What evidence is there to support evolution. I kno one, which is the fact there is a 1% difference between?

Question

human and monkey genes. And the fact of non-bipedal humans at first

Answer 1

I believe it's still 2% between humans and chimps. With Dubya, however, that might be only .2%.

Answer 2

Evolution is valid. Even Christians would tend to agree.

It is the concept that WE are a product of RANDOM evolution from a lower form or different from of life that is the center point of conflict.

Evolution implies things change. This is true and Darwin's observations are correct.

Not one scientist has put amino acids into a bottle, shaken it up and produced an Amoeba.

Darwin's theory says, on primordial Earth a bunch of random amino acids came together and randomly produced an Amoeba, or something similar, and this multipled and eventually became a colony of Amoeba, which eventually become some type of insect, worm, slug or fish, developing a central nervious system, a heart, a criculatory system and one day Lo and Behold a new creature was born and instead of grunting or whistling it spoke and said: The square root of a right triangle is equal to the lenths of hte other two sides.

And Athiests and Scientists have problems with GOD and MAN?

I mean, that story is just about as wild!

And if they are correct and there are billions and billions of worlds we might be the ONLY one with life that can speak and reason.

Now, take a big glass sphere, suck out all the air, throw in some loose, free hydrgen atoms, put it in a gravity free environment and see how many trillions of years it takes to make a big bang happen spontaniously

Now, on the day MAN puts those Amino Acids into a jar, shakes it up and produces a living, sentiant species, that person will know what it's like to be God.

Maybe they'll write books about him too!

Evolution does exist. You'd have to be a fool that say it doesn't.

Evolution, however, is a long stretch in proving how we got here. Even over the time frame of a few million years.

What are the odds, even given trillions of trillons of billions of years, that free floating hydrogen would create the stars, planets and humans all by it's little lonesome self. That we are a random product of partially inorganic material that magically found a way to fuse together over time and become you!

The other explaination is that there was a guding hand of consciousness and knoweldge who either created the universe or knew all the rules quite well and that guided hand gave a nudge that cause all of today to occur.

It seems more logical that "intellegence" helped to make our Universe possible rather than random atomic collisions.

Everyone knows the odds are better when you play against a human instead of a precise machine. Better for the player, that is.

The one arm bandit wins far more often than the Black Jack dealer.

Did God breath life into the universe or did hydrogen atoms fly around whacking each other and eventualy made man!

And Science laughs at Religion!!

That's a stretch, if ever I heard one!

Hey, next time don't let Oppenheimer make the bomb. Just put all the parts into a box and wait for some time in the future for it to spontaniously come together on its own!

Answer 3

and people watermelon and clouds are all mostly water...they probably have a common ancestor..but seriously... is 99% of the genome even mapped... I think your statistics are way off

there will of course be some commonality even in creationary view and intelligent design as we would expect eco systems and foodchains to work togather for foods etc.. and to biodegrade etc... so commonality might reinforce a person presuppositions but not really make the case

I think the comonality statistist themselves are overblown you are claiming

note the following from www.answersingenesis.org

Chimp genome sequence very different from man
by David A. DeWitt, Ph.D., director, Center for Creation Studies, Liberty University, Lynchburg, VA, USA

September 5, 2005

For many years, evolutionary scientists—and science museums and zoos—have hailed the chimpanzee as “our closest living relative” and have pointed to the similarity in DNA sequences between the two as evidence. In most previous studies, they have announced 98-99% identical DNA.1 However, these were for gene coding regions (such as the sequence of the cytochrome c protein), which constituted only a very tiny fraction of the roughly 3 billion DNA base pairs that comprise our genetic blueprint. Although the full human genome sequence has been available since 2001, the whole chimpanzee genome has not. Thus, all of the previous work has been based on only a portion of the total DNA.

see the rest of the article
from http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2005/0905chimp.asp

when everythings said and done alot of really bad arguments are used for evolution... peppered moths ... start with light and dark moths end with light and dark moths... no evolution
bad argument but it gets alot of pubicity

also people are shallowly taught about what they mean. Creationists and naturalist believe in micor evolutionfor example one might say
wolves=> poodles a form of mutant dog
but that is micro evolution a dog type is still a dog type

Creationist do not believe in macro evolution
cows=>whales
and if the truth be known there is alot of doubt in the naturalist community about it more than realized

and the fossil record is a great evidense for the flood of Noah which catastrophically bruried and preserved massive numbers of animals

Answer 4

That 1% difference supports CREATIONISM not Evolution!! LOL
Its thanks to the Almighty God that we exist and not more apes...He has determined it so.

