lost,,,not knowing where they came from.evolution only has theories

even darwin said all he had was a theory

Well, evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts do not go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's, but apples did not suspend themselves in mid-air, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from apelike ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other, yet to be discovered.

Moreover, "fact" does not mean "absolute certainty." The final proofs of logic and mathematics flow deductively from stated premises and achieve certainty only because they are not about the empirical world. Evolutionists make no claim for perpetual truth, though creationists often do (and then attack us for a style of argument that they themselves favor). In science, "fact" can only mean "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." I suppose that apples might start to rise tomorrow, but the possibility does not merit equal time in physics classrooms.

~ Stephen Jay Gould

Perhaps the most misunderstood term is scientific theory. To many non scientists, a theory is nothing more than an idea, a guess, a belief, or a hypothesis. To a scientist, however, a theory is one of the most powerful statements that science can make about how the natural world works. A scientific theory is a logical and unifying structure of ideas that accounts for a large body of observations and, therefore, explains something important about nature. Examples are the theories of special and general relativity, the theory of evolution, and the theory of plate tectonics. Much of physics does not make any sense unless viewed within the framework of relativity. The theory of evolution and the theory of plate tectonics have the same importance to biology and geology, respectively. A theory is the closest that science can come to the "truth." This is why scientists were so upset when President Ronald Reagan said that evolution was "only a theory." He was equating an important scientific theory, for which there is convincing evidence and that is universally accepted by knowledgeable scientists, with a hypothesis or a guess, and he was dead wrong.

Despite the confidence scientists have in current theories and laws, none of them is absolutely guaranteed to endure. Science arrives at its description of nature by a series of increasingly better approximations. New findings may modify scientific facts, laws, and theories and lead to new and quite different conclusions from those previously thought to be true. Occasionally, when overwhelming evidence is brought to bear, a whole field of science may undergo a revolution of sorts a "paradigm shift." The discovery of atomic structure around the turn of the twentieth century did that for chemistry and physics, just as the discovery of plate tectonics in the 1960s did for geology and Charles Darwin's 1859 descent with modification, now known as the theory of evolution, did for biology.

~ G. Brent Dalrymple

A good theory will describe a large range of phenomena on the basis of a few simple postulates and will make definite predictions that can be tested. if the predictions agree with the observations, the theory survives that test, although it can never be proved to be correct.'

Stephen Hawking

NO MAGIC, PLEASE

While the law of cause and effect encourages scientists to seek causative agents to explain the existence of observable effects, there are limitations on the kinds of explanations that are acceptable. A fundamental premise of sci­ence is that natural laws do not change with time. We presume that the laws describing the properties and behavior of matter and energy today operate everywhere in the Universe and have operated throughout the history of the Universe. Where scientists have in the past thought that some anomaly was defying the laws, they later learned that they had not been examining the anomaly properly or that the original law was inadequate—and then under­standing of the scientific law changed accordingly.

If natural laws are constant and predictable, then it follows that supernat­ural agents may not be invoked in science; magic, witchcraft, or intervention by a supreme being are excluded as possible causes. This does not mean that a supreme being does not exist or that Earth was not created by some miraculous event, only that such an explanation is forbidden in the world of sci­ence. Why is this? If science were not restricted to natural explanations, there would be little reason to seek them, for everything could instead be explained easily by calling upon supernatural acts. Admittedly this would save a lot of effort and expense, but it would also result in a rather unpredictable and useless science. Science takes as one of its starting points the premise that nature is decipherable, and that it is reasonable and profitable to ask questions about the history of the Universe, including the age of Earth.

~ G. Brent Dalrymple

.
The existence of gods is an unsupported hypothesis or guess, whereas evolution is a hypothesis that has been tested millions of times by multiple lines of evidence, found to be supported and raised to the status of a scientific theory - which, let's remember, is the closest approach that can be made to final truth.

they have *there their opinion but since they were not there when the world just came about all they have is theories. so maybe they need mental help

To this day the issues surrounding the Burgess Shale fossils, also known as the Cambrian Explosion, have not been solved......

"While Stephen Jay Gould and others have claimed these Burgess Shale fossils are examples of “evolution in action,” they remain an enigma, a mystery in fact, to this day. Because the problem for evolutionists—and further study of these fossils has only intensified the problem—is how could all of these fossils, so many unique species, many in unique phyla with unique body plans, have so suddenly in a veritable geologic instant have evolved. This has been called the “Cambrian explosion,” which is a real problem for evolutionists, especially because of the complexity these fossils exhibit, when there are no known evolutionary precursors or suitable ancestors found in the rock layers beneath the Burgess Shale and its equivalents elsewhere around the globe. To this day this problem has not been solved. ~ Geologist Dr. Andrew Snelling

they have there opinion but since they were not there when the world just came about all they have is theories. so maybe they need mental help

they have there opinion but since they were not there when the world just came about all they have is theories. so maybe they need mental help

I don't know---
but think why all different languages
The Bible says Let us go down and confuse-make many languages so the humans can't work together
Why would Almighty G-d or gods be afraid of humankind being of one language IF
these gods or G-d were Almighty?