Now this might be weird to some people but RH refers to a certain primate which the atheist religious doctrine commonly referred to as the theory of evolution assumes by ancestry explains the existence in many blood types. So RH- is a bit of a mystery to them. They assume lacking that is some kind of mutation...
But evolution is as believable as biden beating trump.
I've researched a lot of things since I was about 8 years old, when I first started having encounters with the little gray bastards. Christians need to loosen up about evolution (and so do evolutionists, for that matter). There is nothing that says you cannot have evolution in a universe that has a creator. Evolution is a natural part of life, on every celestial body that is able to harbor life. It goes through the steps of evolution and eventually a dominant species emerges and develops intelligence and sentience. This is why you hear about humanoid aliens looking like lizards, some look hairless and gray, others are hairy and whatever... and humanoid seems to be the default pattern of evolutionary biology. Sentients have a head, two arms, two legs. Why? Because it is part of the DESIGN. I've heard that for every creature you can imagine on earth, there is an intelligent, evolved analog on some planet somewhere, with two arms, two legs, hands, and a head on top. Something I innately knew from a young age: Life is not the exception in the universe, it's the RULE. Life is EVERYWHERE. We are so NOT alone, it is staggering.
Hey I don't mind a good dive into the mysteries of the universe. Ancient Aliens is one of my favorite shows. Also don't doubt any of your personal experience.
But just as 2+2 does not equal 5. There is nothing scientific about the theory being taught to explain the existence of extremely complexes life. It doesn't even explain simple life for that matter.
The only 'evolution' that is scientifically sound is what we used to simply call adaptation.
So if you must have a creator, I don't see any reason to limit the creator's creative powers by inserting a completely illogical and unscientific process.
or... evolution could be an integral part of the creator's plan. A planet is born, single-cell life erupts, becomes more complex, eventually you get a dominant bipedal species which becomes sentient and eventually spacefaring. Some of those sentients develop from hominid mammals, some from other types of mammals, others from reptiles, others from avian species? You get the idea? It explains a lot of things and makes sense. Even beyond THIS phase of existence there is allegedly "ascension" to be experienced. Constant growth from day one.
So much of what people call "science" is just fiction. Your hypothesis doesn't explain anything that needs explaining as far as I can tell, unless you're explaining a plot for a star trek episode.
I'm not trying to trample on anyone's beliefs. What you say sounds fun to talk about but it's just not necessary in any scientific inquiry.
But to your question - no, in reality, if no evidence supports the theory of evolution, then there is no reason to claim the creator used it. The mechanisms do not exist.
It's like even though you are capable of forming complete sentences, you simply created a pencil and let the wind take care of the rest. No point in it. Especially if you already wrote a whole book demonstrating your vast abilities.
I'm O-. Pretty sure Trump is too. ?
Now this might be weird to some people but RH refers to a certain primate which the atheist religious doctrine commonly referred to as the theory of evolution assumes by ancestry explains the existence in many blood types. So RH- is a bit of a mystery to them. They assume lacking that is some kind of mutation...
But evolution is as believable as biden beating trump.
I've researched a lot of things since I was about 8 years old, when I first started having encounters with the little gray bastards. Christians need to loosen up about evolution (and so do evolutionists, for that matter). There is nothing that says you cannot have evolution in a universe that has a creator. Evolution is a natural part of life, on every celestial body that is able to harbor life. It goes through the steps of evolution and eventually a dominant species emerges and develops intelligence and sentience. This is why you hear about humanoid aliens looking like lizards, some look hairless and gray, others are hairy and whatever... and humanoid seems to be the default pattern of evolutionary biology. Sentients have a head, two arms, two legs. Why? Because it is part of the DESIGN. I've heard that for every creature you can imagine on earth, there is an intelligent, evolved analog on some planet somewhere, with two arms, two legs, hands, and a head on top. Something I innately knew from a young age: Life is not the exception in the universe, it's the RULE. Life is EVERYWHERE. We are so NOT alone, it is staggering.
Hey I don't mind a good dive into the mysteries of the universe. Ancient Aliens is one of my favorite shows. Also don't doubt any of your personal experience.
But just as 2+2 does not equal 5. There is nothing scientific about the theory being taught to explain the existence of extremely complexes life. It doesn't even explain simple life for that matter.
The only 'evolution' that is scientifically sound is what we used to simply call adaptation.
So if you must have a creator, I don't see any reason to limit the creator's creative powers by inserting a completely illogical and unscientific process.
or... evolution could be an integral part of the creator's plan. A planet is born, single-cell life erupts, becomes more complex, eventually you get a dominant bipedal species which becomes sentient and eventually spacefaring. Some of those sentients develop from hominid mammals, some from other types of mammals, others from reptiles, others from avian species? You get the idea? It explains a lot of things and makes sense. Even beyond THIS phase of existence there is allegedly "ascension" to be experienced. Constant growth from day one.
So much of what people call "science" is just fiction. Your hypothesis doesn't explain anything that needs explaining as far as I can tell, unless you're explaining a plot for a star trek episode.
I'm not trying to trample on anyone's beliefs. What you say sounds fun to talk about but it's just not necessary in any scientific inquiry.
But to your question - no, in reality, if no evidence supports the theory of evolution, then there is no reason to claim the creator used it. The mechanisms do not exist.
It's like even though you are capable of forming complete sentences, you simply created a pencil and let the wind take care of the rest. No point in it. Especially if you already wrote a whole book demonstrating your vast abilities.