A Problem with Evolution

According to 'evolution' theory, 150 years are very less period for species to get extinct or evolve into some other species. However, 'so-called' mutation happened in the name of 'Corona' to prove the 'evolution' theory.

 

A comment by a fellow member, I think, is worth repeating.

"Many unproven theories have been advanced by secular scientists to explain the origin of our universe, and yet those same scientists sometimes have to ignore well established facts of physics in pursuit of the unknown. Why, for example, do they ignore the laws of gas dynamics in order to explain star formation? If gas particles in a vacuum repel one another, seeking equilibrium, how can you ever get a self-gravitational body of hydrogen with the mass and density necessary to start and maintain nuclear reactions? According to evolutionists, the first generation of stars had to be non-metallic because the Big Bang could not account for any elements heavier than lithium. So far as I know no such stars have ever been detected. If they have all died out without leaving a trace, how do we know that they ever really existed?"

"Martin Harwit, an American astronomer and for eight years the director of the National Air and Space Museum, once said, "The silent embarrassment of modern astrophysics is that we do not know how even a single one of these stars managed to form". It has been said that gas particles in a vacuum repel each other with a force 100 times greater than the mutual gravitational attraction. And even if the supernova explosion of a star could condense a cloud of hydrogen gas into a self-gravitational body - which is highly doubtful since an expanding shell from a supernova would be more likely to scatter gas clouds than compress them, you still have to explain from where the first star came."

"So, first generation stars cannot be accounted for by the Big Bang Theory, but what about other concepts? The Steady State Theory seems to have fallen out of favor, since no one can demonstrate that mass/energy can be lost and somehow miraculously be replicated somewhere else. And the claim that matter and energy is eternal has no basis in empirical science, and flies in the face of the Second Law of Thermodynamics. No evidence exists that the universe is cyclical or that there are multiple universes. The idea that the universe began because of a fluctuation in a quantum vacuum doesn't explain where the energy came from that created the matter."

"Since there is no scientific explanation for the origin of the universe that makes any sense, is it irrational to believe in a supernatural Creator, or is that the only rational position to take. Actually, there is no more reasonable position, either scientifically or spiritually. "In the beginning God..." Phillip Diller, member

 

Also, there is no proven and shown way in nature by which a creature internal Dna has been modified in order to affect species transformation, as even Darwin admitted his biggest flaw would be in the lack of transitional fossil records!