Creation (Pro) versus Evolution (Con)

"Randomness is everywhere in your theory. The idea that ALL THE SPECIES IN THE WORLD became what they are now from ONE GENE, ONE ATOM, the thought that the entire fine-tuned world came into existence by a few atoms and energy, and the name of "Big Bang" explains how ridiculous, preposterous and inconceivable your theory is. Even in a billion years, all those changes, mutations," You"re right; it is a crazy concept, but there are so many crazy concepts that have been tested again and again and are actually true. Here is the reason why this work. Branching. [1] Branching is a consequence of evolution. [2] So you need to know what causes evolution, and then what causes branching. What causes evolution are mutation + natural selection. Mutations are just tiny changes in DNA during reproduction. Most mutations don't have any effect at all, some are harmful (and don't last long), but a small number are beneficial (they provide some small advantage in survival or reproduction). Natural selection is the idea that those individuals lucky enough to get some beneficial new mutation (no matter how tiny), will tend on average to leave more offspring ... and they in turn leave more offspring, and so on. And so the population changes over time. Branching happens because populations of a species often get separated from each other. (A migration, a change in temperature, a river cutting through a valley, a lake drying into two lakes, etc. etc.) If this happens, and the two populations are not exchanging genes (DNA), then they will continue to change over time, but in different ways. They end up with more and more different mutations ... until the two populations are unable to reproduce together any more. [3] At that point they are two species. Two separate branches on evolution. Where each branch can itself branch again, and again ... with many branches going extinct. And this branching happens again, and again, and again. Which is why life is not just a bunch of separate species ... but we find a treelike structure to the arrangement of all the species. Branching, branching, and branching. That's the key. [1] "Evolution cannot be observed. There's not any evidence which plainly gives way to Evolution, no proof that makes you go 'no doubt about it: Evolution happened.' There are no transitional fossils anywhere, and if the evolution process had occurred there should be millions of transitional fossils for EVERY SPECIE found floating around." (By the way, I do not believe that "no doubt about it: Evolution happened.") Evolution implies that when the humans first began to walk the earth (estimated at around 5 million years ago) and the earliest known ancestors of humans (roughly 100,000 years ago), one should find a succession of creatures less apelike and more modern, which is what the records show.[4] But one does not find humans fossils from the Jurassic period.[4] Did you know that there have been a few transitional fossils found paleontologists? Yes they actually have; the most well-known one was the Archaeopteryx, which has feathers and a skeletal structure similar to birds with the features of dinosaurs. [5] "P3. Your theory isn't logical. Evolution says that our common ancestor is the ape family, but because we look alike it leads MORE to the possibility of a common Designer (Creator). We share 50% bound DNA with bananas, but that doesn't mean we're half banana!" Apes and humans are both in the Hominoidea family that is what we evolved from. [6] Bananas are not. Also, just because humans share over 90% of their DNA with their primate cousins doesn"t mean we are over 90% percent ape. It just means that we have the same DNA as them. [7] Also, the long list of things that science disproves, you forgot to add the entire earth coming from God. [1] http://www.nyu.edu... [2] https://images.search.yahoo.com... [3] http://www.writework.com... [4] http://www.scientificamerican.com... [5] http://www.newworldencyclopedia.org... [6] http://www.thefreedictionary.com... [7] http://phys.org...