Heres evidence AGAINST Evolution....
There are no transistory fossils showing the gradual change of Apes into Man. Darwin et al said that apes changed gradually (evolved) into man over millons of years. So where are the fossils that show this happening? Where are the half-ape/half-man fossils? There arent any. Darwin himself said i havent seen any transistory fossils but i am confident they will be found later on....but they never were. Transistory fossils should exist for all creatures if we are to believe that they "evolved". But again there arent any. Instead, creatures appeared on Earth in the same complete forms that we recognise them in today. Humans, likewise.

Most evolutionists push the theory of evolution because they are afraid of the alternative- that God exists and created the world. It means that they are answerable to him and they feel that they would lose all their freedom. Also, such peope are arrogant- they dont want to be the servants of a Creator- they want to believe mankind is the be-all and end-all of the universe....If that was the case then how come we can do so little? Think about it? We're minute compared to the rest of the universe....we need God to survive.

If you go to www.harunyahya.com you will see more evidence that refutes evolution.

I just saw the comments saying there IS a fossil record...prove it, coz i KNOW there isnt one; there was one which two guys admitted was a fake they had put together themselves...

http://www.harunyahya.com/refuted1.php

Answer 5

*Sigh*

To Grex77
It's not exactly Survival of the Fittest. If you understand population genetics and adaptation, then you understand environmental niches. And weiner dogs were bred by humans, not nature.

To Aaliyah
There are many transitory fossils! Ever heard of Lucy? Skull morphology shows it is transitory from humans and apes.

I know there are creationists out there that won't spurt out old tired arguments that have already been debunked. Where are you all?

Oh, sorry Earl D, didn't see you there. I'd have to say that yes, that is a valid argument. Random events from the primordial ooze aside, once multicellular organisms existed, I would have to say evolution takes over from there.

Answer 6

Even if there are minimal differences in humans and certain primates, does that necessarily mean that they have a common ancestor or that they evolved one from the other?

Or could it simply support the fact that they had the same Creator?

If evolution is so true and "survival of the fittest" is the rule of all nature, explain weiner dogs. How are their unique features designed to help them survive in the wild?

Weiner dogs. They make Darwin a liar.

Answer 7

The best evidence of evolution is going to be in microbes simply because they reproduce so much faster than large animals.

You are probably familiar with the flu virus; new vaccines have to be made for it every year because the virus changes so quickly.

A bigger threat than the flu is tuberculosis. There are a number of different medications for it, but strains are evolving to become resistant to current medicine, which could prove to be a global health threat in the near future.

Answer 8

Volumes have been written regarding the evidence that supports evolution - more than enough to form a rational conclusion, but no amount could ever be enough to convince someone who rejects it for religious reasons.

Answer 9

Actually the variation in our DNA is less than 1%.
There are THOUSANDS of pages of evidence and proof. There are also thousands of transitional fossils too.
Oh make no mistake the proof it out there. The only people who don't believe are those who wave thier hands, say "is not!, is not!" and then refuse to look at any evidence.
They are intellectual cowards.

Answer 10

in actuality, there is very little information, far less than to support the bible, than people believe.

to believe in christianity you have to believe in the virgin birth, that Jesus is the Christ foretold in the old testament and that He came here to die, in our place, so that we could find salvation in his sacrifice.

to believe in evolution you hvae to believe that ooze became one celled animals, that got more cells then became fish, then became amphibions, then became lizards that layed eggs that hatched feathered birds that also became the common ancestor for apes and mankind.

not only that, but you have to believe that this nearly impossible to ever occur in nature event, happened twice. once before the great asteroid and once after when all life on earth was destroyed.

easier for me to believe in the great flood, than the asteroid as i can see the ice caps and polar ice, but i have not been shown any evidence of the great asteroid as other than a theory.

what the bible cannot prove, is the divinity of Christ in Jesus, or the divinity of God.

-eagle