Evolution has no REAL proof and microevolution is not evolution. So why is it taught as fact?

Question

Fossils show no proof (you cant tell if it had kids) same with the geological collums. A small streem can sort sediment out in 5 minutes to make its own little geological collum. I havent even heard of anything that shows any proof of evolution at all. Becides there are six different types of evolution.
1.Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang. 2.Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen. 3.Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets. 4.Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter. 5.Macroevolution- Origin of major kinds.
6.Microevolution Variations within kinds- Only this one has been observed, the first five are religious. They are believed, by faith, even though there is no empirical evidence to prove them in any way. If you want to know more about it go to www.drdino.com then shopping, packages and get the blue series. He DESTROYS evolution. I dont advertise but what he has to say is worth it.

thanks for the input, just seeing what i'd get and yes I really suck at spelling....but you understood it :) Oh by the way micro evolution is adaptation. It really takes as much Faith to believe either. I appreciate the heckling but I hope you would check out drdino.com if you want to understand what I believe. Just to let you know, he backs everything he says with science. But be warned all ye hecklers....its a christian site (scarry) GOD be with you.

I was just asking to see what I would get and yes, I know MY truths.

Konthra7, thats what i'm talking about :)

freedomhammer, your attempt to make fun of me is entertaining in itself. My spelling shows no proof of any evolution. It shows deterioration. crazy old fool. dont waste space to make yourself look smart.

The only reason that all the "evidence" points to evolution is because thats all the evidence that they show you. Yes, my spelling and grammer sucks. Why do people still have to heckle me on that??? thats not the subject here. You still understand me so suck it up. If you look in text books they tell you that they know how the stars were and are formed but if you look in science journals they talk about how they are baffled because they have never seen a star even form let alone know how the universe was created. All you end up doing is looking at the "evidence" for eveolution when there is evidence for a young Earth all arround. You just turn a blind eye to it because you couldnt possibly understand the alternative and you dont want it either.

chuckleslovesjesus: dude, your statement is stupid. Read genesis. It took 6 literal days to make the earth and unless evolution took place in a few hours that would show evolution isnt in the bible. Unless you believe in the "Gap Theory" but then that makes GOD cruel and stupid. Plus its a complete abomination and heracy.

PI Joe, that quote best suits yourself if you haven't heard of chemical evolution. It has to do with the big bang. That little ball (that was nothing) that exploded was filled with hydrogen (and all the matter of the universe). Since the scientists say that hydrogen was the only element there, then all the other elements had to "evolve" from it. Oh yea, and fusion can only get you a little ways.

Answer 1

MicroEVOLUTION isn't evolution huh?

What sort of bizzare nonsense is this?

Next you'll be teling us that microeconomics isn't economics and that microsurgery isn't surgery.

Answer 2

Why is it that Believers and disbelievers so often come to verbal and ideological blows on the matter of creationism (belief in GOD) or Evolution? Does one really and necessarily cancel out the other? No. In fact, anyone with Real common sense could see that GOD is the greatest scientist of all time. He started it all, Bear with me a moment.
The problem most "scientists" have with creationism is that it requires Faith. Faith is by definition, "belief in things unseen." Science in its essence is about proving and verifying theories and results. The two almost seem to negate each other but they don't.
If you look at the facts....is this world, this galaxy, this universe perfectly balanced or not? It is. Every thing is perfectly aligned and in harmony with one another. The moon, the stars, the sun, our bodily cells, the atoms and sub atomic particles all running around each other in perfect harmony...held together by, among other things, gravity (something unseen but proveable). Doesn't that seem just a little odd to have happened if this all came from a random explosion and in a few billion years complex life....not to mention thought and conscienceness. There is a lot I want to say here, but have neither the space, time, or words to complete. I am merely trying to drop a seed of thought and faith.
If you look at recent developments in quantum physics, they are leaning toward creationism being more viable an explanation day after day. Quantum physics is showing that "thought" actually has a physical affect upon our world. In the beginning, God created the Heavens and the Earth. He spoke this into being....just as he said let there be "Light". If our science is proving that a simple man can think something and it changes the physical world.....why can there not be an all powerful being, GOD, that can simply create from the nothingness, and empty void all that we see and know to be true. It doesnt say he doesnt exist only that he is a great engineer. The bible says that man was created in GODS image...that means figuratively and literally. We posess what GOD has, we are a small part of him. If GOD can create with his mind than so can we. With that I am gonna wrap this....please respond if you like. Am willing to discuss this thoroughly and share my opinions.

Answer 3

Wow someone that is clearly uneducated not believing in evolution. What a shock. Try going back to school for spelling and grammar then enter a science class.

