If anyone remembers the case of the Piltdown Man, and how the entire lower mandible was actually the jaw of an orang-utan, they'd think twice about the credibility of Darwin.

That little article [about scientific misconceptions] didn't explain a damn thing!!! I mean, the points I raised cannot just be overlooked.

Of course I've heard of R. Dawkins and his books, I've often visited his web-site, <a href="http://www.world-of-dawkins.com" target="_blank">www.world-of-dawkins.com</a> [which has a large disclaimer at the top that it's not by Dawkins...] <u>The book doesn't really explain stuff well in my opinion</u>... if complex emotions are also the products of evolution, how come random natural selection gave them only to us humans, just one species out of tens of millions?

That little link of up there offers no answers to the question I raised earlier: How do evolving organisms with evolving i.e. semi-formed i.e. non-functional i.e. temporarily useless vital organs live and survive? If the heart is vital for a mammal to live, what kept it alive while it was evolving that heart?

I've practically been terrorised for proclaiming that Darwin has more holes in his theory than a leaking boat, but the only reason morons negate me is because their concepts are flawed and outdated and they know it... obviously the only way to make scientists understand this is by throwing bricks at them.

There are some who would argue this point with you. Some study where it was determined spirits or the supernatural were somehow weighed and the result was somewhere in ounces. 1 to 4 or something like that.

Aysia, you're my hero!!

[The following series of utterly amazing posts from the Acne.org forum is of such unprecedented quality that it's all but impossible to nominate just one. Thus, the entire collection is recipient of this never-before-seen prize.]Evolutionists say that man originally evolved millions of years ago from a fish that crawled onto land and liked the scenery so much that it decided to stay. Now, if, as evolution dictates, organisms evolve certain mechanisms in order to survive in their particular surroundings, how the fuck did this fish, who had up to then spent all its life underwater breathing through it's gills, survive it's stay on dry land? I mean if you pull a fish out of the water, it is out of it's habitat and it writhers around and soon dies cos it doesn't have lungs. But this fuckin fish species was evidently so smart that it decided millions of years earlier to evolve lungs so that sometime in the future, you know, if things got boring in the drink, they could crawl onto land and evolve into squirrels, monkeys, apes and then man. And people think fish are clueless!!

Another thing to consider is this: since evolution is ongoing, where are all the transitional life forms with evolving and currently-useless organs and limbs TODAY??????????? Are there any organisms today with semi-formed organs and limbs, ones that are, in lehman's terms 'under construction', due to become functional sometime in the next few millions of years?? The answer so far is a big fat NOPE!!!!.. These and other questions are routinely ignored by scientists who think their PhD in biology makes them Gods, er sorry, evolution's all-knowing gift to mankind!!

The theory of evolution claims that all matter was formed by chance. By some extraordinary feat of magic, inorganic and unconcious matter 'developed' the ability to come together and form life. If this holds true than the ability for me to suddenly evolutionise (if circumstance permits) into a giant spiky eyeball also becomes a likely reality... "T Hence, it flies in the face of an evolutionary possibility... the probability of a protein being formed by chance is zero, therefore the probability of me turning into a deviant bodysnatcher to devour his guts (though unfortunate), is also zero. Also, homology, is a myth.

Why would a fish need to develop the capacity to breathe on land if it is a sea-bound organism? If this theory were put in reverse, then human sailors would spontaneously begin to develop gills in their multi-millenial preparation to become fish... The theory of evolution cannot explain these problems so it conviniently overlooks and ignores them. I have read lot's of literature both for and against evolution and my opinion is that Life on Earth is just too amazing and creative to be the product of random, chaotic natural selection. Cheers.