The arguments for and against evolution that have been formulated over the years are numerous. Even with the intensive debating, every side has stuck to its argument concerning the origin of life. There are strong arguments against evolution, even with the many theories that are in support of it. It would gain some credibility if it was able to conclusively explain three main things. These are the origin of the earth and the sun, how all other living organisms were formed and how the very first replicating cells were formed.
It is for a fact that it is not possible for living organisms to arise from non-living ones. That is a clear fact even scientifically. Evolutionary theories base their arguments on the fact that living things emanated from non living organisms, spontaneously. The principle of bio-genesis in biology explains all this. The belief of life being generated from non living things has never been proved by evolutionists.
There are missing links that are needed to complete the theory, at least conclusively. Interestingly, the missing links are still missing. If the theory was true, we should have a large number of intermediate fossil organisms available in the fossil record. Most of the information is thus only inferred and is dependent on the laws of probability and not on the evidence of fossils.
The science of probability does not favor the evolutionary theory either. The chances of just one molecule of protein which has two hundred amino acids arising spontaneously is very low, so low that the probability of it happening is very much close to zero. This is not even if the world was full of amino acids that are able to combine frantically for billions of years. No life would be produced. If anything, the human body has over two million different proteins that could not have come by chance.
There is no possibility that the universe just created itself is not there. This is contrary to evolutionary beliefs that from time immemorial, there was some form of matter available. In short, their explanation about the origin of the universe scarcely makes sense. Scientists like Steven Hawking that argue that the presence of gravity is enough to make it possible for the universe to create itself from scratch. From the laws of thermodynamics, it is clear that if indeed it is true that the universe did exist before, all the energy would have been depleted by now.
Mutations are used by evolutionists as the basis of their theories. However, the mutations are contrary to evolution. Even with natural selection, there is no introduction of new genetic makeup. This is unlike the belief of evolutionists that natural selection brings about new genes. It is however for a fact that mutations are cell modifications to enable survival under new conditions and have nothing to do with evolution.
Evolutionists believe that vestigial organs are those that became useless because they were not put to use for a long time. This, like most other aspects, has no proof. Merely because an organ is not being used does not imply it is useless.
The arguments against evolution are valid. There is not enough information to believe in evolutionary processes. Creation remains largely believable.
It is for a fact that it is not possible for living organisms to arise from non-living ones. That is a clear fact even scientifically. Evolutionary theories base their arguments on the fact that living things emanated from non living organisms, spontaneously. The principle of bio-genesis in biology explains all this. The belief of life being generated from non living things has never been proved by evolutionists.
There are missing links that are needed to complete the theory, at least conclusively. Interestingly, the missing links are still missing. If the theory was true, we should have a large number of intermediate fossil organisms available in the fossil record. Most of the information is thus only inferred and is dependent on the laws of probability and not on the evidence of fossils.
The science of probability does not favor the evolutionary theory either. The chances of just one molecule of protein which has two hundred amino acids arising spontaneously is very low, so low that the probability of it happening is very much close to zero. This is not even if the world was full of amino acids that are able to combine frantically for billions of years. No life would be produced. If anything, the human body has over two million different proteins that could not have come by chance.
There is no possibility that the universe just created itself is not there. This is contrary to evolutionary beliefs that from time immemorial, there was some form of matter available. In short, their explanation about the origin of the universe scarcely makes sense. Scientists like Steven Hawking that argue that the presence of gravity is enough to make it possible for the universe to create itself from scratch. From the laws of thermodynamics, it is clear that if indeed it is true that the universe did exist before, all the energy would have been depleted by now.
Mutations are used by evolutionists as the basis of their theories. However, the mutations are contrary to evolution. Even with natural selection, there is no introduction of new genetic makeup. This is unlike the belief of evolutionists that natural selection brings about new genes. It is however for a fact that mutations are cell modifications to enable survival under new conditions and have nothing to do with evolution.
Evolutionists believe that vestigial organs are those that became useless because they were not put to use for a long time. This, like most other aspects, has no proof. Merely because an organ is not being used does not imply it is useless.
The arguments against evolution are valid. There is not enough information to believe in evolutionary processes. Creation remains largely believable.
No comments:
Post a Comment