Ethe flaws in evoultion read this ppl and state oppinion belivers and disbelievers anwser please?

There have been lots of findings of the so--called remains of those manlike apes, even different types of these creatures had apparently existed at one time or another. But, is that not also true of almost every animal, insect, mammal, fish, flower, fruit, or vegetable. There are now and always have been various types of virtually every species on this planet. How easy it is to point out that these remains bear such a remarkable resemblance to the human being. On the other hand, could it not have been possible that what had actually happened here is that evolution had worked somewhat backwards to how science had perceived it and that these manlike apes actually evolved into members of the ape family rather than man? This is not at all inconceivable.

A friend recently told me that he had read an article explaining the science community has currently discovered flaws in its system of carbon dating. Carbon is a widely distributed element in nature. One of the uses of this metho

Ethe flaws in evoultion read this ppl and state oppinion belivers and disbelievers anwser please?
evolution is a theory man.. no one said it was perfect. Every theory has flaws or it wouldnt be a theory it would be a law. i dont know what your trying to prove?
Reply:This belongs in the biology section. Also, your question is so laughably filled with holes and the most common misconceptions (not to mention outright falsehoods) that trying to correct you would be an embarrasment to you. Take this test and bang your head against the wall for the number of times you say yes: http://www.holysmoke.org/sdhok/cre-test....



Also, start here: http://www.iidb.org/vbb/showthread.php?t...



There's a wealth of knowledge to go around and you seem to be deprived of it.



By the way smiling4ever222, you should take the same advice. Harun Yahya is a joke; any competent scientist will see right through his sophistry. For example, here's one funny example that shows how LITTLE you know about the theory of evolution: "This theory, which claims that life emerged by chance from inanimate matter..." Unfortunately for you, that has nothing to do with evolution. That's actually abiogenesis, not evolution. The theory isn't concerned with the origin of life at all, that is one of the most popular and stupid misconceptions.



Harun Yahya also makes himself look even more stupid when he claims that there are no transitional forms. That type of sophistry works only on the scientifically illiterate. Sorry, not going to convince me or any actual scientists.



And evolution is random? Did your/Yahya's brain shut off in science class when your instructor discussed natural selection? All mutations are harmful? The guy has no credibility except to the scientifically illiterate.



You know, Harun Yahya's an incredibly stupid person. For example, one of his latest "evidences" for that primitive man was non-existent was how the tools made by them were too finely shaped. Their stone tools had to be shaped with metal. I snorted my coffee when I read this personally. Primitive men used steel tools to make stone tools even though they had steel tools??? LOL! Come on, don't rely on idiots like them!



So do yourself a favor, stop the copy-and-paste jobs, stop listening to the idiotic creationists, and start learning some actual science.
Reply:There are a lot of discrepancies in your comments.

This web-site might also be of interest to you.



Personally, I am more willing to believe in a science that is developing through research, then a faith that claims to be the absolute truth.