Hi mfscrewu
I apologised if I give you that kind of feeling.
Yes, evolution did takes place, but it is the kind of evolution we see everyday: hair color, rose color, dog size, finches' beaks. But they do not change the sort of thing the organism is: the person remains a person, the rose a rose, the dog a dog, and the finch a finch. No matter how it change, the dog cannot change to a man.
Read this:
(((Evolution, as it is commonly referred to, demands much more than this. It demands that there have been enough directional mutations, one added to another, through the ages, to change what was once a unicellular organism into the variety of life we see today. This kind of evolution is lacking a mechanism, however, as mutations are not known to do this. We see single mutations, such as antibiotic resistance, malarial resistance (which, in its homozygous form, confers the deadly sickle cell disease), and such, but we do not see mutations adding up anywhere to produce a new form or function. Instead, the vast majority of mutations we do see are negative, harming the organism involved. Those that do not harm, such as antibiotic resistance changes, have the effect of weakening the organism in any environment except the specific one in which that change helped it survive. Change the environment and the original form, if it still exists, proves strongest and takes over again. What we see, what we can work with, and what we see as the results of tests, is called biological stasis. No matter how many generations of E.coli bacteria are worked with, they remain....E.coli. No matter how many generations of fruit flies are subjects of forced mutations, they remain.... fruit flies. We can get different types of mice for our lab experiments until we run out of names for them. They remain mice. This is biological stasis. Variation seems to exist within what Genesis refers to as the "kind," and that is all. Does the scientific consensus overwhelmingly support evolution? Yes, it does. The question is, Why? First of all, most areas of science don't concern themselves with evolution or creation. Science tends to be so incredibly technical today that it is the science philosophers who have taken over the arguments concerning evolution and creation. The scientists in the labs and in the field are, with the exception of some geologists and paleontologists, not thinking about evolution. But that is what they were taught in university as true. And so they accept it. And they accept that anything else is some kind of weird religious doctrine. But if you ask the scientist to point to something in his own field which verifies the type of evolution that turns bacteria to bears, or even supports it, you will get mostly silence. He may point to another field, but very few are willing to point to something in their own field of study which supports evolution especially if you ask them to support evolution to the exclusion of creation.
Thus, to say that the majority of scientists accept evolution may be true on the surface, but that is about as far as their acceptance goes anyway. If a person wants to really find out which is true, it is best to dig into the evidence and read what has been written on both sides. When one meets those who have done so, one just might find a few more creationists than one expected to find. And an even greater number of anti-evolutionists. *Scientifically*, evolution is not something that has been shown to work. Yes, plants and animals change. They can vary in some possibly startling ways. But no breeder of horses, or dogs, or cattle, and no parent, when they hear, "there seems to be a mutation..." is going to excitedly ask, "Is it a good one?". It has not been proven in thousands upon thousands of generations of E.coli, nor has it been proven anywhere else. Remember we are not talking about simple variations within kind, or type, but actual change away from that type -- the type of change on which another change, or mutation, can build so that something new is produced. We have never seen that happen.)))
Whatever the case, discussion between Creation vs Evolution will never end. You need faith to believe in creation. It is the same as for evolution cos it also cannot be proven.
Something for you to ponder over. Why is it that man always go to their god for help if they are desperate and helpless? My view is that all man are created by God and all man belong to God. There is a link between man and God. The spirit of man knows that there is an existence of a God in the world, only thing is that they do not know who is this God. In Christianity, God is our loving Father and we turn to our Father when we need help and comfort from Him. You may not believe now that there is a God, but your spirit will search for it, if not now, maybe in future, whether Christianity, buddhism or Islam.
I am also not here to argue but to share if there is an opportunity. I respect other faith and religions, if not, I would have said that all gods are devils who come to deceive, right?.
Do you burn joss stick and pray to the dead at the wake? Just curious how an atheist show respect to the dead at the wake. No hard feelings, friend.
Anyway, have a nice day to you also.
Peace

Raymond Chua