Evolutionists, how come animals have not evolved to fly around outer space outside the atmosphere of Earth?

Umm..


Organic organisms on EARTH require some sort of air to breathe, wether it be oxygen, cardon dioxide, methane, etc...


There probably is some type of organism out there that can survive purely on the energy from the sun but we have yet to find them.

Evolution is pure FACT.

The Earth was not created 5,000 years ago.


Creationists need to get over their outdated religious indoctrination, and wake up to the REAL WORLD.


Thank you for reading!

Because in the outter space there is no air, no water, no food, temperatures are freezing, and gravity is zero.

What purpose would that serve?

2 words: Water Bear

Well, but maybe there are giant space protoza in the outter space.


Look at this video:




Pay attention to what happens between 2:49 and 2:52


Giant space protoza?

Completely agree, more than likely they did not originate on Earth, so it wouldn't constitute the question posed by Opie.


I have no doubt that life can come in many different forms and variations.

Why would they even need to? And Im not an evolutionist (or really just dont know whether its true or not) but that the best you got?

but sure;y in the billions of years of existence of the universe something should have evolved to live in such conditions if evolution was true

We don't know "something" hasn't.

We've only explored the most tiny fraction of space.

Sure there's none we can see around here, but Earth is pretty good for it's organisms in general, there's no reason for them to evolve into spacefaring creatures... but that lack of space faring creatures here does not mean there are none somewhere else in the universe.

there isn't much food in space

How can something live with no food, no water, and no air?

The species could have evolved to survive on light and radiation from the sun only?

OP you're just trolling right? Please, PLEASE tell me you're trolling...

Its (remotely) possible that something, somewhere, in the universe has done so. I doubt it has happened, but I will not rule it out.

That doesn't mean it had to happen on Earth. And why would animals here on Earth evolve that capability? There's no reason for it. They have all the elements necessary for higher life to thrive right here. There's no reason for them to adapt to live in such an inhospitable place as space when all of the requirements for life are available in huge quantities where they already are.

Thread: Christians Sounding Real Smrt.

well,a few years back they made cameras strong enough to survive the pressure deep under the ocean,where science said nothing could live in the intense sulpher plumes,guess what?teaming with odd lifeforms.so how on earth to be so closed minded that nothing has adapted to a vacume,is even in our visible spectrum,is just mega stupid

What about these "animals" ? Or don't we count.

[link to www.nasa.gov]

I think it is interesting that Darwin started out as a minister in the Church of England.

If you read his early work "The variation of animals and plants under domestication" it seems evident that he believed in creation.

His original argument in that work was basically:

"As the first origin of life on this earth, as well as the continued life of each individual, is at present quite beyond the scope of science, I do not wish to lay much stress on the greater simplicity of the view of a few forms, or of only one form, having been originally created, instead of innumerable miraculous creations having been necessary at innumerable periods."

Relating this to Dogs for example. God did not create independent of one another all of the various breeds of Dogs that we see today. God did not individually create the Yorkshire Terrier, Old English Sheepdog, Neapolitan Mastiff, Miniature Poodle, Greyhound, Dachshund, Shar-Pei, Bulldog etc. as independent acts of creation, right ? Though if seen in the wild, many of these breeds would not be recognized as the same animal.

That is, or was, about as far as Darwin's original argument went.

Either 1) "a few forms, or of only one form, having been originally created"

Or 2) "innumerable miraculous creations having been necessary at innumerable periods."

Personally I favor #2) "innumerable miraculous creations having been necessary at innumerable periods."

In other words, every new breed of animal or plant is a new creation. God is immanent and active in the world, even today. It takes some kind of creative genius to develop a new variety of plant or animal form. In other words, we are co-creators with God.

And you think this is a valid question with which you can smugly discredit evolution?

Really?

They do, they are called airplanes.

I've seen loads of them.

They do, they are called airplanes.

I've seen loads of them.

It is simple really, evolution is adapting to survive.

There is no need to adapt to upper atmospheric conditions for survival.

Spermatozoa in space!

quite possibly there is we just have not encountered it
or recognised it.

personally i think both the strict bibletards and strict darwinidiots need a good slap around the head to wake them
up to the real truth and yes its somewhere inbetween.

The ones who did have flown the fuck away he smart ass.

if you consider this to be a valid question, then you need to go do some reading

not your bible

...nice try friend, I see you are looking to win the dummest question on earth competition...but rest assured their are some who will beat and surpass your effort.

There are organisms that can strive in space or in magma, but ask yourself this..

What on Earth is the point? If a bird could evolve to fly around in space... wtf is the point, theres nothing to eat there.

Just when I thought religitards couldn`t
get any dummer.

then BAMB

A form of mental illness???? huh?