How else would they come to be?
people making them? Really, man? I know it uses the word "law", but it is not the same thing. It is not a decree, or legislation. It is a mathematical model of how the universe functions.
And if someone "made it", how is that dependent on whether it can be broken or not?
And that is an argument from ignorance. "I dunno the answer, so GODDIDIT!"
The universe most certainly does function according to laws though.
not in the way you used above. You used the terms as if it were a piece of contrived legislation. It is unfortunate that the community of people who are literalist xians do dishonestly use scientific words and attempt to apply colloquial meanings to them interchangeably.
Do you know the difference between the meanings of "velocity" when used in scientific and everyday contexts?
if the universe does not operate according to laws, then you are saying that I might throw a ball into the air and it might just stay suspended in mid-air one day.
No, that is not what I am saying and I have no idea how you derived that. You are not answering the questions or addressing the points. You are side-stepping the conversation. I don't know if that is your intent or if you simply don't understand what is being said.
Is that the road you want to drive down? That is a long and winding road filled with 3 feet deep potholes.
skep, please don't kid yourself. Your arguments are not scary or intimidating in the least. You are not the smartest or most knowledgeable person in the room.
Evolution also doesn't explain why birds evolved wings and humans didn't.
Yes it does. It very clearly explains it. I'm not going to explain it because it is a lot of work you
should have done before
You do this all the time, skep, and frankly, it is not acceptable. You shoot off your mouth without educating yourself in the least on topics that are relatively easy to research. It is lazy and inexcusable.
I can imagine wings would be pretty advantageous for humans.
sure it would. So would shooting lasers out of our eyes. But evolution is not a buffet where we get to pick traits simply because they happened to be advantageous. That is not how it works. You should know that by now.
I am VERY skeptical of that study. For instance, there are 2 billion children in the world and only 66 participated in the study. Is it scientific to take the results of a test of 66 children and project it onto 2 billion children? That seems very absurd to me.
Aaaand here we have skep shooting off his mouth, yet again, without having the vaguest clue as to what he's talking about.
See? This is where evolution becomes unbelievable. All of these species all with different features and nobody has any clue as to why these new features would even start evolving. Think of all the different features of all the sea creatures. Yet, they all live in the ocean. The ocean is the ocean, so what factors influenced those creatures to start evolving all these traits willy-nilly?
The forest is the forest so why did gorillas turn black while the orangutan is practically redish/orangeish?
This is where we get down to the tough questions.
did you do anything at all to try to find answers to any of these questions? If not, STFU.