Thanks.You seem fairly familiar with evolution, that's cool.
There's definitly a lot of credit due for the research that's been done and we've found out a lot. The only problem I have is that I'm extremely logical, and I keep seeing conclusions from observations and experiments that are far from justified. I don't think it's silly to say that we need be able to see a dog evolve into another species in order to conclude that a dog can evolve into another species, how else can you be sure that it can? We have some nice theories though.
Let's say a dog could evolve into another species; that would just mean that dogs can evolve into that particular species, and it's not logical to conclude from that that other animals can also evolve into other species, or even that the dog, could evolve into anything else besides the species we'd seen it evolve into - it's going beyond the scope of the observations and experiments. Perhaps looking at it with some established theories could make it seem consistant that other things can evolve into different species, but I think in many ways that's illogical; you don't know the entirety of the factors involved, as well as if there are limitations. There are always factors that haven't been thought about, and there are always limitations. The human seems incapable of understanding everything that is entailed. What if there is a certain limit to the kind of variances that can come out of certain species? So we've observed bacteria change a lot, that's cool, but I think it's pretty far-fetched to say that it could eventually become anything more than a bacteria. Of course, I won't rule out the possibility, but we do need clearer evidence than what we have in order to claim that something is the way it is... as "factual" or "proven".
I'm not really debating macro-evolution per se, as I do think that certain animals could potentially change into something "considered" another species, but to claim that we all came from the same first cell of life, is waaaay going beyond what we've observed.
As for life coming from non-life. The probabilities seem to be so low, that I find it's not even believeable to think that it can happen by chance in any amount of time. I think we need to realize that we don't know. There are so many possibilities, and Evolution & ID are just 2 of those. I think it's fair to assume that we also aren't able to detect certain aspects of the universe. Do we understand gravity? No, all we understand are its effects. Why is gravity even there? Why is there even energy and matter? Perhaps there are other substances or forces that are undetectable and have a significant effect on the universe.
Quantum physics is a good example of how abstract certain aspects of the universe can be. So many weird things happen at that level, that aren't 'yet' understood by scientists, and as we know, we're all made of atoms and energy.. so obviously we don't know every factor that influences us.
But anyway. If I had to side somewhere (Evolution or ID), I'd say neither.
