It's amazing to hear most people speak of the Theory of Evolution as if it were a Law. Scientists have found bone fragments from Aust. Afarensis, Aust. Gigantus, Homo Habilis, Homo Sapien-Sapien, etc.

But it seems that no one finds things that are between species. Isn't that odd?

If A morphs into B, wouldn't we find more A.1, A.2, A.3... than either A.0 or B.0?

And this theory doesn't even make sense on the face. For example, the theory says that certain species have qualities about them that enable them to "win out" over their rival species. So, then we say, well what are those qualities. We look at the ones that survive and say, "Yes, these are the qualities."

So basically, the theory of evolution says the ones that survive are the ones who have the qualities of the ones that survived.

This is a tautology. It means nothing.

But find anyone who tries to go against this Theory-cum-Law and they are cast as the anti-scientist.

No proof of evolution exists. It's just a matter of opinion.

The fact that the fossil record indicates that many life forms have become extinct does not support evolution. The fossil record just proves that many life forms have become extinct. The idea that some of the life forms are similar in some ways is not surprising. However, this similarity does not mean one is the progenitor of the other.

The problem is that most people carry the theory of evolution to an extreme. Like the autobiogenisis idea and the idea that evolution is always toward a better more complex animal.

Autobiogenisis is against the natural laws of this particular universe. Autobiogenisis requires that organic life, the most organized matter in our universe, originated from less organized matter. This idea is not science but rather is wishful thinking.

Autobiogenisis by random chance would require more time than a few billions of years. This is why the world of science is clutching desparately at the notion that life must have come from outer space. But even with this "pie in the sky" idea there is not sufficient time involved to turn chaos into life. The everything from nothing or "big bang" idea doesn't help evolution it just adds to the wishful thinking.

The idea that the theory of evolution dictates that as organisms evolve they gain complexity is just plain not contained in the theory. Evolution theory says that as the environment changes the oganisims evolve adaptations and the best adaptation survives. This does not mean that this adaptation is more complex but rather only better for suvival in that particular environment.

The missing link debates are premature at this point because the theory of evolution has so far failed to justify it's own exsistance, scientifically.