[MrL_JaKiri]

Originally Posted by Travler

We still don't fully understand how gravity works.

How it works is distinct from whether or not it exists. Gravity, to the level of detail we can measure it, exists. Evolution, similarly, exists.

Originally Posted by Travler

It is a distortion in the fabric of space or some kind of magnetic attraction?

Magnetic attraction is a different phenomenon, and not really a relevent topic. However, I would be delighted to debate with you the metaphysics of gravity.

Originally Posted by Travler

Evolution is taking the fact that living things adapt and calling a series of adaptions evolution.

Just like gravity is taking the fact that masses attract eachother and calling it gravity. It's a name, it's an abstract concept.

Furthermore, unless the word "evolution" is some major blasphemy which I have been hitherto not been made aware of, it is the substance of the premise rather than the name that is objected to.

Originally Posted by Travler

It's like the old joke that says "If Man evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?"

Originally Posted by Travler

Why is there only one fossile called "Lucy" of the so-called missing link?

The fossil record is formed from a series of extremely unlikely events. The amount of evidence we have for many things is based entirely on luck; as it happens, we have a good account of the evolution of humans. Furthermore, your argument based upon this is fairly typical of people who deride the sciences; because we miss one link in the chain, a link that the failure of which to be observed is purely based upon chance rather than absence, the entire chain does not exist.

I have pictures of me when I was 6 feet tall and when I was 5 feet tall; it doesn't imply that there is no connection between the pictures, or that I suddenly grew a foot in height.

Originally Posted by Travler

I don't fully agree with everything about ID but I do believe that creatures that exist on our planet and in our universe are not random.

Then why does all the evidence, especially on a genetic level, suggest that they are random?

[quote=TravlerBeyond a few proteins, amino acids, peptides, and enzymes I highly doubt that a full strand of DNA could be assembled from random.[/QUOTE]

Want a method? Look up the RNA World Hypothesis. No, it's not generally accepted, but that's because science requires evidence. Nevertheless, the debate is not over whether it was done, but how it was done, another distinction that ID proponents often ignore.