B4iendu said:
okay in order
1. Who?
2. Show me the real evidence then.
3. If we do then show them to me.
4. Out of the centuries of recorded history monkeys or any other creature for that matter has not shown signs of physical evolution. Note I mean a physical metamorphosis not traits acquired from adaptation, there is a difference between these. A monkey is a monkey 500 years ago and longer.
5. Breading, evolving into there next stage, or dying off from ceasing to be the dominant species on the planet, etc.
6. I realize this, I was just using those two as an example. My point though, is that the basis of evolution is founded on the fact that a smaller simpler life form grows into a bigger more complex one. Then what i ask made the smallest organism? You have no answer. No one does , in the realm of scientific theory that is.
7. skimming through some of those articles, and so far no proof.
In closing there are a several cases, in all walks off life, where life is too complex to have evolved into these traits. Want an example? Look up the biology of the giraffe. You'll see what I mean. (I know this last part is worded a little poorly, but if you want me to elaborate just ask)
1. a creationist crack-pot who regularly preaches about evolution using the EXACT same arguments as yourself. He is internationally mocked by the scientific community and no one who understands what evolution actually is and says takes him seriously at all.
2. Pick any animal you want. Also, before we start down that road, define what you want evidence of. Do you want it of new species forming, past evolution of current species, use of the theory in various scientific feilds (this being, how the theory is required to exist to do things like deal with bacteria or make new strains of crops be resistant to bugs). Or are you going to choose something stupid like asking for evidence of one animal turning into another, because I'll be honest, pokemon is not an example of evolution in the real world.
3. Go to google. Type "transitional fossils". Learn.
4. Bullshit! Human beings are showing signs of evolution. EVERY living creature is showing signs of evolution. Do you even know what evolution ACTUALLY is? This is just retarded. No one says species metamorphosis into other ones. That is not evolution. Evolution of a species is roughly the accumulation of variating traits in a population of species to the point it is no longer the same species/can't reproduce with the original species to create viable offspring. those traits you mention, you know, from adaption? THEY ARE EVOLUTION DUMBASS! See, evolution is a process that is constantly going so long as the living things are reproducing. A trait that is propagated because of adaption and natural selection is an example of evolution. You seem to have an idea of scale that is required to be met before it is evolution. That is wrong, it is all part of evolution. To think otherwise is like saying you don't believe in miles but you believe inches. Evolution in this case is the measuring of distance, it encompasses inches, miles and everything in between.
5. Evolution makes no claim a species needs to die off or change. Gators and sharks have been pretty similar to how they were millions of years ago. Some species just don't have as much pressure to change so they remain largely unchanged since mutations would not give one portion of the population a distinct advantage compared to the rest. also, you can get evolutionary change in a segment of the population whole the rest remains the same. This happens if part of the population is isolated, for example. Look at human skin pigmentation, and how it is based on the geographical area the people's ancestors hail from.
6. Actually, you are just wrong and don't really understand what the theory actually says. Though if you want to know the simplest organisms, that would be self replicating chains of protein, I believe. If you are actually interested (and not just trying desperately to misrepresent the actual theory with attempted straw-men made of lack of understanding and failure to learn), well, look up abiogenisis. It is the theory about the orgin of life. Evolution only deals with life after it started up.
7.That is because you don't understand the idea to begin with. Start with something easier, like 3rd grade science and get a feel for what the theory ACTUALLY says before you try to insist it isn't true. That is not meant to be a jab (already plenty here to go around), but a simple statement of wisdom. Start with the basics, undertsand what they say and imply and grow from there. Coming in from the top and trying to ask questions about specific rules when you don't understand the basics is just asking to be mocked and rightfully so. Because what I see here is someone going "well, I think it works this way, and since I what I think is ridiculous, the theory itself must be". Go, learn before you make a fool of yourself more. For the good of the people, go.
Giraffe evolution in a nut shell- a smaller shorter mammal who due to an environment that was changing as well, adapted over generations by allowing the species with the longest necks to survive where as the others would die out. Being able to reach higher and higher sources of food gave them an advantage over their peers so that trait was selected for. Give a couple millions years and countless generations of such selection and there you go, a long necked animal that looks rediculous.
Since people were saying it before, I think I'll put my opinion on it here.
Evolution is a theory and a fact. A theory, a scientific one at least, is an explanation of countless amounts of gathered data and tested hypothesizes. New traits form from mutation? that is a fact. Certain traits increase survivability? That's a fact. Over time, the number and variety of traits and lead to new species? That's a fact. That last one is also a definition used for evolution. The theory itself explains all these facts and is rigorously tested to make sure the explanation matches every case out there. The giraffe? been explained by evolution. The bacteria phalanges? Yup. The human eyeball? You betcha.
Think of it this way, gravity is the process in which mass pulls on things, while the theory attempts to explain the whys and hows of the matter. Evolution is the same way, the process of evolution is an observable fact, where as the theory explains why the process happens.
Honestly, I don't think people understand what they imply when they try to make up bullshit about evolution. What they are essentially saying is they are smarter then every single scientist in the field who would jump on this for the fame and recognition if they could disprove evolution and that there is a massive conspiracy that leads the theory to be used and verified in a plethora of scientific fields, relied on for a number of aspects the western world takes for granted.
the theory has been described as the single most tested and reliant theory made to date.
The fact so many people protest it, especially when they don't know what the hell they are actually arguing against is just saddening.
