24 Aug '10 15:08>2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayYes.
Your assuming that evolution is the cause and the flow of how the eye got here
was a steady flow of small changes.
Kelly
- and that “assumption “ that things evolve has already been scientifically proven.
But what has that got to do with anything I put in that post?
I basically had pointed out the logical contradiction of what you apparently in-effect said ( by your “…Or, none of the above…” comment in response to all the possibilities I systematically pointed out ) which is that X didn’t come before Y and Y didn’t come before X and X and Y didn’t come at the same time where X is the formation of a light-absorbing pigment in a life form and Y is the formation of a “communication system” in a life form that allows a response to light detection.
So, I repeat my question that you haven’t answered which basically is:
If X didn’t come before Y and Y didn’t come before X and X and Y didn’t come at the same time then in what order did they come?
Whether you believe things evolved or not or whether you believe events X and Y happened as a result of divine intervention rather than evolution, surely logic dictates you must either believe X came before Y or Y came before X or X and Y came at the same time –right?