http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DAciOQtOKQ&feature=relmfu
-
The evidence for evolution is overwhelming. If judged in court, it would easily pass the 'beyond a reasonable doubt' test I believe, moreso than any other case in history. I find it ironic that people in general (perhaps my view is biased) seem more willing to accept OJ Simpsons guilt (which didn't have sufficient evidence to convict him) than evolution (which has as much evidence for it as anything possibly can). Yes there are many questions. It is a relatively young science and demonstrating something that takes thousands or millions of generations cannot easily be shown in a laboratory. However, it is also true that as humans, we only experience one frame of a very long movie. Things that are perfectly normal on an incredibly long time scale are difficult to fathom when given virtually a single image... like a baby trying to understand how it could ever grow up to be an adult when it has never seen such a thing happen. Or like trying to understand a joke without watching the whole movie.
Anyway, regarding the video. Both presenters are obviously very intelligent, reasonable, and scientifically trained. The main thing they show are that there are unsolved questions.. not that the tremendous body of evidence and scientific investigation from many fields, for evolution, should be completely disregarded. But I think the most important point I could make against the geneticists argument that a cell requires a minimal complement of genes is that the conditions of early Earth were very different. There was no oxygen to degrade free organic molecules and no life forms to decompose it. Mats of organic goo could have covered the earth without degrading for eons. Nucleic and Amino acids could have been catalyzed to self replicate by processes such as in tide pools, and with inorganic catalysts like clay substrates, without having all the prerequisites for life. It is a good question and unresolved, but think of all the things we used to attribute to God, and now understand as physical processes due to hundreds of years of scientific investigation. Absence of evidence is no reason to evoke the need for a divine hand, just as absence of evidence for God is no reason to disregard the possibility he exists.
Anyway, regarding the video. Both presenters are obviously very intelligent, reasonable, and scientifically trained. The main thing they show are that there are unsolved questions.. not that the tremendous body of evidence and scientific investigation from many fields, for evolution, should be completely disregarded. But I think the most important point I could make against the geneticists argument that a cell requires a minimal complement of genes is that the conditions of early Earth were very different. There was no oxygen to degrade free organic molecules and no life forms to decompose it. Mats of organic goo could have covered the earth without degrading for eons. Nucleic and Amino acids could have been catalyzed to self replicate by processes such as in tide pools, and with inorganic catalysts like clay substrates, without having all the prerequisites for life. It is a good question and unresolved, but think of all the things we used to attribute to God, and now understand as physical processes due to hundreds of years of scientific investigation. Absence of evidence is no reason to evoke the need for a divine hand, just as absence of evidence for God is no reason to disregard the possibility he exists.
12
keywords: video,this,say,what,about,can,Evilutionist,evolution,you,debunking,Evilutionist what can you say about this video debunking evolution