"Do you really not see the evidence for intellect progression in nature?"
Again, no. I don't. And neither do you. You are confusing "evidence" with the interpretation of facts. There is a big difference. Evolutionary science is one of forensics. It must interpret what is finds.
When compared to the fouding premises that it is based on, that interpretation fails. For instance, Darwin said that if the incredible complexity we see is to be explained by evolution, it must rely on an incredible amount of speciation occurring at all times. So, the fossile record should be full of transitional fossils. But it is not. It is remarkably silent there. It has failed.
Creationists are often lambasted for demanding more and more transitional proof, but we are merely echoing the founding father of natuiral selection. Current evolutionists such as Gould also note this break-down in the core tennants of classical evolution.
The fact is that the fossil record shows the sudden and intact appearance of species'. For me, that is a large indication that the premises that evolution is built on are flawed, thus my use of "ludecrous" in the other blog.
Sorry to double-up on you dogg...
...but I had a further comment on your question:
"Do you really not see the evidence for intellect progression in nature?"
Again, no. I don't. And neither do you. You are confusing "evidence" with the interpretation of facts. There is a big difference. Evolutionary science is one of forensics. It must interpret what is finds.
When compared to the fouding premises that it is based on, that interpretation fails. For instance, Darwin said that if the incredible complexity we see is to be explained by evolution, it must rely on an incredible amount of speciation occurring at all times. So, the fossile record should be full of transitional fossils. But it is not. It is remarkably silent there. It has failed.
Creationists are often lambasted for demanding more and more transitional proof, but we are merely echoing the founding father of natuiral selection. Current evolutionists such as Gould also note this break-down in the core tennants of classical evolution.
The fact is that the fossil record shows the sudden and intact appearance of species'. For me, that is a large indication that the premises that evolution is built on are flawed, thus my use of "ludecrous" in the other blog.
I hope this clarifies...