Redewenur
Im not sure why you wrote all you did either , all I said was...
if someone has a theory about the stones and there is nothing that would oppose that theory , then the theory would remain intact would it not?
is there something wrong with the wording that I cannot find?
and speaking of something that would not support the
theory of evolution how about the cambrian explosion...
The picture presented by the Cambrian fossils clearly refutes the assumptions of the theory of evolution, and provides strong evidence for the involvement of a "supernatural" being in their creation. Douglas Futuyma, a prominent evolutionary biologist, admits this fact:
Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from pre-existing species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence.
The fossil record clearly indicates that living things did not evolve from primitive to advanced forms, but instead emerged all of a sudden in a fully formed state. This provides evidence for saying that life did not come into existence through random natural processes, but through an act of intelligent creation.
that is amazing how these animals just appeared fully formed ,
you would think that there would be a few fossils that were found that were in some type of transition as evolution calls it.
but thats not the case.
how do evolutionist exaggerate, leaving out important details, and outright misrepresentation or lying in their attemp to explain the cambrian explosion?
