Do you deny this evidence of evolution?

Question

Is this part of a scientific conspiracy to disprove creationism?

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2002/01/0110_020110TVfinches.html

What reason would scientist have to want to disprove creationism?

Answer 1

... How is this evidence of evolution?

This is evidence of 'survival of the fittest,' and becoming better suited to live in a given environment, yes. That part's fine, no one should have a problem with that. That's been held up pretty well. The finches are becoming more adapted to survival. That's good. Others would say this is evidence of 'micro-evolution,' or species getting better characteristics. That's good.

However, there is no evidence at all that finches are changing into another species at all, or 'macro-evolution.' That's the part that has an unbelievable amount of problems. This doesn't disprove creationism in the slightest. There's nothing here that even suggests that new species came about or will come about. That's the part that's fatally flawed in evolution.

In short, there's nothing here that's not new, except perhaps for the time period in which the finches adapted.

Answer 2

What this article describes is "micro"-evolution. Or a better term is variation within a species-some may say adaptation. This is how people use the "bait and switch" con game on unsuspecting idiots. They show an example of one thing-then tell you it is something all together different. Get them to show you a rock becoming a living organism. Or even a finch becoming a frog. They can not. I wish someone could turn my f-100 into a f-350, that might make me a believer.
This article is pure hog wash.

Answer 3

The only reason one would want to disprove creationism is because it is a false notion, and shouldnt be taught nor beleived by anyone.

Can someone please tell me why every idiot theist thinks that the end product of evolution HAS TO BE either something becoming human or intelligent?? That is NOT the case! Quick thinking this way and you MIGHT start to understand evolutionary theory... You people are so ignorant. There are 1.5 MILLION species on earth...and only 30,ooo were on Noahs ark. So this means that out of 30K species, NEW SPECIES have evolved! Why can you not understand this concept? this is NOT micro evolution, so quit making excuses.... again, look at how many idiots said "we dont have talking dogs..." or "how come they dont have legs and speak?" Christ, the lack of intelligence makes me want to abandon this site...

For the record, I love your avatar and screenname! HILARIOUS!

Answer 4

The article says: "It turns out that finches are able to influence the size of their offspring by controlling the sex of their eggs according to the hatching order."

How is this "evolution?" Evolution has always been touted as relying on mutation and natural selection. Does the definition change with the evidence now? How is that any different than creationists searching for "evidence" to support their preconceived ideas?

Answer 5

I have heard this argument here dozens of times and creationists have alwways agreed with mico evolution and that is what this might be... it actually might be a preexistent abilty to swtich on genes based on environment

You started with a birds and ended with a bird.
This is an example of micro evolution, creationists and naturalist all believe in micro evolution

The controversy is over MACRO evolution (cow to whale, dinosaur to tweety bird, ape to man) and this example doesnt concern itself with that issue

some examples are neither peppered mothes for example (a mixture of dark and light moths become... well... a nixture of dark and light moths... not evolution in anyones book)

as the perosn following me points out, some animals have a gentic abilty to swtich on genes depending on the environment they are subject to and the effect showing up in the offspring... this is also not evolution but an already existing behavor
See the article well armed water fleas and radishes
http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v22/i1/water_fleas.asp

http://www.answersingenesis.org/Home/Area/re1/chapter2.asp

Answer 6

the reason to want to disprove is because they don't want to face the fact that they will be accountable to a higher power after death- does not change the fact that they will be .
This is an interesting article- still shows absolutely not one shred of evidence that any one species evolved into another :

I cannot make you believe something that you don't want to believe, but I urge you to use discernment, reason and logic when thinking aobut evolution- all the things evolutionists accuse us of not using , but really- do the principles of evolution make sense? If this has taken place over the course of millions of years, little by little, then we are being decieved when we are told we are looking for "the missing link" we are looking for millions of missing links- besides that- there are so many common sense, scientific questions that evolution just cannot answer- no matter how you twist it.
If you are really interested in education and not just disproving something that does not fit your mold- read this article, it is fun reading but very informative and common sense-
Meet Gaspy: the lungfish:

http://www.reflecthisglory.org/study/did...

here are other bits of interesting fact for you to ponder :

