Genesis Creation vs. Darwin's Macroevolution Myth

[Alter2Ego]

The claim by Charles Darwin and his modern-day disciples, including those in academia, is that all organic beings throughout history were the descendants of a single common organic ancestor. Credible scientific evidence has also proven that organic life cannot result from non-life.

According to the atheists, there is no Jehovah aka Creator of life. So the question is this: If there is no Jehovah and therefore no Creator, how did evolution's "common organic ancestor" come to life by itself?

The Genesis Creation account speaks about the creation of living things by Jehovah, each uniquely different and each created as-is, but with the ability to produce variations of themselves--up to a set point.

Credible science supports the Genesis Creation account and contradicts Darwin's macroevolution myth. Fake science, meanwhile, relies on abiogenesis (organic life coming to life by itself) but fails to provide any credible explanation for this impossible feat.

QUESTION 1: How did evolution's common ancestor come to life by itself (abiogenesis) so that evolution could then proceed?

QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as primates such as apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. So how is it that there is not so much as one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?

QUESTION 3: If every single organic being that has ever existed came from a common ancestor (macroevolution), how is it that there is no evidence within the fossils record to support this claim?

Alter2Ego

________________
"That people may know that you, whose name is JEHOVAH, you alone are the Most High over all the earth." ~ Psalms 83:18

[Jack]

1. Good Question. As of now, no one knows.
2. The current view is that we evolved from numerous hominids. Non sub-saharan Homo Sapiens have traces of Neanderthal DNA. Probably many DNA strains of early hominids.
3. There's lots of fossils. Are you expecting a uniform and timely skeletal remains over a million years?

[Mason Michaels]

What separates man from animals is a man is a fusion between a flesh being and a spirit being.
The flesh evolved the spirit,was added in the Garden of Eden.

[Jack]

This might help.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/human-family-tree

[Grugore]

1. Good Question. As of now, no one knows.
2. The current view is that we evolved from numerous hominids. Non sub-saharan Homo Sapiens have traces of Neanderthal DNA. Probably many DNA strains of early hominids.
3. There's lots of fossils. Are you expecting a uniform and timely skeletal remains over a million years?

There is not one single undisputed transitional fossil. That is a fact. Ask any scientist. They'll tell you the same thing.

[MAGA MAN]

Atheists are funny.

[Jack]

There is not one single undisputed transitional fossil. That is a fact. Ask any scientist. They'll tell you the same thing.

If you say so.

[Fentoine Lum]

There is not one single undisputed transitional fossil. That is a fact. Ask any scientist. They'll tell you the same thing.

Perhaps you could list the ones you've asked for clarity and disclosure.

[Fentoine Lum]

QUESTION 2: Humans are supposedly primates, and they supposedly came from the same common primate ancestor as primates such as apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas. So how is it that there is not so much as one single fossil showing the transitions among humans, apes, chimpanzees, and gorillas from this supposed common primate ancestor?

Hang out and interact with some of our posters here.