Posts
Comments
Sure. Look, there are SEVERAL rebuttals for atheism/evolution. One of the many examples that Dr. Michael Behe uses to show the Biochemical complexity (which atheists reject), is blood clotting: If your blood does not clot in the right place, in the right amount and at the right time, you will bleed to death. It turns out that the blood clotting system involves an extremely choreographed ten-step cascade that uses about twenty different molecular compounds. To create a complex, perfectly balanced blood coagulation system, clusters of protein components have to be inserted all at once. That eliminates a Darwinian approach and fits the hypothesis of an intelligent designer. How could blood clotting develop over time, step by step, while the animal had no effective way of stopping the blood flow that would cause death every time it was injured? It doesn’t work if you only have one part of the system, you need all the components, and natural selection only works if there is something useful at that time, not in the future. Finally, no one has ever carried out experiments to show how blood clotting could have developed. It is one of the many examples of an irreducibly complex system, which needs to emerge complete to function. My response has been extracted from Behe´s response in the book "The case for the Creator" of Lee Strobel. Look, i know there are several atheists here that like to hide on this forum and erase any comment they don´t like, but i believe you can be open-minded
I study secular psychology and i can tell you the obvious... Evolution theory has been proven wrong a long time ago. Also, the human eye can´t "evolve". It is recognize as one of many examples of irreducible complexity. You should read Michael Behe and Jonathan Wells, they have tons of evidence that refute your core hypothesis... Also, your moral foundation (Francis Bacon) is very weak that i am not going to bother refuting it