Quote from Charles Darwin: "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."
Division of the sexes makes the theory of evolution even more perposterous. Simple life forms do not have male and female genders. If we evolved from such creatures there is no way that suddenly a human could only reproduce with half of the rest of its race. It would make no sense whatsoever.
No missing links have ever been found, but plenty have been fabricated. Why have certain scientists gone so far as to make such farces seem as fact? Religion. How can you suddenly mistake a pig bone for a man's, honestly.
Well what about the genetic evidence, animals that can be very different share many of the same genes, for example I think the chimpanzee is like 99 and the dog 89% similar gene structure. Also comparing a simple organism like a bacterium and a species with different sexes is absurd, why not compare how a cell of a bacteria is like a human cell in that it divides into 2 children cells of the same tissue. That is a fact that can be observed by anyone who has access to a microscope, mitosis, every life for is made of cells,if cells didn't exist then you cannot exist.
Quote from Charles Darwin: "To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree."
So your moving up the creationist latter from ignorant or stupid to misleading. Nice quote mine there, care to finish what Darwin said? I bet not so I will do it for you. Picking up for the last sentence from the quote above.
Quote from Charles Darwin: "Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real. How a nerve comes to be sensitive to light, hardly concerns us more than how life itself first originated; but I may remark that several facts make me suspect that any sensitive nerve may be rendered sensitive to light, and likewise to those coarser vibrations of the air which produce sound."
and for anyone interested here's a link where you can read the origin of species for yourself.
Division of the sexes makes the theory of evolution even more perposterous. Simple life forms do not have male and female genders. If we evolved from such creatures there is no way that suddenly a human could only reproduce with half of the rest of its race. It would make no sense whatsoever.
You are so full of it.
Here's a nice little video explaining how sex could have evolved.
Careful watching this video it contains science that might make your head start hurting in a funny way.
No missing links have ever been found, but plenty have been fabricated. Why have certain scientists gone so far as to make such farces seem as fact? Religion. How can you suddenly mistake a pig bone for a man's, honestly.
Do you make this one up or did you get this off a creationist website?
Was Darwin's theory the one where evolution was slow and persistent? Or was he the one where it can be quick, violent and not always better? And since the current theory only works until the next find does that mean evolution evolves too?
Well if a practice doesn't change it eventually dies...hmm sorta like evolution, Science is based on the Scientific method which can discover new things when ways of observation/technology changes the perspectives of humans. We have really only started our knowledge of life, I think we know less then 10 percent of all living organisms on Earth(just an estimate). Let alone genetics, you know that all cells contain the same DNA, and each have all the genes you are made of yet each are unique in function and form.
How can you suddenly mistake a pig bone for a man's, honestly.
One more thing it was scientists who corrected this mistake. Just in case you bring it up they didn't recreate the whole thing from the tooth. The drawing was an artists interpretation made for the local newspaper.
I know you didn't mean this for any kind of accuracy. With that said even as an estimate it's way off. Interestingly enough evidence suggests we were not the first species to have religion. Neanderthal was. Neanderthal first appeared around 600,000 years ago. There is evidence they took part in ceremonial burials suggesting of religion inclinations.
Now neanderthal is not a direct descendant of us but a subspecies of the homo genus. So not only did we not invent religion but to answer the question religion has been around for like 600,000 years.