Evolution:
That in billions of years something can go from soup to humans and animals. That something can be created from nothing with no cause. Natural selection in addition to mutations will be able to increase the information contained in DNA. Random processes can make amino acids.
That is what I see evolution as.
Will someone explain how you can randomly make amino acids in a chemical soup? You can't have them floating by themselves because they quickly degrade in that kind of environment.
Will someone explain how you get proteins folded the right way? Especially, when you need a biological process that uses the said folded proteins to make more folded proteins of the same type.
I have a question. Does something else have to be proven right for evolution to be wrong? Not just, it needs extra clarification, but the whole theory to be wrong?
Here is a good quote that explains evolution
"
Darwin's Law [2] of Evolution by Natural Selection (traditionally referred to as a "
theory"
to honor Darwin's original treatise, but now confirmed through observation and experiment) consists of five main tenets. First, he describes how species can change in shape and character through selective breeding. No reasonable person, whether creationist or scientist, doubts selective breeding can morph a wolf into a pony-sized mastiff. Or evolve the same wild animal into a comically shrunk, rat-sized Chihuahua. Second, he describes how species are neither completely uniform nor immutable, and how these natural variations are the grist upon which human selective breeding grinds. Once a new characteristic is established, these variations persist from generation to generation, and are systematically and predictably passed from parent to child. Again, all but the most radical creationists accepts these facts, widely employed since the birth of animal husbandry and agriculture [3] . Third, he recognized that Nature, through selective pressures like environmental shifts or changes in predation, can play the role of humans in selective breeding. Whether man selects a long-haired dog for its appearance, or colder winters favor the survival of thick furred over short-haired canines, the result is identical. Again, the power of evolution by Natural Selection is confirmed though field work (such as Darwin's finches), genetic mapping, and the experience of anyone who chooses to listen openly to nature."
http://www.genuineideas.com/ArticlesIndex/Darwin.htm
Problem is that I have no problem with any of this. I have a problem with the thought that one species could become another. That a bat could become a mouse. (Or the other way around, I don't actually know what it said to be)
Lastly, are you including switches as mutations? Because that is not actually changing the information that is actually there. It just changes what the cell uses.
____________________________
Last night upon a stair
I met a man that wasn't there
He wasn't there again today
I wish that man would stay away