Ten reasons why creation scientists don't believe in evolution (idea)

• Cell walls
• Chloroplasts

A key concept though is that plants and animals diverged at a very early point in the history of life. To hold a fossil of such a single celled thing, the rock grains must be smaller than the size of the thing. Over a billion or so years, these rocks have been distorted from their original form and lost much of their original information. To find a single good cell in a rock that is about a billion years old and has gone through metamorphic stresses is akin to finding a needle in a field of hay that has tossed about by a tractor.

For transitions between one species of animal to another - these are all around us. From fossils of ancient tetrapods which show fish leaving the water to modern horse shoe crabs. Darwin's finches on the Galapagos islands are all seperate species, yet they clearly all evolved from a single species of finch some time ago - that was a transition species. As such, every species alive today that does not become extinct will likely some day become a transition. Species are not the 'final product' but rather part of the process of life.

This can easily be demonstrated. Take a handful of marbles of different colors. Drop them on the ground. This assortment represents different populations with slight differences between them. Now, all the ones on one half, select for 'red-ish'. The ones on the other half, select for 'green-ish'. As the gene pools separate, their ability to have young that are fertile diminishes.

Today, the horse and the donkey can reproduce, however the offspring (known as a mule) are always infertile. There is no way to get the genes from the donkey population back into the horse population, or vice versa.

This is prohibited genetically since all of the information for the development of an organism has already been encoded in DNA of its parent.

Not all mutations are harmful. There are times when a mutation can be beneficial, helping an organism to adapt to its environment better. Consider the blind cave salamander. A distant ancestor of it could see, however some mutation took away its sight, which really didn't help it. If anything, not having to confuse the brain with constant darkness and spending energy keeping the eyes in top form could be considered a beneficial mutation.

Thermodynamics. It is indeed the case that entropy and disorder tend to a maximum. However, this does not mean that things cannot get better from this. There is a device called the hydraulic ram. This sits in a river running downhill, and uses the energy of disorder to force a small portion of water up. This in no way violates thermodynamics.

There are trillions of mutations, and billions of species. Many of these die out, but those few that do survive and pass on their genetic information have succeeded. This does not violate thermodynamics either.

BTW, what is a basic kind? And what basic kind is the platypus and spiny ant eater?

And what is this "first matter" stuff you're talking about? What is so absurd about it? Where is this logic you are talking about being absurd?

Morality in humanity? You imply that other creatures have no morals or feelings? Do not dolphins mourn the loss of companions? Or the other primates? Our mental capacity is dwarfed by that of whales. Why does our ability to dominate the environment (which we are not alone in, just the most obvious) set us apart from the rest of the world? Many other species use tools, yet we just happen to have the most free time on our manipulative appendages to come up with unique ways to throughly destroy the world we live in.

Feel free to read The Blind Watchmaker.

Yes, there have been hoaxes and misunderstandings in the past. A lot of research has been done in the past 50 years, and a greater understanding of what has actually happened has arisen.

Footprints that date back to before homo sapiens took its place in the evolutionary latter. Footprints of a being that walked upright. What other explanation could there be?

Now two years after the original node, a debate wages about if the chimpanze should be placed in the homo genius rather than the pan genius and thus quite literaly our cousins.

1. It is possible for a slightly hindering mutation that does not prevent a creature from reproducing to act with another later mutation to provide a MUCH better organism. This is important. Read that again. It is possible to have a mutation that does currently hinder an organism that later leads to its survival. Hypothetically, a butterfly that eats a wide variety of plants. A mutation prevents this butterfly from eating all but one plant of its normal diet, a bad thing. But in eating this one plant, it becomes poisonous to other animals, a very good thing.
2. Any animal that cannot pass on its genes is a failure in natural selection.
3. Order from disorder. A salt solution is a disordered state. A salt crystal is a highly ordered state. The salt crystal comes from a disordered state. I have also shown how an ordered state can be reached through the motion of disorder.

Once again, please read up on The Blind Watchmaker

1. In our lifetime, we have seen organisms change to adapt to their environment. The classic example of this is a moth in London that had its coloration change from white to gray because it was easier to camouflage itself with the coal dusty environment it lives in. Was the pigeon created for the glass and steel world of modern cities?

   The dogs and cats that we know and love as pets were originally much larger beasts that happened to settle down with people to get easy food by chasing away those that would steal it.

   The lovely mule, and the liger (half lion, half tiger) are creatures that could not have originally been created, because they are infertile. There are several species of dolphins that also can breed to form hybrids. This extends also to the plant kingdom, where there are many breeds of corn that are infertile but better adapted to the environment than is found in nature.

2. Birthday Fallacy. The eye of the human and the eye of the octopus are quite similar. However, there is nothing about either of these that says there is only one designer. There are millions of species, and uncountable numbers of similarities. To claim that all these similarities are because of one entity is not logically valid. Whats to say that Prometheus designed the humans and Epimetheus designed the animals?
3. Cannibalism is defined as eating a member of the same species. Where would you draw the line for murder and cannibalism - we have the same building blocks as that wheat that is part of the bread you are eating, and the juice from the orange you are drinking, and the syrup on your pancakes.
4. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? At one time, there was a thing that was not a chicken, it was a proto-chicken. It laid an egg. The thing that hatched from it was a chicken. There was a thing that at one time was not an oak tree. It dropped an acorn. The tree that grew from it was an oak tree. Your children will not be exactly like you, nor are you exactly like your parents. The line between the proto-chicken and the chicken is very fuzzy, but it is there.
5. Hedonism is the basis for all of what we do. Our desire to be happy, and our desire to flourish. If we need to feel loved to be happy, that is what we will do. Our happiness is part of our long-term survival. Think about it, things that don't make us happy or help us cope with sorrow, generally aren't good for our long term survivability. Though this is certainly more into the realm of philosophy and psychology than evolution. The human mind is a complex thing.
6. Order in interdependence argue for a world where many things happen at similar times. The flowering plants didn't evolve until the methods for them to transmit seeds (insects) evolved. Maybe there were flowering plants before there were insects, but they didn't survive. The world is a very complex place, with many parts that have grown up together. There are many mistakes in the lineage of history.

The protuding tree. Picture a flood plain with trees on it. Each year the floods lay down a layer of dirt. These strata of dirt grow up around the tree. Eventually the tree dies. More layers of dirt cover it. This is a perfectly reasonable explanation for a fossil tree protuding from layers of sediment.

The flood recorded in the bible (and the Epic of Gilgamesh, and Greek mythology) was the flooding of the Black Sea after the Ice Age. There were no dinosaurs that got buried in this flood. It was not a global flood (though the people at the time had a rather small view of the world).