Evolution theory doesn't make sense.
Of the many fields of science which I am in agreement with there are a few questionable things which always seem to take the forefront of the political and social infrastructure. Such controversies have arisen throughout the pages of history which some modern thinkers feel tend to stifle the progress of human development in this most important arena of education. But I see an ulterior motive attached to the gallant assertions of our atheist cousins in the homosapien genus.
The progression of thought
The theory of evolution leads the average person to believe that a species evolves slowly over millions of years, yet there is a fatal flaw in this design. We have this unreliable method of figuring out just how old something or someone is through the use of carbon dating technology. So when archaeologists dig up something that has no possible way of figuring out an estimated date of origin they use carbon dating as a means of backup in order to create the illusion of the modern day all knowing answers for everything science. This is a clever example of scientists using their assumptions to dictate their conclusions. (which is ironic because atheist scientists accuse religious people of doing the same thing.)
It does seem better, for some reason, for them to declare that this object in our possession is twenty five million years old! when in reality they don't have a clue. So when they find an unidentified body they naturally assume, based on the unrecognizable style of clothing, and primitive hand tools, it correlates with their carbonated shot in the dark.
Now we have writings which date back to 3000 BC. The first written language known as Cuneiform, invented in Sumer.
So we have the slow and methodical development of the human mind getting smarter and smarter over millions of years with no real proof of written language. Then all of a sudden people learn to write, and then over a period of a mere seven thousand years people begin to build large societies, and work together in agriculture. Then cities are built, large complex buildings, and advancements in knowledge of metals and alloys explode everywhere, weapons get more and more complex, we go from throwing spears to building nuclear warheads.
Transportation advances carry mankind across continents in years, months, weeks, and down to hours, even to the point where people have journeyed on space missions. Communication goes from primitive Epistles, to letters, books, E-mail, and twitter to anyone everywhere.
The exponential growth of the human mind over the last seven thousand years blows the notion of slow multi million year development of human thought out of the water, unless by some unexplainable theory, a tiny piece of their minds suddenly spurted out an extra five inches of nerve endings that magically turned on the lights for everyone, everywhere, and for no reason at all, they were all able to sit down with a chisel and stone and start writing poetry in the form of religious assertions.
Survival of the fittest?
This is an expression which was originally made by Herbert Spencer, But the entire concept poses a large contradiction. My question is, why does natural selection work in favor of the human species despite it's overwhelming frailties?
In nature we can see several examples of the strong surviving. The weak members of the herd are left behind to be devoured by predators. In most of the animal kingdom a baby is born, and within moments it is up and running, and ready to fend for its self on a level that a human baby could never hope to accomplish.
In contrast the average homosapien infant doesn't learn how to walk for an entire year. And during that period, and for many more years they are at the complete mercy of the parents. If they are left alone for any small period of time there is no possibility of them being able to do a single thing to maintain their own life, none whatsoever.
Given the fact that humans are born without speed, agility, or natural predatory or defensive abilities, it is quite the phenomena that out of shear coincidence, or divine providence, the human race ever had a chance at being among the elite of the "natural selection" process.
so how is it that humans who supposedly evolved from Apes, during infancy, have such a big contrast in their abilities? A baby human could never do this.
How is it possible that the Earth slowly comes into existence, and all life comes from some puddle of goo that was struck by lightning, and somehow all the cells in all the ponds of goo in the world grew into a bunch of diverse creatures, and yet nothing comes close to possessing the kind of brain activity that humans do?
Are we to believe that humans are so randomly fortunate to have been struck by lightning at the right angle with the exact amount of force it takes in order for us to have come out with advanced bodies and minds, with the capability to think, build, hunt, communicate, and so forth, while other species on the Earth advance no further than that of a dung beetle. In my opinion, it seems only logical in order for us to maintain an evolutionary standard of thinking, everything should have a frontal lobe, and all manner of different species should have been competing with us in the space race.
The religion of Evolution
The more people I encounter who subscribe to evolution as a plausible explanation for the beginning of the human species, the more I see common ground between atheists and the religious. The underlying aspect is the vehement defense of their beliefs, and the need to debunk outside ideologies in order to prove that they are right. There are those who go to great lengths acting as apologists in defense of their faith, all the while mocking, and ridiculing any naysayers.
Lastly the most perplexing of all is the assertion of moral superiority. For some reason this matters a great deal to the Atheist who is trying to convert the believer. Why should morality mean anything to us if we just came from a pile of goo, and are destined to become nothing more than food for worms?
In my mind Evolution theory is nothing more than militant atheism in disguise. It is being pushed into the schools by atheists because they know, despite the fact that there is no plausible application for this theory, it is a damaging antithesis to the foundations of religion.