The Collapse of Atheism

[SIZE="4"]THE MYTH COLLAPSES: THE THEORY OF EVOLUTION[/SIZE]


In the West, the theory of evolution continues to be promoted as if it were a proven fact or a secure, testable and tested law - something that no-one in their right minds questions any more. This presentation implies that there is no room, let alone any need, for discussion. The most common media cliche is that the evolutionary chain has been confirmed yet again by yet another discovery of the missing link proving human ancestry from apes. Faced with this kind of promotion and presentation, and the sheer pervasiveness of it, it is no surprise if non-specialists come to accept that the theory must be true, and that it must be accepted by all the specialists, the whole scientific community, with no serious doubters. However, that perception is far from the reality. In the first place, the theory lacks completeness on two major counts and there is no likelihood of these deficiencies ever being made up. In the second, there are major voices of dissent from within the scientific community, alongside alternative theoretical explanations which demonstrate a far superior conformity with observed or experimentally obtained data.

[SIZE="2"]The origin of life[/SIZE][SIZE="2"]The problem of transitional forms[/SIZE][SIZE="2"]The ideological background to the theory[/SIZE][SIZE="2"]Conclusion[/SIZE]

Failed out of the starting gate, Sword.





I will now tear you apart, one slice at a time. Or what I like to call "fun".



Fail. Evolution does not and has never needed to explain the origin of life. Read the title... "Origin of Species". You want to target life's origins, that's another field. Try a few doors down.



Again, wrong field. Try again. Life did not "evolve" from non-living forms. Life emerged from chemical chains and proteins... but it did not evolve from them. Evolution applies only to living organisms, and is not relevant to the origins of life.



You again, didn't I tell you this is the wrong door? The notion, as you call it, did not "operate" before the existence of life. Say it with me Sword... Evolution applies only to living organisms and has no bearing on, nor is affected by, the origins of life.



First: The Rhinoceros did not exist "aeons" ago. The Rhino is fairly new... as early as 10,000 years old.

Second: You clearly miss the concept of evolution. The chance part you get... that's the one the creationists ALWAYS hit dead on. However they have no idea that there's a non-random part that plays as much of a role as the random. It's the whole "natural selection" half of the theory... the part that puts pressure upon life, the part that removes the life which is not best fit for its environment. When you throw that in, it's easy to see that life will adapt when given sufficient environmental pressure. There are several tested and reproduceable tests to show this. I can supply a few if you want.



I'll attack this in one fell swoop: No.

First answer: It is not the same across the board. The basic concept is, but the rate, selective pressure and results will be as wide as your imagination.

Next: Define "varieties of being alive". I think I get what you are aiming for, but it's so off the course that I'm not really sure.

Wow, you're really out there. The rest of this thing is full of strawmen, logical fallacies... the whole nine. It's obvious that whoever wrote this has no idea what evolution, or science for that matter, really is.


Ohhhhhhhhhh... I get it! You think that evolution = atheism = THE WEST. Gotcha.

I'm not even gonna bother with this.

Besides, it isn't Atheism that Abraham's three bloody children have to worry about, it is the resurgent Pagans, Wiccans, Druids, Deists, Hare Krishna's and so forth that are all growing at a greater pace than any of the bloody kids...those are the ones that should be giving you nightmares...LOL :patriot: