Christianity isnt the subject here, evolution is, try to keep on track. You can "look" all you want, but there isnt one ounce of evidence that the first living being, more advanced then any super computer, came from dirt and water. Its a fairy tail.

You never heard of spontanious generation? Im not shocked.

I wish you would truly read about things before you take strong stands.

Evolution isn't about complex beings arising out of a pool of organic material. Humans didn't evolve directly from simple organic compounds, but from former species of hominids. The development of our characteristics didn't randomly 'flabbergast' out of nothingness, but rather after millions of years of careful trial and error and 'weaker characteristics' being unable to carry their genetic code (through procreation [thus, evolution's really "the survival of those who are likely to mate the most."]). All living things may have the common ancestry of the 'cooking organic soups' on earlier Earth, but it's a misconception to think that all the very complex lifeforms around you were raised directly from a pool of gooey liquid.

There's nothing random about billions of years of careful trial and error. My genetic code didn't randomly form out of a pool of mud, but slowly gained complexity.

The only fairy tale here is that man was created four thousand years ago with the universe and had tea with the dinosaurs.

First you tell me you wished I would read, then tell me this???? The very first "simple cell" (that there isnt anything even remotly simple about)created in this pre mortal soup MUST have been AMAZINGLY complex. There wasnt "billions of years" according to the theory once the first cell was made, it had a few short hours to develope everything it needed to live, eat, and mulitply.

We know that DNA dominates the earth. Fully structured DNA at that. There is no proof what so ever that could lead us to believe that the first living cell could have lived without it. Dirt and water CANNOT make DNA, especialy with out even having a will to do so.

Creationism isnt on the plate here, we dont teach children creationism. Like I said, its evolution that must prove its self to be true. And in MANY ways, it just doesnt add up. Its a fairy tail.

And BTW trial and error???????? That would imply that something had a will, and learned from mistakes. With out even any kinda will to see life start, what was to stop the water from just making the same mistakes over and over again. Where did the water find will to even want to change, and correct mistakes? That totally shoots down that this all came from random chance.

And we havent even looked at the mathmatical possibilities of all this, which BTW are beyond absurd.

I'm sticking with my "we were deposited here" theory. I like it.

Me too

You continue to display profound ignorance on the subject, starting with your idea of what the word "theory" means in the scientific sense.

In science, "theory" does not mean something waiting to be proven a fact, like a bill waits to become a law.

Like I said before, evolution is an established, observable fact... just like gravity. And, just like gravity, it's also a theory... well, several theories, actually.

THAT's why evolution is taught in school. It's a fact. And the reason Creationism is not taught... and never should be, is evident in what's related in your posts. Willfull ignorance and blatant intellectual dishonesty.

Here is a clear example of someone who has bought into the dogma of evolution. Question any part of it and right way your "dishonest" and "ignorant"

#1 I never said Creation should be taught in schools.

#2 why dont you comment directly on what Im actualy saying here, instead of just calling me ignorant. Ingorance is thinking dirty warm water can create life. And if you believe that, it is YOU sir who are ignorant

#3 What have I been dishonest about?


Just calling someone ignorant is hardly good debating skill

Another thing, how is evolution a observable fact???? They have NEVER created any life form from dirt, water and heat. Nor do they have a clear fossil record of transition. What exactly do you mean by "observable"?