A scientific theory is not based on one piece of evidence but based on thousands, all leading to one conclusion without any proof going against it.

You can find evidence for macro evolution in fossils, dating, DNA (there are a few different kinds of DNA and they all prove towards evolution), same with RNA, geology, and within the species itself such as in vestigial structures.

You can find evidence for the Big Bang from the red shift effect, background radiation, and quasars.

Planetary evolution can be seen today with the help of telescopes. We are able to see star systems being born.

Atoms changing to form a different element has been seen many times and does occur naturally in nature. I have no idea where you got that we never seen chemical evolution.

Micro evolution is not from variations. A variation is a difference from one organism to another of the same species because of alleles. Micro evolution is an actual change in the genetic structure.

Please try learning these little things before saying something so stupid.

Answer 4

First of all, you are completely mixing your evolutions. Let's start by understanding that evolution as a word simply means changing over time. The definition usually implies a change to a more optimal condition over time.

This definition means very little when it comes to the theory of biological evolution often times called Darwinian evolution. When the word evolution is applied to biological change over time, which changes which are deemed optimal are determined by the environment and only the environment. We humans have little say in what evolution will bring in the future.

As far as your decision to believe there is no proof of evolution. You are providing an opinion. Your "belief" that there is no proof is no more valid than someone else's "belief" there is. Biological evolution is a scientific theory that is maintained because no evidence has been produced to refute it. This evidence is objectively analyzed.

My suggestion to you would be do more analysis of the evidence which has been produced and stop making premature decisions.

Besides, human understanding of evolution can best be described as incipient at best. It took roughly 100 years for mankind to put the molecular and genetic mechanisms of evolution together in a coherent model, and we’ve only been using this model for the past 42 years. I, for one, am willing to wait to see what is to come in the next 58.

For those who aren’t willing to wait for more information to emerge from evolutionary studies because the Good Book provides all the answers you need, you may want to counsel that very same Book on how you should consider the future of our understanding:

“The end of a matter is better than its beginning, and patience is better than pride. Do not be quickly provoked in your spirit, for anger resides in the lap of fools.” – Ecclesiastes 7:8-9

Answer 5

How you drooling Geezus freaks can believe in your imaginary playmate when there is absolutely NO INDEPENDENT PROOF that GEEZUS ever existed and yet you keep repeating this crap about there being no real proof for evolution when, in fact, it would be impossible to scientifically prove that evolution does NOT exist.

Darwain only called it a "Theory" because, at the time, that is what it was. In the hundred years since he discovered how different species have EVOLVED to suit their needs for survival, REAL SCIENCE has advanced and there is more proof that evolution exists than that cigarette smoking causes cancer. In fact, only the very stupid (read: religious) can believe the crap the born agains try to hand out to discredit one of the greatest scientific discoveries of all time.

You can offer all the pseudo scientific arguments and muddled thinking and diatribe you care to spout... but anyone with a BRAIN and a basic knowledge of natural science, KNOWS just how WRONG YOU ARE.

Answer 6

You have no common sense.

Evolution is as much a theory as Einstein's "theory" of relativity. Fossils are absolutely evidence. Of course you have to have a brainstem to connect the dots, but I"m guessing you haven't got one of those.

1. Big Bang has been proven mathematically.

2. There is no such thing as Chemical evolution. Elements are called elements because they are the basic building blocks.

3. Stellar development has been observed.

4. Organic evolution - see brainstem comment above.

5. Macroeveolution happens today. Humans are larger.

6. Viruses "mutate".

God on the other hand takes one gigantic leap of "faith" to comprehend. ANIMALS DON'T TALK.

Answer 7

Debating anyone with a religious basis for attacking even the discussion of evolution only gives the other side more credit than it deserves.

If anyone cares about this topic, the absolutely best writer on it is the late Steven Jay Gould.

Religion is a search for answers to the unknowable.

Science is a seeking to know.

Draw your own conclusions. As for me, the original poster has raised no meaningful new ideas, asked original questions, or otherwise made any contribution to the discussion. Agent provocatuer, anyone?

Answer 8

I agree that evolution is not fact and schools should not force it on us. If evolution can be taught so should GOD and creative design. I have an open mind to what others believe and think but I think that GOD and the Bible are the answers as to how the human race came to be. Religion is fact and what you believe. Many events that have occurred in the Bible have been discovered and found to have happened. I don't believe that the human race could have started out a singled celled organism (or goo as my science teacher, who supported evolution, called it)

Answer 9

It is taught as fact because too many people want to disbelieve in creationism. FACT is... not ONE species has been observed to mutate into another species.. even with large amounts of research being done in colleges all over the world on fruit flies every year.. since.. when.. 1800's?? at least since 1940's.. and none of them have ever produced a new species. If you ask them.. most evolutionists would tell you that the automobile has evolved into a modern machine of some sort.. when in FACT.. each automobile was designed and built seperately.

