Here's why Creatards might be right

[Esquilax]

isnt that what the Big Bang religion is though people insisting that they DO know ?

We have evidence for the big bang... not that you bothered to understand the subject at all before deciding you knew enough to disagree with it. Because what could match your complete ignorance, right?

[TheRocketSurgeon]

actually science doesnt explain at all WHY there are different species and different organisms all living on the same earth , now if every living thing on earth was a human then natural evolution would be logical . i am on the same earth with a squirrel so why are we so different ?

Actually science does explain why there are different species. We have explained it to you. 

Why in the world would you expect everything on earth to become human? Humanity is not the point of evolution. Surviving to reproduce DNA is the point of evolution. There are a couple of billion variations known on how DNA has done this. It diverges, it splits, and adapts to new environments and conditions all the time. We observe this happening and can demonstrate it mathematically (this is literally the topic in the second week of any course on genetics).

The Big Bang threw out a huge cloud of expanding hydrogen atoms, with a few helium ones forming along with possibly some lithium, the lightest three elements. All the rest was formed in the hearts of ancient fusion reactors called stars, which is why Sagan talks of being "made of star-stuff". 

All of this is based entirely on gravity. When enough particles get together, gravity "smashes" them enough to cause certain ones to fuse, and in that fusion process they produce heavier elements. When the star goes nova, it throws that material across the heavens. When later stars form, they have a lot of that heavier material in their environment... as the condensing cloud spins during its collapse inward, the heavier stuff is slung outward as part of a "disc" of material that forms planets. If the planet is in a zone that allows for water to exist in liquid state, as on earth, you have conditions which are right for producing organic chemistry. From that organic chemistry emerges replicating molecules... and once you have a replicator, you have a chance for the following generations to mutate, to not be exactly like the parent generation. That is the beginning of evolution. All the rest is the result of replicating under conditions that shapes what emerges via mutation (and a couple of other chemical recombinations I won't get into here) through the process of Natural Selection, as the environment and related factors determine which recombinations replicate better than others.

In that process, you get diversification and change. That is why we see all types of "answers" to the "question" of how to best replicate on this planet. There's no one right answer... there are literally billions, and nature tries them all to see what works, so to speak. (No active intelligence is operating, just the rules of chemistry and chance.)

[SteelCurtain]

isnt that what the Big Bang religion is though people insisting that they DO know ?

Huh?

Once again, you betray your ignorance on what the Big Bang Theory actually is.

The actual theory doesn't say a damned thing about "before." In fact, "before" is a notion that is really just meaningless in terms of spacetime.

I think we could probably save a lot of time if you gave us your understanding of the Big Bang Theory. My hunch is that you were told that everything poofed into existence and that's what atheists believe.

[jenny1972]

so your suggesting that humans evolved into humans and plants evolved into plants because of climate differences in different locations ....  bugs are different than other species of bugs all because they have intensely different environmental factors ?

Yes. And random mutation in non-genetically-sharing populations results in different directions of potential evolution, narrowed back down by the Natural Selection pressures in their different environments.

The fact that the species "work together" (though I'd say that bees getting their colony destroyed by wasps would differ in this opinion) is a result of Natural Selection working on all of the populations put together to form part of that environment; environment is geography + ecology.

religious atheists are funny   is it really so hard for you to say " i dont know " ?

[robvalue]

I'm giving up now. I'm afraid you're demonstrating willful ignorance by refusing to learn on account of your theistic assumptions.

The resources out there to learn from are endless, it's your choice.

[The Grand Nudger]

the only thing im saying is that based on the reality of our circumstances how different organisms evolved into different living things all on the same earth , the same environment under the same sun that its very likely that there is a reason for that and its a result of an intelligent plan ..... we know of planets that are capable of containing complex life and yet they dont . and those planets have been subjected to the same big bang right ?

I wanted to touch on something Rocket mentioned, above.  This business about humans being the only species on earth -  and that being some evidence, as you see it, for evolution (or would be).  How does "we are not the apex" and -this-..flow from the same persons mouth?

In any case....as regards the above:  show me the math, show me upon what metrics you've determined the probability of all of this having been designed?  

Put up or shut up. Modern Synth has made it's case, it's time for you to make yours.

[Esquilax]

Yes. And random mutation in non-genetically-sharing populations results in different directions of potential evolution, narrowed back down by the Natural Selection pressures in their different environments.

The fact that the species "work together" (though I'd say that bees getting their colony destroyed by wasps would differ in this opinion) is a result of Natural Selection working on all of the populations put together to form part of that environment; environment is geography + ecology.

religious atheists are funny   is it really so hard for you to say " i dont know " ?

... Except that all of this is supported by over a century of observation and laboratory experiments. So, you know, fuck off with your dismissive attitude and worship of your own unbridled, arrogant ignorance, okay?

[SteelCurtain]

religious atheists are funny   is it really so hard for you to say " i dont know " ?

Now you're just trolling.

Keep it up.

[robvalue]

OK, they're not technically endless. But in reality they are. There's more than you could get through in a lifetime probably.

"Too complex => magic" is the main problem with a lot of theistic thinking.

[jenny1972]

They are different species because significant genetic variation has occurred so as to make reproduction between groups impossible.  This doesn't -have- to have anything to due with differing environments, but it often does (as, for example, the criteria which manifest itself as genetic variation between two populations).

religious atheism