>Hi Jim,
>
>Both are beliefs and not based entirely on proven facts. Neither belief corresponds to any actual perceivable, observable, or verifiable tangible evidence. Each person basically has to decide for themselves which to believe.
>
>I lean toward the theory of evolution myself. However, a problem with it is the lack of fossil records for the hypothetical intermediate species which must have appeared and disappeared so quickly that no fossils were left. Also, I believe that scientists have failed to prove with experiments that mutations have positive results and cause a step in the evolution ladder (a requirement for the evolution theory). Just the opposite has occurred in fact, right? So far testing has only proven that mutations have negative reactions.
>
>Still the possibility of the worlds simply appearing out of nothingness requires a huge leap of faith... :o)


If I had one question I like someone to answer is, how did the simple molecules like RNA and DNA (which are actually not so simple), once formed how did they stay intact while waiting for the next big mutation happen. RNA and DNA are very unstable outside of their protective cell walls. They degenerate very quickly. Then some how these things gathered all the neccessary elements required and formed a "simple" cell.