Lenny said:
In fact, it IS evolution.
In scientific terms, evolution is when a species changes - not into a completely different species, but within itself -- adaptation is a big part of evolution. It IS evolution.
The first organisms adapted to their environments - and evolved. Some lived in water, other lived on land, some went mad and decided to fly. Eventually, that one original single-celled organism evolved into every living creature we see today.
|
No it isnt. You cant have best of both worlds. Even though you HAVe to...
Lets take Dog Variability. When bred for certain traits, dogs become different and distinctive. This is a common example of microevolutionchanges in size, shape, and coloror minor genetic alterations. It is not macroevolution: an upward, beneficial increase in complexity, as evolutionists claim happened millions of times between bacteria and man. Macroevolution has never been observed in any breeding experiment.
Before considering how life began, we must first understand the term organic evolution. Organic evolution, as theorized, is a naturally occurring, beneficial change that produces increasing and inheritable complexity. Increased complexity would be shown if the offspring of one form of life had a different and improved set of vital organs. This is sometimes called the molecules-to-man theoryor macroevolution
Microevolution, on the other hand, does not involve increasing complexity. It involves changes only in size, shape, color, or minor genetic alterations caused by a few mutations. Macroevolution requires thousands of just right mutations. Microevolution can be thought of as horizontal (or even downward) change, whereas macroevolution, if it were ever observed, would involve an upward, beneficial change in complexity. Notice that microevolution plus time will not produce macroevolution. [micro + time ≠ macro]
Creationists and evolutionists agree that microevolution occurs. Minor change has been observed since history began. But notice how often evolutionists give evidence for microevolution to support macroevolution. It is macroevolutionwhich requires new abilities, increasing complexity, that results from new genetic informationthat is at the center of the creation-evolution controversy.
Because science should always base conclusions on what is seen and reproducible, what is observed? We see variations in lizards, four of which are shown at the bottom. We also see birds, represented at the top. In-between forms (or intermediates), which should be vast in number if macroevolution occurred, are never seen as fossils or living species. A careful observer can usually see unbelievable discontinuities in these claimed upward changes.
Ever since Darwin, evolutionists have made excuses for why the world and our fossil museums are not overflowing with hundreds of thousands of intermediates! None are found!
Organic Evolution Has Never Been Observed.
The Law of Biogenesis
Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the law of biogenesis. The theory of evolution conflicts with this scientific law when claiming that life came from nonliving matter through natural processes.a
Evolutionary scientists reluctantly accept the law of biogenesis.b However, some say that future studies may show how life could come from lifeless matter, despite the virtually impossible odds. Others say that their theory of evolution doesnt begin until the first life somehow arose. Still others say the first life was created, then evolution occurred. All evolutionists recognize that, based on scientific observations, life only comes from life.
Mendels laws of genetics and their modern-day refinements explain almost all physical variations observed in living things. Mendel discovered that genes (units of heredity) are merely reshuffled from one generation to another. Different combinations are formed, not different genes. The different combinations produce many variations within each kind of life, as in the dog family. A logical consequence of Mendels laws is that there are LIMITS to such variation. Breeding experimentsb and common observationsc also confirm these boundaries.
Natural Selection
An offspring of a plant or animal has characteristics that vary, often in subtle ways, from its parents. Because of the environment, genetics, and chance circumstances, some of these offspring will reproduce more than others. So a species with certain characteristics will tend, on average, to have more children. In this sense, nature selects genetic characteristics suited to an environmentand, more importantly, eliminates unsuitable genetic variations. Therefore, an organisms gene pool is constantly decreasing. This is called natural selection.
Notice, natural selection cannot produce new genes; it only selects among preexisting characteristics. As the word selection implies, variations are reduced, not increased.
The variations Darwin observed among finches on different Galapagos islands is another example of natural selection producing micro- (not macro-) evolution. While natural selection sometimes explains the survival of the fittest, it does not explain the origin of the fittest. Today, some people think that because natural selection occurs, evolution must be correct. THIS IS THE HOAX! Actually, natural selection PREVENTS major evolutionary changes!
Mutations are the only known means by which new genetic material becomes available for evolution. Rarely, if ever, is a mutation beneficial to an organism in its natural environment. Almost ALL observable mutations are harmful; some are meaningless; many are lethal! No known mutation has ever produced a form of life having greater complexity and viability than its ancestors!!!
There is no direct evidence that any major group of animals or plants arose from any other major group.a Species are observed only going out of existence (extinctions), never coming into existence.
Codes, Programs, and Information
In our experience, codes are produced only by intelligence, not by natural processes or chance. A code is a set of rules for converting information from one useful form to another. Examples include Morse code and braille. Code makers must simultaneously understand at least two ways of representing information and then establish the rules for converting from one to the other and back again.
The genetic material that controls the physical processes of life is coded information. Also coded are complex and completely different functions: the transmission, translation, correction, and duplication systems, without which the genetic material would be useless, and life would cease.a It seems most reasonable that the genetic code, the accompanying transmission, translation, correction, and duplication systems were produced simultaneously in each living organism by an extremely high intelligence.
Likewise, no natural process has ever been observed to produce a program. A program is a planned sequence of steps to accomplish some goal. Computer programs are common examples. Because programs require foresight, they are not produced by chance or natural processes. The information stored in the genetic material of all life is a complex program. Therefore, it appears that an unfathomable intelligence created these genetic programs.
Life contains matter, energy, and informationd. All isolated systems, including living organisms, have specific, but perishable, amounts of information. No isolated system has ever been shown to increase its information content significantly.e Nor do natural processes increase information; they destroy it. Only outside intelligence can significantly increase the information content of an otherwise isolated system. All scientific observations are consistent with this generalization, which has three corollaries:
* Macroevolution cannot occur.
* Outside intelligence was involved in the creation of the universe and all forms of life.
* Life could not result from a big bang.
http://www.creationscience.com/onlin...ciences18.html