Is there any evidence that is scientific and observable and testable that proves evolution beyond micro?

Question

Real evidence that can be seen and observed and tested and studied, like real science should. No crap like missing links that have been proven to be frauds or fruit flys that produce fruit flys. Real evidence that a real dog can swim in the ocean for a while and turn into a real whale, or something along that lines. Where is the tons of evidence?

The flu always produces flu, that's not macro.

Have any bones been found of these common ancestors?

Dogs keep producing dogs, always have and always will, that's not macro either.

Simularities are also proof for a common designer.

Birds and fruit flies have always and always will produce more birds and more fruit flies respectively. Macro evolution would be the fruit fly turning into a bird. Doesn't matter if one fly can't mate with another, it's still a fly and all that's observed is micro, an adaptation.

The whale theory is still strong among evolutionists, though they try to hide it, first it was a bear, then it was a dog, now they say it must have been something related to the dog.

If the best evidence for macro evolution is flies that produce flies and dogs that produce dogs, how can can this be proof all life came from a rock billions of years ago? You would also have to believe in spontanious generation which was proven wrong years ago, there's huge leaps of faith here.

Answer 1

The flu evolves every year.

Answer 2

No matter how long a dog swims in the ocean, it will not turn into a whale (it will drown, however, so don't try this at home). Evolution doesn't just happen; there must be some reproductive advantage for a characteristic to be passed on and become a dominant trait. Dogs won't become whales because they are trying to do so. Natural selection leads to adaptation, but the process doesn't involve "trying." Natural selection involves genetic variation and selection among variants present in a population. Either an individual has genes that are good enough to survive and reproduce, or it does not — but it can't get the right genes by "trying."

Evolution is observable and testable. The misconception you seem to have is that science is limited to controlled experiments that are conducted in laboratories by people in white lab coats. Actually, much of science is accomplished by gathering evidence from the real world and inferring how things work. Astronomers cannot hold stars in their hands and geologists cannot go back in time, but in both cases scientists can learn a great deal by using multiple lines of evidence to make valid and useful inferences about their objects of study. The same is true of the study of the evolutionary history of life on Earth, and as a matter of fact, many mechanisms of evolution are studied through direct experimentation as in more familiar sciences.

So if you want to see the evidence of evolution, Berkeley has a great website devoted to the topic.

Answer 3

These processes happen at immense time scales, but short term examples are common. See Galapagos El Nino events around 1983 and the impacts on local bird size and characters. A short term change in the general form of the birds on certain islands was observed in response to severe food shortages.
Another is the hawthorne fly, native to North America and breeding exclusively on Hawthorne apples. Within the past 200 years(or since the introduction of the european apple to the states) a portion of these hawthorne flies adapted to breed on the imports. Now that single species has diverged enough that the two populations dont breed together and are considered distinct, one that breeds on hawthornes and another that breeds solely on non-natives.
Its a small scale thing to occur in only 200 years, but it is well documented.
BTW, whenever you hear adapted, mutated, changed or 'jumped to' when pertaining to a virus or bacteria(bird flu, etc.) there is your evidence for evolution. Read about your own immune system and how it actually functions.

Answer 4

There is no actual body of evidence that refutes the theory of evolution. There are either things it can't explain yet that people points out, portions of it that actually do explain what they claim that it doesn't explain (they are just ignorant), or they are willfully obtuse and don't even attempt to think about how it's feasible. I came across a question yesterday where a guy stated that one of the wholes in evolution was "how did we make the transition from sea to land anyway? We couldn't have had both had lungs and gills." Apparently he had never heard of a lung fish..... EDIT: Chick above me is basically using the old "We believe in micro evolution, just not Macro evolution." routine. How is an animal progressing into a different species over time against science?

Answer 5

The evidence you seek is not evolution, that is closer to Lemarckian theory, and it was wiped out by the real theory, natural selection. Do you believe in Creation, even though you have never seen anything being created?
Missing links are not crap, they are gaps in fossil records. Like gaps in the new testament, they do not disprove anything. Fraud exists in all areas in human society, scientists or those wishing to make money from scientific discoveries are not unique or any different to other sections of society. Again, it disproves nothing, any more than a TV evangelist preaching love and respect for others, while cheating on his wife with a male lover, is an example of all evangelists.

There is a lot of evidence for evolution, you just have to decide not to dismiss it before it is presented.

Answer 6

Do you have a few thousand of years to spare? Because that is the scale that evolution works at: thousand of years. The fact you don't see it happen at a minute notice does not prove it is not happening at all.

For the record, a missing link is missing only until it is not found. There is no missing link in the original sense, as what was being looked at was a creature that was halfway between today's ape and today's human; that was a fallacy brought by people who do not understand evolution, or try to disprove it with fake arguments. What we have are common ancestors that do not look like modern apes nor modern humans.

Answer 7

Speaking of dogs, we have only been their companions for about 10,000 years. Look at the difference between a Beagle and a wolf, the Beagles ancestor. What could happen with a few million years of natural selection. ( A female wolf would probable more want to eat the Beagle, than mate; already setting up reproductive barriers )

Answer 8

yes
learning changes the shape of your brain...
notice that the simpler, reptile parts are at the base of the brain, therefore the oldest to develop, and then you've got your math abilities at the top of your brain, which snakes can't do.

Answer 9

Yes..........about a billion times more evidence than that available to prove creationism.......which has absolutely none.