After all isn't evolution the opposite of faith? Well, not so fast; let's take a look at this 'non-faith' theory. If you ever find yourself in the midst of a debate with a hard-core evolutionist, you will see that they place themselves on the pedestal of "science," while you're relegated to the status of believing in "superstition." (I prefer 'supernaturalism' over 'superstition,' but they insist on the pejorative term for its obvious negative connotation.
Besides, if you can make your opponent in a debate look the part of the idiot…you have partially won). Terminology aside, let's take a closer look at this 'science.' When I was in high school I was taught that science worked something like this: you observe some phenomenon in nature, form a theory to explain the phenomenon, test the theory, evaluate the data, if necessary modify the theory, and begin again. For any scientific theory to 'evolve' into fact, your conclusions must be verifiable. In other words, if your experiment works only in your garage…it probably doesn't work at all.
So what is the theory of evolution and how does it hold up to the data? Now forgive the laymen's terminology…I am not a scientist. Evolution says this, a long time ago it rained on a rock, or a rock fell into some mud, and then the rock or the mud or something like that became alive. Bear with me here, I know that in itself this sounds…suspect.
I recall as a child some cleaver entrepreneur said on T.V. he had found living rocks, in fact for a few meager dollars you could send away and receive your own living rock. I know the entire thing smacks of the kings' new clothes. Nevertheless, I digress. So this rock/mud became alive. The question is "how?" Well, in the scientific community there is no consensus.
Recently, some of the best and brightest have suggested…hold on for this one, 'space aliens.' Space aliens, not only rescue failing sitcoms on television, they also save endangered theories. Yes, space aliens 'planted' the living rock/mud.
Let's move on despite the fact that this seems to fail the 'sniff-test.' The next leap is to say that this rock/mud became a fish, which became a lizard, which became a cow…and you guessed it, your great uncle (the hairy one) in support of your childhood impressions, was in fact a monkey.
Again, is there data to support this? Well, no not really. The science actually says that this idea is quite improbable; according to the fossil record there is a little hiccup. Not only are there no indisputable missing links (despite your great uncle) but also it appears that all the creatures on earth, sort of just appeared overnight 'geologically speaking' in what is known as the Cambrian-Explosion.
And how, pray tell, does a cow become a monkey? Answer: mutations. Despite the fact that mutations are always detrimental to any living being, this nevertheless is the mechanism, the 'savior' of evolution. The theory of evolution is this: there was nothing, then nothing became something, then that something became everything. The only ingredient necessary to make this theory float…a large dose of faith.