Thread:TheSquidychicken/@comment-31308946-20170525193032/@comment-32211498-20170605185527

@LysurusPeriphragmoides789   all scientific facts are interpreted from a presuppositional worldview. Ours happens to be that the Bible is absolutly true, and yours seems to be that evolution is absolutely true. When you say, " we find organisms in different layers, with more complex organisms present in more recent layers, with the more ancient ones containing only very simple ones"  a quick internet search yields these sources:  http://discovermagazine.com/1993/jun/onwardandupward235 , https://phys.org/news/2012-10-complex-brains-evolved-earlier-previously.html , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion. As soon as something is discovered that disagrees with mainstream belief of macroevolution the first thought is not that evolution could be wrong because it is assumed to be correct before the information is interpreted.

As for the "fact" evolution (by which I mean macroevolution), how to do you explain the lack of transitional forms? Or can you explain how mutations can increase complexity of an organism when the most common mutations actually cause a loss of information (e.g. deletions, point mutations, nonsense mutations).

P.S. I could have found countless creation sources but I chose to use secular ones to prove my point