Proof evolution theory is not logical?

Question

The population on planet earth has been growing for the past 3-5 thousand years. Today there is about 6.68 billion humans on earth and 75 million births per year, that is about 200,000 births per day.

Evolutionist say that humans evolved over a period of a million years. but the population 4000-6000 years ago would have been like maybe 1 million humans in the entire planet or less?

Mesopotamia Art show humans as we know them today.

So before any recorded history human population must have been very low on planet earth. Births must have been a few a year.

So if we are having 75 million births per year should'nt there be a sign of human drastic evolution? 75 million births is probaby equivalent to a 100,000 years before any recorded history since the population was so low and births where few.

Yet we see no sign of human evolution. We so see variety of skin color and eye color, but we do not find one superior variety. All humans are equal and evolution is absent.

Answer 1

What you have is not proof evolution 'is not logical', it's a challenge to evolution. My reply is that your challenge is easily met.

To begin with, population growth is not a direct result of the number of births. It's the difference between births and deaths. For instance, the infant mortality rate has dropped a lot in just the past 100 years. Children were exposed to many diseases, so many would never reach maturity. It's only with modern medicine that we've been able to remedy this.

Then you need to consider how much food people could produce. Not until humans learned to plow fields and sow crops did we have more than enough food, so any serious population growth can not have happened before then.

As for your final paragraph, what do you mean 'one superior variety'? There are obvious adaptations to environment (i.e. evolution) in the ethnic differences of mankind. One quality is superior in one environment but not in another, which is why Africans are darker than Inuits.

Answer 2

First,read up on "exponential growth" It is not even a remotely new concept. Second,understand enough about the theory that you are attempting to refute to realise that evolution has nothing to do with the size of a population,and a lot to do with populations changing over time to better survive in a changed environment.

Answer 3

Are you serious?

Today you see a crap load of infant survival due to the increase in medical care. Combine that with massive increase in food production and you got the making for a massive population growth.

Answer 4

What's is funny about this question (apart from its startling scientific and mathematical inaccuracy) is that you say illogicality disproves evolution yet I assume you support the "logic" of some guy with a beard making us all out of dirt and spare ribs!
Truly bonkers!

Answer 5

This must be a new definition of the word "proof" that I am not familiar with. You haven't proved anything. Everything you said was your interpretation and opinion and not facts, which are needed in any proof. I just love it when people use words they don't understand.

Answer 6

first the two key thing to evolution is natural selection and variation number one i don't see a lot of natural selection since pretty much everyone live to reproduce and past their genes on

Answer 7

why don't you ask your question in the biology section

BTW you don't seem to have grasped evolution.

Evolution is mainly about being best able to survive in the environment you live in (those best able to survive are more likely to pass on their genes).

There are no environmental pressures for humans to evolve any further.

Answer 8

But most people now survive to reproduce, so no traits are really being selected for.

Answer 9

Nope, that's proof that you are not logical.

Answer 10

Please tell me you're joking, because you're lacking anything that remotely even resembles real "logic".

_()_