What is it with all this harping on evolution?? Only Biblical literalists are this concerned about it, because everyone else doesn't see the problem.
And why is chance such a horrible thing? We are the result of a chance encounter between one of many thousands of our mother's eggs, and millions of sperm from each sexual act with our father, adding up to one of billions of total sperm cells. If they had had sex in a different position on that fateful night that we were each conceived, or an hour afterwards, someone else would be standing here in our place, with a different configuration of genes. So what? Is there supposed to be something special about us now here today? There isn't. We are all of us supremely average and insignificant in the grand cosmic scheme of things.
And yes, we are still evolving. And as I stated before, the last time the anthropic principle was evoked, we evolve to suit the environment, not the other way around. If we didn't fit the environment we live in well enough, we'd all be dead. And when climate change runs amok, theists will suddenly discover that this particular argument just doesn't work so well.
The next one is about evolution, too, so let's get it out of the way while we're at it...
#48 Could it possibly be that the missing link does not exist?
Actually, no. Because hundreds of "missing links" have been found over the last century-and-a-half, and each and every time, creationist ran around like chickens with their heads cut off demanding that we now bridge the two new gaps created by filling in the middle of the old one. The fact that we can't reproduce the generation by generation record of individual mutations that led from anaroebic bacteria to humans is not necessary to firmly establish that evolution occurred and is occurring. The DNA proves it far better than the fossil record, and the fossil record does a pretty good job.
This particular argument has everything to do with moving the goal posts and nothing whatever to do with openminded inquiry into whether evolution is really true or not. No evidence will ever satisfy a creationist, because we will just go back to saying that Satan put the evidence there to deceive us.
And as I've previously pointed out, a question is not a proof of anything. And neither does evolution particularly have any relevance to the question of the general existence of god, only the existence of a particular god (at least in some incarnations thereof). I'm forced to wonder, for instance, if followers of Shiva give a rat's ass about missing links.