Answer 10

A theory is an explanation set forth to explain facts. It is not fact itself. Evolution has no REAL proof because some refuse to try to understand what it is saying. Microevolution? I have never heard of it and I doubt it exists. If you don't understand Science then you should go back to living in a cave and stick to hunting and gathering for your existance. Scientific thoeries have led to advances, including the internet, and very few scientists are willing to tackle evolution in favor of some biblical based pseudo-science.

Answer 11

Wow, is this a bombshell or what!
Well, lets look at some known facts before even trying shall we?

1) Evolution, at least to date, has not been observed.

2)There are two major lines of thought concerning species evolution: 2a) That evolution is so slow that we simply cannot see it. and 2b) Evolution occurs in spurts, all of which occurred in the past.

3) Experiments done by creation scientists have come up with very interesting results when simulating "pre-flood" condition(more on this later).

4) The geologic columns do not exist everywhere

5) There exist footprints of dinosaurs with HUMAN foot prints inside. This seems to indicate that the Human stepped in the pre-fossilized mud shortly after the dinosaur did.

6)Wood decays within decades(un treated), yet there are entire forests in Australia that were petrified standing up(also projecting THROUGH the "geologic column")

Now to go back and draw some conclusions. A theory must be observable to be a theory. Why? If a theory cannot be proven (IE. observed) then it is not a theory.(see 1&2). This makes it not a theory, but a model. A model that, frankly, has as much credence as creationism, but don't take my word for it yet.

In Glenrose, TX, there exists a museum specificly set up to display evidence for creation and to educate th epublice at to how the world was made. There, they simulated "pre-flood" conditions. They did this in two ways: first, they used a pressure chamber(and several other devices that won't be covered here) to simulate the pre-flood environment. They also simply increased the electro-magnetic field in a humble fish tank and placed two paranhas in it. I have seen this paranha with my own eyes....it is HUGE! No fish like that should ever get so large.

4 is pretty obvious but let me point out several other areas where it is off. The geologic column is used to narrow down the age of a fossile that was found in it. However, for it to work, a fossile could not stick up through the layers, as they oftimes do. It has also been found to be err...off at times

5: Once again, I have seen this one with my own eyes. Admittedly, I am not an expert, but those that are have concur that the foot print is indeed human...inside that of a dinosaur's footprint. I would also like to point out that the carbon-14 dating system commonly used to "disprove" creation(which, btw cannot be disproven same as any model) has been found to be wildly inaccurate. According to Morris, a sea snail was once tested by this method for giggles. It tested to being millions of years old, but the snail was still alive! Also, it has been proven that when going over 10,000 years, Carbon-14 dating can be up to the number of years it indicates off. Therefore, a fossile that dates back 3 million years can be up to 3 million years off. It could have died yesterday or 6 million years ago.

Finally, I want to take a moment to address the process by which coal is formed(petrification). Earlier I mentioned a forest of upright petrified trees. It should be noted that an entire forest, much less even one tree, would decompose long before the commonly accepted petrification process could compete. Even burried under ash or similar deposits would not cause such a thing.

Here, I would like to point out that petrification has been performed in lab condtions in a matter of hours. Therefore, if conditions were right, it could in the natural world also. What it takes is time, pressure, and plant material. However, enough pressure and the plant material will "coalify"(petrify) very quickly. A good example of lots of pressure being added would be a world-wide flood.

It is also interesting to note that the Sphinx, sitting alone in the desert, has suffered a flood.

Sciences total rejection of the creation model in favor of the evolutionary model is prepostorous. Especially when it is taught to children in school who simply do not know better. Both models have evidence for them, but the evolution model is constantly going through change in an attempt to make it fit the evidence.(Thats the other reason it's a model and not a theory). This is unacceptable on top of not being science at all. Here we have scientists who should know better running around trying to prove a model disproven by laws currelty in existence, ie the second law of thermodynamics.

One last thing. Did what I typed here make you angry? If so, why? I highly recommend that you sit down and think about why you would become angry over this. If a person is wrong, one tends to chuckle softly and keep going, yet with this simple issue, people get all hot and bothered. Why? Why are so many people having an EMOTIONAL reaction to what has been typed here? Especially considering that this is an intellectual topic.

Before replying to this, stop and ask yourself why you FEEL the way you do, and consider that perhaps you ar not angry with me, but God.

Thanks for reading this--out