Adam's children, sibling relations, bestiality, and natural law

Survival of the fittest is a valid concept. Evolution is not. This is best illustrated by bacteria which are eventually immune to a particular antibiotic.

Believers in evolution point to this as “micro evolution”. What it is, however, is an example of survival of the fittest. The bacteria represent thousands or even millions of variations within that particular strain. As the antibiotic wipes out the most virulent, a variation which has an immunity to the antibiotic takes its place. There is no evolution. The variation existed prior to the application of the antibiotic.

How could a bacterium evolve a defense mechanism after it is exposed to the antibiotic? It is dead. This seems to be a part of the evolutionary hoax that evolutionists never think about. You can’t evolve a defense against something that can kill you. You either have a defense before you are exposed, or you die.

Evolution is a fairy tale.

ابو كمون

Evolutionists make no distinction between ‘micro’ and ‘macro’ evolution. They are all the same thing to them. Micro is evolution running for a short time. Macro is evolution running for a long time.

Its a distinction created by Creationists to seperate the evolution they will believe in from the evolution they won’t.

You will never read the word ‘micro evolution’ in a scientific context.

You are making a fool of yourself abu…you just described evolution, and you claim you have disproven it (because you think evolution is magic).

Evolution is that process you just described (of the fit tending to survive longer than the unfit), plus a notion that, every now and then, a offspring will be different than its parent (due to mutations).

You can beleive it, or not believe it, but THAT is the theory. It has nthing to do with germs magically becoming resistant to antibiotics…it has to do with the antibiotics killing all the germs that weren’t already resistant, so that only the resistant germs are the only ones that survive to reproduce.

You just have to ask the next question to see why this is evolution: Why are there resistant germs to survive in the first place?

How come, no matter how much we refine our antibiotics, or how much we up the dosage, there are germs surviving?

Well, first. I’m really sorry I lashed out at you Kitty. I didn’t mean to come off sounding the way I did. I just sort of started typing and…well. You know.

My advice: Find a book, not written by a creationist, that describes evolution. If you could sit through it (and anyone would understand if you couldn’t), read one that specifically attempts to answer the common criticisms of evolution made by religious people (but stay away from Richard Dawkins…he’s an *******).

Try to find out what the theory says. Not what the press says the theory says (the press can’t seem to get anything right about science, the same way they can’t seem to get anything right about the Catholic Church). Not what the mural at the zoo says (The mural was written for fifth graders on field trips, not for educated, literate adults). And getting evolution according to a creationist is like asking Michael Moore to tell you about the Republican party platform.

Try to get it as straight from the horse’s mouth as you can, what biologists believe evolution to be.

(I took out only the monkey comment because that was the main one. But here we go, evolution says everything from monkeys to the AIDS virus is a cousin. Monkeys are our close cousins, virii…much, much more distant. And yeah, you could just as easily say “We have a common creator.”

As for the huge modifications to Darwins idea…depends on what you mean. The public always over estimates how much science changes its opinions. But, when you say “More tradition than fact”, you are on to something. Science is one of the best institutions in the world for accepting that it is wrong…but it needs something ELSE to believe before it can do it. It would rather stick to a bad idea than leap into a vacuum. Though it strikes me a little odd that you aren’t clear on what evolution said from day one, yet you are completely insistent that what it says is inconsistent with fact. That doesn’t bode well.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit