OT:

I still stand firmly that religion is a good thing and that belief in creationism is FINE.

It does not hurt anyone, logic does not need to be shoved in everyone's face. 

I don't see how faith in God (not necessarily following the bible word-for-word) and creationism harms anyone

Well it doesn't harm anyone aslong as it isn't taught in a Science class room, as creationism and intelligent design isn't a scientific theory.

As a personal belief, or as something taught at church/religious studies class/home/whatever. Thats fine, it isn't hurting anyone and people can believe whatever it is they want to believe.

Of course being religious is fine aswell. Only extreminism in any form should be fought intellectually.

I think you completely missed my point. I understand how natural selection works and i wouldn't try to argue that it doesn't take place. My point is that a mutation will not produce an eye or a leg or a hand in one go. It will produce one initial component of it. And i would argue that any first component of any of these things is useless and would not cause natural selection to take over. For example the first leg did not just appear all at once all of a sudden. At first a tiny stump (for eg) would have formed. That stump of a leg wouldn't have given the creature a survival advantage as it wouldve had no use.

And i see where you are coming from WereKitten, but in my opinion that doesn't really explain the majority of instances. The eye would have had to have many working parts to be useful as anything - As would many functions of the body. As for having a photosensitive area, I can see how that would make sense in terms of natural selection, but that in itself is not at all 'simple' and would not be formed in one mutation.

I did not argue that it made the whole thing true, and nor did you ask me to. You asked me to show that it has more merit then a fairy tale. Jesus was a living person and i think that gives it more merit then a fairy tale.

That is an interesting concept... However it still leads itself to stuff that doesn't make logical sense. If there was an infinite amount of time before us, how could we exist now? And since heat is the ultimate form of energy, a universe old enough would be entirely heat (That is the heat death theory). I think this sorta stuff is beyond the human brain truly understanding. kinda like trying to create a new colour - something we aren't capable of XD

Depends on the fairy tale. As I said, King Athur has just as much backing, and dragons even more so.

That's just not true. The fact that in the right conditions we can effectively evolve new strains, metabolic pathways and organisms proves this, and in a much shorter space of time (with evolution having had billions of years). Also, if a part is present but not detrimental to the cell then it is unlikely to be selected out (e.g. the human organ, the appendix, it's present and does nothing but randomly kill a very small proportion of a given population). You're applying human logic where there isn't any.

You need to look deeper at the DNA, RNA and protein sequences, recombinations and mutations. Many of these proteins needed to work together arise via multiple methods, and will 99.9% of the time have been derived from a protein that had a seperate singular function. Just a few small mutations can drastically change the function of a protein and this can have a knock on effect with other proteins in a cellular environment.This is what leads to the complexity you see in life which has had a near inconceivable amount of time to acheive.

Many proteins can have very similar sequences yet totally different functions, and many can have very similar structures but very different functions. For instance, it only takes 5 mutations to convert a serine protease to a threonine protease (2 very different mechanisms).

It's also worth noting that there are a ridiculously huge number of ways that genetic information and genomes can be changed over time. HIV is currently fatal to most people without the help of medication, yet if humans remain on Earth for another 1000 yrs, it's quite possible that HIV will cease to exist and its genetic code will be integrated in the human genome. There is a lot of genetic evidence that points to the human genome having integrated a number of genes from retroviruses in the past. Yet another possible way for complexity to have arisen.

Please note, I'm not arguing against your belief in a creator, that's fine by me, but your logic and understanding on the topic of natural selection and evolution is flawed.

I believe in 2 things:

1) That my acts as a person will determine what happens to me after death, not what I believe.

2) There is something greater than I am. 

Thats about it. 

I don't think that supporting the theory of evolution (or any subsequent revisions as more evidence and thoeries finetune and or replace the current models) and believing in God need be mutually exclusive. Science is simply the exploration of the natural world whereas Religion is in most ways an exploration of things that exist outside of the natural perceptable world. If the Pope can do it, I see no reasons why others who have far less of a stake in Religion shouldn't be able to. 

Except they likely wouldn't have been useless but would have conferred some added benefit in their particular environment. Using the leg example, the legs were originally fins, which then defined themselves into legs. In each successive generation, the animals with the more defined legs were the most likely to survive on land.

As for your second paragraph, having photosensitive area, in nature there are a number of instances of organisms ranging from microorganisms to mammals that utilise light for a range of different purposes and functions. I have no idea why you think that it has to be simple or that it has to be formed in a single mutation. The proteins and the structures that make up the eye would have all had their uses seperately, and if they didn't, would have had little to no detrimental effect. The eye from our ancestor would have been far simpler than our current eye. As time passes, we accumulate more mutations with natural selection getting rid of the majority of the detrimental mutants.

Succesive generations of mutants give rise to the complex interactions and structures of the human body. On a smaller molecular and protein level we actually have software that can find networks of sites which may have co-evolved (not neccessarily simultaneously, but show that If position X is mutated, a mutation to position Y will give a new function/structure/interaction).