Ahhh, a reasonable discussion! Very reasonable questions indeed.'Evolution' is, itself, a somewhat 'charged' word, engendering, because of connotation, the concept of a very simple organism evolving into a more complex organism over time--eons.Flash1969 wrote:
So if it looks like a duck, smells like a duck and sounds like a duck it could very well be a chicken!!??
So you acknowledge natural selection and that species adapt to environmental changes and this, somehow, is not evolution?? In previous posts you have acknowledged "micro" evolution. The underlying mechanisms of "micro" evolution are the same as for "macro" evolution, in fact it's only creationists that bother trying to make that distinction.
An accurate term would be 'adaptation.''Adaptation' is not only possible, it has been observed. The phenomenon is not inseparable from TOE, however. And that is the point I am addressing. Adaptation, natural selection, mutation, all take place. But none of that means that a simple organism will evolve into a more complex organism, over time.
Interesting thought, although I have a different perception. At any rate, alternative theories make for good discussion. Will get there erelong."Intelligent design" answers NOTHING, it poses no questions. It is simply a fall back position for creationists when presented with hard questions.