Charles Dawson, a British lawyer and amateur geologist announced in 1912 his discovery of pieces of a human skull and an apelike jaw in a gravel pit near the town of Piltdown, England . . . Dawson's announcement stopped the scorn cold. Experts instantly declared Piltdown Man (estimated to be 300,000 to one million years old), the evolutionary find of the century. Darwin's missing link had been identified. Or so it seemed for the next 40 or so years. Then, in the early fifties . . . scientists began to suspect misattribution. In 1953, that suspicion gave way to a full-blown scandal: Piltdown Man was a hoax . . . tests proved that its skull belonged to a 600-year-old woman, and its jaw to a 500-year-old orangutan from the East Indies." Our Times--the Illustrated History of the 20th Century (Turner Publishing, 1995, page 94).

Science Fiction
The Piltdown Man fraud wasn't an isolated incident. The famed "Nebraska Man" was built from one tooth, which was later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig. "Java Man" was found in the early 20th Century, and was nothing more than a piece of skull, a fragment of a thigh bone and three molar teeth. The rest came from the deeply fertile imaginations of plaster of Paris workers. "Heidelberg Man" came from a jawbone, a large chin section and a few teeth. Most scientists reject the jawbone because it's similar to that of modem man. Still, many evolutionists believe that he's 250,000 years old. No doubt they pinpointed his birthday with good old carbon dating. Now there's reliable proof. Not according to Time magazine (June 11, 1990). They published an article in the science section that was subtitled, "Geologists show that carbon dating can be way off." Don't look to "Neanderthal Man" for any evidence of evolution. Recent genetic DNA research indicates the chromosomes do not match those of humans. They do match those of bipedal primates (apes).

What does Science Say?
Here are some wise words from a few respected men of science: "Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of science. It is useless." (Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research). "Evolution is unproved and unprovable." (Sir Arthur Keith--he wrote the foreword to the 100th edition of, Origin of the Species). "Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever." (Dr. T. N. Tahmisian, Atomic Energy Commission, USA).

"To suppose that the eye . . . could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree." Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species

A great resource for some education that is logical and common sense is called "The Science or Evolution: expand your mind" You can get this DVD from WayoftheMaster.com


The fact is there is nothing here that was not created, planned with a purpose in mind. Is there anything on this earth- not natural that just came together on its own. You can put pieces of 'stuff' in a box and put whatever conditions you choose and without a purpose and planning for that purpose, you won't get anything useful. I have yet to see anyone show matter being created out of nothing, or one species evolving into another or any proof of that happening. this world works in a clockwork type order , there is precision and purpose to everything you see - you cannot have purpose without a plan and you cannot have a plan without a planner- there is nothing that can disprove intelligent design. Period!

Answer 7

There does not need to be a conspiracy. Creationism is nonsense. It was a story in the bible with a moral nothing more. Stop reading the bible as science. It is a book of parables.

Answer 8

OK.
LOL
So, can the Montana finches mate with the Alabama finches? The article didn't say.
Have they "evolved" into a new species?
The article didn't say.
Sounds to me as if the finches are adapting to their surroundings...hey, even people do that.
And we can do it in one lifetime. I moved from upstate New York when I was 22. I am 55 years old now, and *brrrrrrr*, I can't STAND the cold winter weather. Hard to believe I actually used to go outside and PLAY in that nasty white stuff!
Of course, my youngest child is a daughter, and she is rather small.....
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm.........

Answer 9

I do not believe that scientists want to prove anything, but rather falsify everything possible. Take the idea that the deity/deities behind our existence is/are trickster/s. Scientists could never prove that God or the like created us to believe that evolution occurred.

Answer 10

birds being bigger or smaller due to their environment is in no way evidence of evolution..... it's adaptation.... survival of the fittest... i mean they are still birds aren't they and not even a different kind of bird, they are still finches..... there is no scientific evidence that any species has ever changed their DNA and "evolved" into another species, yet we still teach it to our children... how absurd is that..... a fish changing into a lizard, changing into a monkey changing into a person.... get real.....lol....
dogs are dogs and will always create other dogs, not cats
cows are cows and will never produce a chicken,
and humans are humans and will never create llamas... it's a DNA thing, your code either has llama or it doesn't... ya know.