Evolution is a Real Thing

I must elaborate that this debate bores me.First thing first: Your Accusation.This is no argument at all?Thanks to you!Debate: To engage in argument by discussing opposing points.Argument: A discussion in which disagreement is expressed; a debate.Expressed: 1. To set forth in words; state. 2. To manifest or communicate, as by a gesture; show. 3. To make known the feelings or opinions of (oneself), as by statement or art.So legally, this IS an argument. You just fail so bad at convincing anyone.Yes, I am stabbing the belief of many people, there is no problem in that as long as civil discussion is being used, and the purpose is not to offend or incite them, but made toward a constructive purpose away from forgery and lies.Knowledge exists not to please, knowledge exists to inform.However, you attempted to stab me as an individual, thus you are as bad as you claimed me to be."You seem to be saying that evolutionists in particular "avoid arguments".....Forgive me for failing to see the logic in this statement."Man... What possessed me to say such things? I wonder...*Super hint! You are the living fossil er... proof!*Btw, I forgive you ;)You must have a hard time making arguments... I understand.Since we cleaned the can of worms, lets get into the real stuff.The first statement ignores one of the points I left last for a PURPOSE, I did NOT put it there for fun.Therefore, I have the right to dismiss that point, However (Damn buts and howevers)... I am going to refute it in order to prove my point.The refutation have a very simple, but true answer. A THEORY CAN NOT PREDICT THE OPPOSITE. A theory can not create a hypothesis predicting the opposite of the theory, if it did then it is not science, it is child play since this would be a contradictory trick to keep the theory alive when science should attempt to destroy theories and replace them with better ones.Furthermore, what happened to "Luck" and "Chance" you evolutionists are so happy about? Does this mean evolution is based on intelligent design?if the chance is 10 base 50, it will never happen. The probability of producing a human cell by chance is 10 base 119,000. Make the math.And here is an other question: How do creatures evolve at the same time? If the luck from mutation and natural selection caused a creature to evolve into an other specie, then the said specie cannot produce on it's own.*Note, I am ignoring the flinch statement just like you ignored the refutation*Are you saying the book is made by one stupid person? They are not stupid, they are conspirators.Ernst Haeckel said that there are hundreds of fellow culprits in the forgery, and many of them are seen as respected and trustworthy biologist.“Evolution is unproved and unprovable. We believe it because the only alternative is special creation which is unthinkable.” -Sir Arthur Keith"Evolution is a fairy tale for adults."I believe that is exactly what it is. In Grimms' Fairy Tales someone kisses a frog and in two seconds it becomes a prince. That is a fairy tale. In evolution, someone kisses a frog and in two million years, it becomes a prince. Tat is no science. It is simply a faith." -Dr Duane Gish "In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection-quite unaware of the fact that random mutations have turned out to be irrelevant and natural selection a tautology." -Arthur KoestlerInformation for future Internet use: BTW = Trivial information.Therefore,what you wrote did nothing but make your argument seem longer, it is not like it is long anyway.Is that your super-reply to the subject?The reason I made a claim about transitional fossils is because I wanted to encourage you to write something! Any argument.But then you copy paste from wikipedia.What the hell. Imma be lazy. I am out of characters anyway.http://bit.ly...http://www.darwinismrefuted.com...As for your last point:Evolution: Living things (Like single cell organism) become more complicated living things by accident (Like a multi-cell organism).Spontaneous generation: Non-Living things create living things by accident (Like the first cell).As for the video, it is simply an imaginary scenario, not an argument, nor science. Arthur Koestler is a Hungarian-born British novelist, journalist, and critic: In the meantime, the educated public continues to believe that Darwin has provided all the relevant answers by the magic formula of random mutations plus natural selection-quite unaware of the fact that random mutations have turned out to be irrelevant and natural selection a tautology. 15