by Lamarck. (Since the mouse was no longer using the tail then it should have had babys without it) Yet after 22 generations later not one tailess mouse had been born! The same is with ears and tails of certian breeds of dogs. The Padaung tribe in Burma(sorry guess it wasn't Africa), had an interest in long necks. It was considered a sign of feminine beauty. There necks look longer because the rings have been stacked between there shoulders and there neck. The rings compress the check by pushing the collar bones and the top of the ribcage down. According to Lamarck's theory Padaung girls outh to be born with their rib cages already pushed down. In light of all this and other evidence evolutionists have admitted that the theory of inheritance of acquired charaeristics is false
Sir Isaac Newton, Lord Kelvin, Michael Rafaday, James Maxwell, and Louis Pasteur were just a few of the many great scientist who believed in divine creation. Evolution was accepted by people who did so for philosophical reasons; they wanted to remove God fromt the picture. Although lots of people had a much simpler reason: they believed that it was scientific. Darwin's philosophy of evolution really had little to do with science itself. In fact, one of Darwin's first supporters was a liberal Anglican clergyman and socialist, Charles Kingsley, he whorked hard to intergrate the ideas of evolution into Christian practive. Most scientist though were very skeptical of Darwin's theory because they realised it was most speculation.
Problems with evolution:
Lack of transitional forms, even if God started it all there is none.
No true "missing links" have been found. See if evolution had occured with God or without there would be millions of fossils showing various stages in the gradual transitions of kinds of organisms into all the different kinds. Yet we have yet to find one.
Even in the newer idea of punctuated equilibrium, there has never been any proof of people seeing this happen. Also the fossils are remain essentually the same from the first apperance to the last apperance.
David B. Kitts, a zoologist says, "Despite the bright promise that paleontology provides a means of "seeing" evolution, it has presented some nasty difficulties for evolutionists, the most notorious of which is the presence of "gaps" in the fossil record. Evolution requires intermediate forms between species, and paleontology does not provide the..."
Now this really doesn't prove evolution right or wrong, but it makes an extremely good point.
