In the Right
This is a blog dedicated to discussing my political and moral views. I am a conservative Christian, female, age 23.
Feel free to send me a message. Just know that I answer them irregularly, and it may take me quite a while to get to yours. Furthermore, though I answer most of my messages, I reserve the right not to for any reason.
If KumaraDosha is following you, that's me.
My Main Blog
-
No. Me and evolutionists are saying that that's what life did. But we're saying we have no idea how life originated. We believe we have at least a vague idea of what single-celled organisms did. But we have absolutely no fucking clue where those single-celled organisms came from. And yes people have ideas about the formation of Earth but that and evolution are two complete separate ideas; it'd be like comparing Buffy the Vampire Slayer and Twilight -- two different things with tenuous links.
Asked by nothopeless
Alright, but…my question is this. No matter how it came to be, did life begin as one-celled organisms that eventually evolved into the complex mammals etc. we see today? Or did life start out as already-existed complex life-forms that just changed in form and function over time? If you’re arguing the former, you’re saying evolution decidedly made life more and more complex. If you’re arguing the latter (which you must be, since multiple people have said evolution doesn’t make living things more complex), that means monkeys and horses and fish ect. have always existed as long as life has existed, and they haven’t changed much at all, since they haven’t gotten more complex…just different. So which is it?
-
-
in-the-right posted this
-
