Evolution theory, fact or fantasy?

Theory of evolution has nothing to do with the big bang and nothing to do with aboigenesis. Hopefully you're a kid. If not, your education has failed you I'm afraid.

Wow, this is almost physically painful to read. It's difficult to get so much wrong in just one sentence.

I guess the simplest thing to say would be there are Christians who understand evolution. I don't say "believe evolution" because it's not a matter of faith, it's a matter of education.

On the subject of knoweldge, we don't know everything but we do know some things. Bottom line, you gain knoweldge through logic, not through belief.

There's certainly (much) more to life than this, but if it's knowledge you're after...

I believe that the theory of evolution is true,however you can gain knowledge by revelation.You know,a friend tells you a secret....

Ok, and maybe the friend gained it from a friend.

Trace it all the way back though, and someone had to gain it from their head (probably combined with observation of course).

Sure, they would say they gained their knoweldge from God.

What I dislike though is saying we're imperfect, so why bother to try to learn anything anyway, all you need is faith that these things are true.

We're imperfect, but we CAN gain knoweldge with out minds alone.

Which is more scientific, "I believe that in the beginning dirt exploded and turned into solar systems planets and people", or to say, " I believe that a loving creator designed us with purpose, and destiny, and wants us to know him"? Evolution is by definition a religion, so don't get mad at me.

WHAT, the entire purpose of evolution is to explain the "Origin of Species", if I may quote Darwin. so it is a theory of origins, and nothing more, as it cannot be proven. 

And who gave me my supernatural ability to understand theoretical physics even though no one ever taught me? was it natural selection, mutation, or some other random "whoops"?

Ok so, here I am again mentioning that evolution is not the big bang and is not abiogenesis.

If evolution is "by definition a religion" why doesn't the government give it tax breaks like it does to real religious institutions

---

But seriously, you want to phrase the red highlighted part "what is more scientific" ? Obviously science is more scientific. Maybe you wanted to say which is more logical? Even then, of course, religion is not logical. It feels a lot nicer, but it's faith based, not logic based.

Maybe what you really wanted to say is which serves as a better basis for society... to believe people have inherent worth, or our lives are meaningless. This challenges the ideas of science on a practical and moral level.

First of all, people would still be nice to eachother. Not only is it in our best interest (it's logical) but empathy means when we imagine doing harm to someone (or see harm done to someone) it's as if it's done to us and we don't like it. Totally natural, comes from the brain, no spirits necessary.

Secondly, you can make an argument that a materialistic world view gives us MORE intrinsic worth. Instead of our morality, justice, courage, love, etc coming from outside of us (from God) we would believe that we have it within ourselves. Things would be moral or beautiful because we really see them that way, not because it's been arbitrarily dictated as such from a book.

Yes, the origin all the way back to, but not including, the first form of life.

Don't you mean who or what? Because it doesn't necessarily have to be a who.

Intelligence was naturally selected for because it was beneficial to survival. Being way smarter than animals had the unintended side effect of understanding physics

What I mean is this. (no bragging intended). Something or someone gave me the ability to understand and apply physics long before I started reading about it. I came up with my own Grand Unification Theory before I even read that on was needed.

My point is that according to the definition provided in Webster's dictionary, evolution is a religion. It isn't science. To be truly scientific, an idea must be observable, repeatable, and explainable. Which of these qualities defines evolution best? that's right, none.  Therefore, evolution remains (whether evolutionists like it or not) by definition a theory of origins, and nothing more. 

Evolution has a lot of different things going on. Micro evolution and natural selection are observed in labs and elsewhere every day. 

So yes, it's observable, testable, and repeatable.

For the last one I think you mean falsifiable? Yes, evolution is falsifiable. If we saw new species spring up seemingly from nowhere, or disappear and come back with big changes. Or if we saw fitter species die off then that would disprove evolution.

 No, for one it's used in medicine all the time. Vaccines (viruses evolve) and antibiotics (bacteria become resistant to antibiotics).

That's great. Publish your ideas for others to read them and it will help advance all of human civilization.