| RockSmith372 said: as luck would have it today, my Bible teacher(i go to a private school. IT SUCKS!!!) was talking about how evolution is not "observable science". After my abrupt laughter, he put three key points about evolution 1. Life begets Life- Basically, he believes that evolutionists believe life was spontaneously generated, and then claimed that the second law of thermodynamics makes evolution impossible. I told him what the second law of thermodynamics states and how it has no implications against evolution. 2. Like begets Like- He said that life cannot give birth to anything new. He states all dogs are still dogs(a lot of people in my class didn't get the stupidity of that statement). He then express how he believes God made different "kinds"(which has no clear cut definition. If only God gave us the answer!) and those kinds branched out. 3. Missing Links- He then goes on to say how there are no transitional forms, and all claimed to be are frauds. He then quote mines Stephen J. Gould about his theory on punctuated equilibrium by saying Gould made the theory because it makes evolution make more sense. Alright. I would love to explain why all these statements are wrong, but I am going to ask one of you to show how idiotic my Bible teacher is |
1. Evolution does not actually have anything to do with the beginning of life, that's another branch of science called abiogenesis. Abiogenesis is unfortunately not able to be observed in the same way evolution is but it is able to be proved possible and for ways it could have happened to be found. Second law of thermodynamics is applicable to a closed system, earth is not a closed system as the sun puts tremendous amounts of energy into it. Evolution is the entropy on earth decreasing but the suns increasing entropy dramatically outweighs this.
2. Like begets extremely similar. It takes many many steps on the chain for something drastically different to be born. While a dog may only give birth to another dog, a thousand generations of dogs may give something quite different from your starting animal. There is no clear cut point in the chain where the dog goes 'you know, I think I'll give birth to a toad'.
3. It's been said that every new link in a chain is a disaster for evolution, it fills one gap but creates two - one on either side. There are transitional forms, many creationists just decide to treat them as completely seperate from the chain of evolution - despite how neatly they fit in form, location and time. Punctuated equilibrium is merely a repackaging of evolution.
Edit: Crap. I wasn't going to debate in this topic.
