[GuidoHunter]

Originally Posted by T3hDDRKid

Mutations can cause changes, sure, but the point is that they cannot add information If humans did evolve from fish or whatever it is scientists are claiming nowaday, where would that information come from? Did the fish always have the ability to be humans? Or even go back to the single-celled organisms that evolutionists claim started everything. Single-celled organisms with just a few chromosomes multiplied their current DNA and/or added new chromosomes to eventually grow arms, legs, complicated organ systems, create ecosystems fully interdependant on its own creatures? One more point on this topic: If those single-celled organisms were only rearranging and losing information for, what, 6.4 billion years? (they keep changing that), don't you think that after 6,400,000,000 years they would have lost what little information they have and be down to one or two genes? Instead, evolutionists claim that they did, in fact, increase their information quite a bit, grow, and sprout arms and legs. [I, for one, would not want to be the in-between creature with legs, gills, and no arms.]

Problems with DNA aside, it seems very unlikely that co-dependant creatures could have evolved on their own. If they need each other to survive, how did they evolve in the first place? Also, take your organs. Many of them would be completely useless without all the data that they contain. Your liver could not fuction at all with some DNA gone. Your heart, depending on what was missing, would be severely cripped or would not work.

Suggested reading material: This with respect to this, since you clearly don't understand very simple concepts of natural laws.

The things you bring up (like the thing with gills and legs but no arms) are just retarded if you A) really think they happened and B) don't disprove a single thing.

You're just showing insurmountable ignorance if you actually think that you're giving legitimate arguments against evolution. Do everyone, especially yourself, a favor and go read a book by Michael Shermer or something.

If those single-celled organisms were only rearranging and losing information for, what, 6.4 billion years? (they keep changing that)

Is that a bad thing that that number keeps getting changed? No, not at all. You know why? BECAUSE SCIENCE IS SELF-CORRECTING! Is it such a stretch to understand that as we get more technological, develop better systems of dating, and compile more and more data that we're going to get more and more accurate?

"Hey, did you hear about the new development in quantum physics?"
"Pfft, like there's any weight to that. First light travels through the aether, THEN electricity and magnetism are the same thing, and THEN there's no such thing as relative time? Clearly physicists are so unsure of what's actually happening that there's no credibility to what they say."

That's exactly what you're sounding like, ddrkid.

--Guido

http://andy.mikee385.com