Here, I have a short story to share with you.

I just went to the beach, to go swimming right. So I was walking down to the water, I took off my shoes, and slowly waded into the water, eventually the water began to get deeper and I had to swim. I could no longer use my hands and feet to walk. I had to use them, more like flippers. Which is what anyone of us would have to do, unless you can walk on water.

Then I had to reverse the process to come ashore....

But it reminded me of how hard and painstakingly time consuming the evolutionary struggle is.

And I thought what if me and my friends could speed up that process by planting some prokaryotic plankton in the ocean to photosynthesize and increase the amount of oxygen in the atmosphere, creating a sustainable environment for carbon-based life forms who need oxygen to survive, like mammals.

As interesting as it is to see, we really just did it because we missed you so much and wanted to see you again. Your so adorable and naive, but thats what makes you so special.

Before I go, I just wanted to respond to Alberts comment about not being a very good designer.

Again Im terribly sorry if your not happy this way. More than anybody, I understand how hard this world can be for super-advanced people who are so far ahead of their time.... it does seem to make things much harder for them, but I really did the best I could do granted the materials I had to work with, and I can assure you I really dont enjoy watching people suffer.

Are you starting to understand why I feel this is something you have to learn on your own? Or at least something that maybe shouldnt be taught in school?

I mean really, what is best for our children. To learn that their Mom and Dad made them, God, or some evolutionary machine.....or all of the above?

I think it really comes down to how they learn and the way in which the material is presented.

"And God said, let us make man in our image, after our likeness...... ~ ......so God created man in his own image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them."

Doesn't carbon dating (which is at least fairly accurate) put fossils hundreds of millions of years in the past? I just need clarification on exactly what links fossils to the Great Flood.

I'm also pretty sure most evolutionists don't put protists as the first organisms. They are advanced. It was prokaryotes, bacteria without complex structure that put water vapor into the air with chemosynthesis and made the Earth habitable to other life once all sorts of mutation could occur. Even if that sounds unlikely at any one moment, remember that it would have taken bilions of years.

Carbon dating is ONLY accurate if you assume that the chemical reactions were occurring at a precise constant rate always forever. Obviously it would be completely inaccurate if all things were created by God, so carbon dating is a terrible argument as it only has merit if you believe that we were not created.

Evolutionists do believe that prokariotes were the first organisms, but they also believe that protists were the first multicellular organisms.

And Im, made of clay.

I fear I'm the only one who thinks this way.

That actually makes some sense, given their complexity. You'd need it to be multicellular.

There's no intermediate, though. You can't just go from 1 cell to thousands of specialized and complex cells just like that.

No, that's why you go from 1 celled to 2 to 3 to 4 and so on in that fashion till years later you've got us crazy humans

There is absolutely no evidence of that. It goes from unicellular bacteria to thousands-of-celled protists. Some Biologist (I think her name was Margulis) hypothesized something like that, but it hasn't gone anywhere because she pulled it out of her butt with no evidence.

CB922: Intermediate two-celled life

This link seems to deal with AJ's claim. I'm not quite sure either how a failure to find a transitional form between these two would mean that all of evolution is false.

I'd like to correct Ich Bin about saying Carbon Dating shows that life was around millions of years about because it seems that the results of this dating method are only accurate going back for about 50,000 years. Of course even 1/5 of that limit puts it above the limit for what most YEC think is the age of the earth. I believe that the earth age of at least 10,000+ years has been proven through the use of dendrochronology, which I think even most Creationists would not dispute.

The age of the earth being billions of years has other proof such as calculations with the light from distant stars reaching the earth and radiometric dating.

Again, only accurate under the assumption that those things have always been at a constant rate.