length: 701 words 2 double spaced pages many people in the world have claimed to find these missing links between animal and man. These finds are said to support evolution, but in turn all they do is put evolution down. Several examples of missing links are, piltdown man, neanderthal man, australopithecus, and homo erectus.

Based on this information scientists can actually measure how much the sun has shrunk. This means that they can tell how big the sun would have been at any certain time. So they now can tell that the moon is relatively young, because if it were billions of years old there would be a lot more dust on the moon than there is right now. Evolutionists have slipped up and said that the earth and moon are about the same age.

Best Thesis Topics for Psychology

They know the rate in which the magnetic strength decays, so they now can predict what it used to have been at any given point in time. So the said what if the earth was billions of years old, what would the magnetic field look like. Well it would be so strong that we would suck almost everything into us, somewhat like the sun. All of the evolutionists went crazy over this and thought that this was their big breakthrough as to how life evolved.

But scientists refute this claim because they can find no incident where a mutation is good. Evolutionists say everything about missing links oh there is missing links out there. If there were missing links the fossil record would show us the intermediate species.

Evolutions claim that there was a big bang and life was sort of kick started into existence. Another interesting thing scientists have found is that radioactive material after time gives off helium, which goes up into our atmosphere. They have found out the rate of the give off, and can calculate how much should be there if the earth is really billions of years old. Well if the earth was billions of years old then there would be a whole lot of helium in our atmosphere. There are 10 ways to put together dna, and all this could happen bye chance? yeah right. Scientists know how fossils develop, things have to be encased in some kind of dirt of silt and left for a long time to form into a rock. But how did these organisms get into the rocks? evolutionists cant really explain that, so the only other explanation that makes sense is a huge universal flood, as taught in the bible.

Why would you believe in one side of an argument when the majority of the evidence points to the other? evolution versus creationism has been a controversial issue for many years, and still is. Both sides have convincing arguments and good reasons why the other side 039 s opinion is not correct, but which theory is the more probable one? both theories have very different ideas. Creationists believe that concept and design require a creator, and when the principals of detecting design are applied to living organisms, they find it a reasonable explanation to believe in the existence of a creator or designer, or in other words, a higher power. Creationists generally believe that all organisms were created as single, distinct organisms, while evolutionists think that life started from single celled organisms such as bacteria, then evolved into complex organisms, changing over time, some even into different, distinct animals through evolution since c ontinuous evolution over a very long period of time can result in the development of new varieties and species. Creationists believe that organisms can adapt to their environment to an extent, but do not change so that over time they become completely different organisms than what they were created as.

In my opinion, evolution is the most probable theory considering what evidence has been found. Sedimentary rock allows scientists to study fossils in different layers of the rock, each layer holding fossils millions of years apart. Some extinct species that have been found have traits that are transitional between older species and newer organisms. In other words, the fossils show us intermediate species between the original one and the one that exists now, which supports the theory that organisms can evolve into an entirely different species.

Another reason evolution is more likely the correct theory is the similarities in all organisms on the planet, both chemically and anatomically. For example, amino acids are an example of how every living thing on earth is related. Every type of protein in every living thing is made up of the same 20 kinds of amino acids. This is true in both prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells, showing the relationship between single celled organisms bacteria and multi cellular organisms animals , which supports evolution 039 s idea that we evolved from single celled organisms. Many animals share the same types of body and bone structures, which could only mean that they inherited it from a common ancestor.

Creation Vs Evolution Essay Text

Best Thesis Topics for Psychology

Process of Doing a Research Paper