Richard Dawkins - The Blind Watchmaker - 1/5

Things do come from nothing. Where, for example did the idea that the world was flat come from? It didn't come from God because it turned out to be wrong. It didn't come from evidence because the evidence isn't there. If you need an example that's more material, look up quantum vacuum. A third and ultimate thing that came from nothing is the universe. Because even if God conjured it up, s/he still conjured it up from nothing... didn't s/he?

"My problem with atheistic evolution is the very beginning. Something coming from nothing go agaist many basic scientific laws. "
Your problem is imaginary. Evolution has nothing to do with the origin of the universe, that would be Big Bang and the Big Bang theory does not say everything comes from nothing.

Yes but evolution can only happen on the earth if there is a creation of the universe. The atheist's Big Bang does suggest matter and energy (both at high temp) came from nothing and caused an explosion. So yes, everything at one point came from nothing according to the atheist's Big Bang. I myself beleive the Big Bang happened, God was the creator of it though.

I believe it take much more faith to believe in atheistic evolution. Another problem with atheistic evolution: Where is the trillions of transitional fossils? Darwin himself said that if the earth was not full of these fossils, then his theory should be thrown out. Its been over hundred years of intense study and atheistic evolutionists are simply greatly lacking in evidence.

There is no such thing as atheistic evolution, there is just evolution. Look up a great catholic named Dr. Kenneth Miller, he helped defeat creationism in the dover-trial.

You claim, you are not a creationist, but you bring up the typical lie that there are no transitional fossils. You do know, that even without the vast amount of fossils we have, there are genetic evidence, right?

Yes there is such a thing as atheistic evolution. Just like there is a thing called theistic evolution. I lean towards Day-Age Creationism and the lack of transitional fossils is evidence against evolution that is used by more than just Creationists. There is genetic evidence I know. But I see little use in that if there is so physical proof. That's like saying, "We have the concept for flight down, we just don't have a flying craft."

There isn't a lack of transitional fossils. Claiming there are, is at best ignorance. There are plenty of videos on youtube showing a long list of transitional fossils, I can find a couple of link if you want it.

"But I see little use in that if there is so physical proof."
Genetics are physical proof and more conclusive than fossil evidence.

Sorry but there mj is right. There's so much evidence around that's very difficult to ignore. But I don't understand what difference it makes to you. I understand that you support what I would call guided evolution - which would fit right in with what you label atheistic evolution. Or it's quite possible I don't understand fully your position.

There is alot of evidence, but there is also many holes in the evolutionary theory. But hey, I'm not here to hate. I find evolution to be a very good creation theory. I myself seek the answers without reserve. I lean towards day-age creationism, a form of progressive creationism. I adhere to an old universe, earth, and life. But I believe God was creating or guiding all of it in a progressive and advancing form.

Isn't saying there is a lot of evidence *and* a lot of holes a misrepresentation of the facts? As an intelligent, educated person, people, not just your kids, listen to you. You have a duty to give a balanced point of view.

You're right, science doesn't have a movie. But for all the millions of fossils, genetic, geographical, carbon dating, and other support for evolution, there is not a shred of evidence against it. Evolution & creationism do not deserve equal time.