EVOLUTION PART NINE

EVOLUTION
PART  NINE

(Copied from 
Mark Cahill's  
Book - 
A  Heartbeat Away)


According to Dr. Kent Hovind , the test of any theory is whether or not it provides answers to basic questions. How would you answer these?

1.  When, where, how and why did life 
      come from non-living matter?

2.  When, where, how and why did life 
      learn to reproduce itself?

3.  With what did the first cell capable
     of sexual reproduction reproduce?

4. Why would any plant or animal want
    to reproduce more of its kind since 
    this would only make more mouths 
    to feed and decrease the chances of 
    survival? (Does the individual have a 
   drive to survive, or the species. How 
   do you explain this?) 

5.  How can mutations (recombining of 
     the genetic code) create any new, 
     improved varieties?  (Recombining 
     English letters will never produce
     Chinese books.)

6.  Natural selection works only with
     the genetic material available, and 
     tends only to keep a species stable. 
     How would you explain the  
     increasing complexity in the 
     genetic code that must have occurred 
     if evolution were true?

7.  When, where, why and how did:
           (a)  Single-celled plants become
            multi-celled? (where are the 
             two - and three-celled
             intermediates?) 
      (b)  Fish change to amphibians?
      (c)  Amphibians change to reptiles?
      (d)  Reptiles change into birds? 
             (Their lungs, bones, eyes, 
              reproductive organs, heart,
              method of locomotion, body 
              covering, etc. are all very  
              different!) How did the 
              intermediate forms live?

8.  When, where, why, how and from
      what did
      (a) whales evolve?
      (b)  Sea horses evolve?
      (c)  Bats evolve?
      (d)  Hair, skin, feathers, scales, nails,
             claws,  etc. evolve?

 9.  Which of the                   following evolved           first. (How, and how long did it work without the 
                                          others?)

(a)  The digestive system, the food
        to be digested,
       The appetite, the ability to find 
        and eat food, the digestive juices,
        or the body's own resistance to 
        its own digestive juice, (stomach,
       intestines etc.)?
(b)  The drive to reproduce or the 
       ability to reproduce?
(c)  The lungs, the mucus lining to 
       protect them,
       The throat,  or the perfect mixture
       of gases to be breathed into the 
       lungs?
(d)  The plants or insects that live on 
       and pollinate the plants ?
(e)  The bones, ligaments, tendons, 
       blood supply,
       or muscles to move the bones?
(f)  The immune system or need for it?

Now take a minute to thoughtfully consider your answers. Are you sure they are reasonable and scientifically provable, or do you just hope and believe that it may have happened 
that way? 
Do you really think evolution makes sense?

Scientists want to convince us that new body plans and complex organs - with all their interrelated functions - simply appeared in order to meet a creature's new need. But when you stop to consider it logically, it just isn't possible. 

Natural selection is fine for explaining certain small-scale  changes in organisms, like the beaks of birds adapting to small environmental changes. It can take existing structures and refine them. But it can't explain how you get complex structures in the first place.

We also need to follow the idea of transitional forms to its logical conclusion:  Can a fish survive with a partial gill?  No. It would die! 
Can a bird survive with half a wing?
 No. It would be lunch for some other animal!  
Could we digest food with an incomplete digestive system?  Or see with an undeveloped eyeball? Could a cheetah run without fully formed legs?  Common sense tells us the answer.

And that leads us to the pinnacle of transitional forms - the missing link between ape and man.

next post 24th June