As we all know that evolution depends almost wholly upon fossils being found in chronological order in the layers of the soil, in mountains and deep in the earth. The simplest forms of life corals and starfish are said to be in the lowest and oldest layers of the earth,and the more complete forms-bears, elephants camels - are found in the highest or youngest layers.... In China, Norway, Scotland, Newyork, Georgia, idaho, etc the supposed - to - be old fossils are in the new layers and the new fossils are in the old layers.... A prominent geologist .. Sir Roderick Murchison said, "I know as much of nature in her geologic ages as any living man, and I fearlessly say that our geologic record does not afford one syllable of evidence in support of Darwin's theory.

This is the foundation of evolution and the foundation itself is false. Everything about evolution is therefore false...

OK
so what should we do bout it?
time travel to Darwin era and tell him his theory is false?

You sound like someone who's just awoken from a 120 year hibernation, and as a result, has missed the Discovery of DNA, advent of microbiology, discovery of many ancient fossils, is out of touch with current trends in science; but decides to (mis)quote the anachronistic opinion of an 18th century geologist as some kind of authority on a theory that has waxed stronger over the centuries...

Well then, welcome to the 21st century beloved ancient one. You may have learned how to use the internet, but there's still much to catch up to. Yet, if you've survived this long, I trust a few more years of high school and undergrad biology courses will not amount to much for you. Good luck in your quest for modern knowledge!

Below is what Charles Darwin, who put forth the theory of evolution by natural selection, believed at the time he put forth the theory.

"Scientists" have since been battling to defend Darwin’s theory.

AgentOfAllah:
You sound like someone who's just awoken from a 120 year hibernation, and as a result, has missed the Discovery of DNA, advent of microbiology, discovery of many ancient fossils, is out of touch with current trends in science; but decides to (mis)quote the anachronistic opinion of an 18th century geologist as some kind of authority on a theory that has waxed stronger over the centuries...

Well then, welcome to the 21st century beloved ancient one. You may have learned how to use the internet, but there's still much to catch up to. Yet, if you've survived this long, I trust a few more years of high school and undergrad biology courses will not amount to much for you. Good luck in your quest for modern knowledge!

As usual you just rant and pick on the op... Yet you got nothing to say about the points up there. Your so called chronological order is not the same in some places and I have listed this countries for you.... If your so called chronological order is false then whatever you may come up with is also false.

adjoviomole:




As usual you just rant and pick on the op... Yet you got nothing to say about the points up there. Your so called chronological order is not the same in some places and I have listed this countries for you.... If your so called chronological order is false then whatever you may come up with is also false.

It is not clear what gives you the impression that any random claim you make should be taken as a matter of fact, or seriously for that matter. You're right, I've got nothing to say about your point because you haven't made any! Go pick up a biology textbook if you want to make a point about evolution, not a misquoted statement from an 18th century geologist who didn't know any better.

AgentOfAllah:


It is not clear what gives you the impression that any random claim you make should be taken as a matter of fact, or seriously for that matter. You're right, I've got nothing to say about your point because you haven't made any! Go pick up a biology textbook if you want to make a point about evolution, not a misquoted statement from an 18th century geologist who didn't know any better.

Na so

The problem with creationists is that the evidence is against them, so they lie, cherry pick and make up quotes.
It is amazing that despite the overwhelming evidence for evolution, some people still play the ostrich, burying their heads in the sand, sticking hands is their ears and saying 'nah, nah, nah. The bible says it is not true, so it isn't. '
Ignorance abounds aplenty and they call it wisdom.

Zodiac61:
The problem with creationists is that the evidence is against them, so they lie, cherry pick and make up quotes.
It is amazing that despite the overwhelming evidence for evolution, some people still play the ostrich, burying their heads in the sand, sticking hands is their ears and saying 'nah, nah, nah. The bible says it is not true, so it isn't. '
Ignorance abounds aplenty and they call it wisdom.

Overwhelming evidence! enlighten me on the evidences you have found to back up your natural selection etc.... With fossil records..... May be the coelacanth as an intermediary of water animals evolving to land animals

A comedian once said
" if we are the evolved species of primates, how come we still have monkeys?
Are they the reaterded ones we have now?

Atheism is the dogma of the Evolutionists
And once Evolutions is proven to be false, Atheism falls as well.

PS: The Bing Bang Theory Was Created By A Catholic Priest.