Some preliminary Thoughts on Evolutionary Theory

Some Preliminary Thoughts on Evolutionary Theory
Share
Monday, 21 September 2009 at 03:22 Edit note Delete
Some Preliminary Thoughts on Evolutionary Theory ShareMonday, 21 September 2009 at 03:22 Edit note DeleteAs evolution via natural selection as a theory is based on the operation of time and chance plus nothing it is extremely unlikely that life forms if ever they existed via this theory would ever move from simple to complex forms and we see in nature the opposite is true so this whole theory must be regarded with the suspicion it deserves.Trees are interesting in terms of evolutionary theory There seems no reason in evolutionary theory for the list of benefits both tangible and intangible, that trees give us. First of all, as we all know, trees are the most important and the only natural source of oxygen in the atmosphere. Without oxygen, life is not possible on earth. Trees consume the carbon dioxide from the environment and give out oxygen which balances the amount of oxygen and carbon dioxidein the atmosphere. In addition to this, the wood that we obtain from trees is used in making paper, building houses, making furniture etc. Some trees even have medicinal value. Roots of trees under the surface are a natural water cleaning system. Trees are the reason all human life exists on earth.Did these involve from a survival of the fittest.Did these give medicinal value as a part of "natural selection".Did they learn how to get energy from the sun as the result of millions of years of development.What meaning does it all have if so.What purpose if any does it have except the survival of the fittest which means the obvious fact that the fittest survive.Wasn't it handy for the Earth that trees presumably evolved to give us oxygen especially when you consider every type carries out the same function.How convenient too for the Earth that the Sun on which we depend stay pretty close to us for a almost indefinite period and I have never heard any idea that the position of the Sun in relation to the Earth be anything other than probably time plus chance plus the presumed big bang .Have morals evolved and if so they it could be argued must be adaptable to individual social situations and not necessarily to group more's..Words,grammar, languages,belief systems,literature,drama, art etc etc nothing is outside its reach.If it is thought so true so why then do evolutionists still rely on everything in their scientific attitude,lifestyle, form of Government in the West that originally flowed from a Judaic-Christian base.Could they be secretly afraid of De Sade's dictum that"Whatever is,is right."Could they be afraid that Christianity is true and that the great Pumpkin in the sky is really responsible for it all.Everything based on the idea of one man.Why even Judaism,even Christianity,even Judaic-Christianity is not based on one man alone."Llight will be shed..."mutters Darwin in the triumphal burst of unfounded optimism of nineteenth century humanism.Of course I have to believe like Darwin that light indeed will be shed but the quality and source of that light I expect will come from quite another direction.Isaaih was quite fulsom about it in his time ,so is John in Revelation.