Where is the conclusive evidence of macro-evolution?

Question

Evolutionist taunt scoffers for failure to see the proof. Where is the absolute proof? How did life form on this planet to evolve through the genetic chain to become homo-sapien?

Answer 1

Better not to use the terms microevolution and macroevolution.
These terms, which focus on ‘small’ v. ‘large’ changes, distract from the key issue of information. That is, particles-to-people evolution requires changes that increase genetic information, but all we observe is sorting and loss of information. We have yet to see even a ‘micro’ increase in information, although such changes should be frequent if evolution were true. Conversely, we do observe quite ‘macro’ changes that involve no new information, e.g. when a control gene is switched on or off.

It is quite amusing to see Dawkin's response when he was asked this question.
http://www.gospelcom.net/cgi-bin/hurl?f=aig/video/FrogToPrince.rm

http://trueorigin.org/dawkinfo.asp

Perhaps evolutionists (such as above) would do better to debate the evidence rather than simply try to dismiss a reasonable question without any attempt to answer it.

btw kiddo, each of your claims is easily refuted scientifically by Creationist scientists. Just search for any of the terms you used at CMI.
For example the fossil record *does not* demonstrate evolution of any sort. Rather it shows stasis and extinction.
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3001

Answer 2

Evidence of macro evolution:

1. Homologies
2. Conservation in molecular genetics, like Hox genes
3. Sister species/taxa
4. The fossil record
5. The absence of any other even remotely reasonable explanation for the diversity of life we see today
6. Different stages in the formation of the eye seen among species
7. Conservation in body plan

Also, I have to agree with the person who said most people who ask for evidence in support of macro evolution don't want answers. They're creationists, and don't like to question what the church and their mama told them:).

Answer 3

Evolution requires several leaps of faith assumptions for them to conclude that 1) life began on earth; 2) that conditions were ripe for macro-evolution; 3) that the conditions that caused macro-evolution disappeared following the evolution; 4) that ME has stopped.

There is not an explanation as to how a ME could reproduce, or morph. This is why evolution is only a theory and not a proven fact, as the proponents of evolution will tell you.

It does not stand up under the microscope of genetics.

Answer 4

One reason why evolutionists tend to not waste their time answering questions that have been answered previously hundreds of times, is because virtually always the people asking the question turn out to be creationists. The creationists dont want to accept MOUNTAINS of evidence in favor of evolution, but they want everyone else to accept their radical fundamentalist religious beliefs which are trivial, childish and self-contradictory and have no evidence at at all.

It is very tedious to see the same ignorant questions over and over.