Atheists, you can say that evolution is a fact as many times as you want, until you provide evidence it is not

Question

Science is based on facts, and testable data. There are huge holes in the fossil records, and 'missing links'. It is all conjecture. I understand that you state it as fact because it is the best that you have got. However, until you provide evidence it will remain a theory.

We have the fossils of dinosaurs which lived way before these so called 'transitional animals'. Where are their fossils (the few proved fakes will not do!)

Quite frankly it's embarrassing.

ok in layman's terms...if one animal over time changed into another, there should be fossils of the animals in between. I know evolution is a joke, but it is not as stupid as to say for example that a horse gave birth to a donkey. you claim the change happened slowly, so where are the bones of these animals!!!

Answer 1

Even without positive proof of those "transitional" creatures, the proven existence of dinosaurs disprove the entire creation time line. I'm not saying it debunks the existence of God...just proves the Bible is a work of fiction.
God exists in your heart, science exists in your mind. There is room for both.

Answer 2

If I had a puzzle with the picture of a giant hamburger on it, and when I completed the puzzle, there were some pieces missing, I still would be certain that the picture was a hamburger. You simply don't understand anything about fossils. That we have what we do, is most fortunate because the conditions have to be perfect for the animal remains to fossilize. Why would you think that there would be a fossil somewhere of everything that ever lived in every stage of development? The have enough evidence to know that many animals have gone through these changes to know that it happens. You also do not understand scientific theory. A scientific theory is one that has so much evidence that most of the scientific community accept it as fact. Another term for scientific theory is scientific law.

atheist

Answer 3

Every year more transitional fossils are found. However, this is a mixed blessing.

Transitional fossils do provide ever growing support for evolution. Unfortunately, they also create an ever growing list of "missing links" because every transitional fossil that splits a gap in the fossil record effectively converts that single gap into two gaps and thereby allows creationists to demand that two more "missing links" be found.

Creationism is not based on science and no amount of evidence will ever be able to get rid of it. The demand creationists make for evidence is really meant to divert attention away from the true source of their belief: faith. Only by convincing people that faith is not a sufficient rationale for belief will humanity ever be able to do away with the unfounded hypothesis of creationism.

Answer 4

Wow...and these guys call Christians close-minded! It seems a lot of people argue in favor of evolution simply because they've heard that a lot of scientists say it's true. Well a few hundred years ago, nearly all scientists agreed that the world was flat and that the sun revolved around the planets, and we all know how that turned out. Yes folks, scientists, who are human and therefore prone to error, can be wrong. For the most part, it seems that most people agree with evolution because A) it's a popular, accepted viewpoint and, well, no one wants to be an outcast, B) they haven't taken the time to examine the theory more closely (and thus, haven't discovered the many flaws and holes in it), C) they have discovered the flaws and holes but willingly choose to ignore them since the only other option is intelligent design (aka - God), and let's face it - there either is a God or there isn't, and both ideas are frightening. Or maybe it's D) All of the above. Whatever the case, those that believe in evolution are fighting tooth and nail to try to keep the theory above water, mainly because no one likes to find out they've been lied to, and of course, no one likes to be wrong. Interestingly enough, you don't even have to use the Bible to point out some of the flaws in evolution; science and common sense can do that. For the sake of argument, let's just use the definitions of evolution as examples...

Five out of the six kinds of evolution have never been proven or observed (and the sixth kind isn't really evolution at all).

1. Cosmic evolution - the origin of time, space and matter; i.e. - "Big Bang"
The "Big Bang" theory goes against the "conservation of angular momentum" law; the origin of the Big Bang matter is unknown; space matter is not evenly distributed, etc. No evidence.

2. Chemical evolution - the origin of higher elements from hydrogen
How did 92 elements (plus the synthetic ones) evolve from hydrogen? No one knows.

3. Stellar and planetary evolution - origin of stars and planets
No one has ever seen a star or planet form. Not even intermediate stages of formation. There's evidence of star deaths (novas and supernovas), but what about star births? No evidence.

4. Organic evolution - origin of life
How did life get started from non-living material? Scientists have tried it in the lab (i.e. - the failed Miller-Urey experiments), but none have succeeded. No one has ever observed this occurrence. No evidence.

5. Macro-evolution - changing from one kind of animal to another
There is no evidence of any intermediate stages of evolution (aka - "missing links"). Example: No one has ever seen a dog produce a non-dog. The dogs produced might come in a lot of colors, shapes and sizes (coyotes, dingoes, wolves, etc.), but in the end they're all still the same kind of animal: dogs. Again, no evidence.

6. Micro-evolution - variations within kinds
The description "variations" rather than "micro-evolution" is really more accurate since it's the same kind of plant or animal with varying features (i.e - different varieties of roses, different varieties of finches, etc.), but this is the one and only event that has ever been observed.

Also, radiometric dating - especially carbon dating - is unreliable (certain external factors have been known to affect carbon levels, resulting in inaccurate ages), the geologic column is wrong (petrified trees have been found standing up, running through multiple strata), embryology is false (Ernst Haeckel, the artist behind the fake embryo drawings, was convicted of fraud by his own university), the "horse evolution" model is false (proven wrong about 50 years ago), and on, and on, and on. The truth is right in front of them, yet they can't see the forest for the trees. But that's okay. God still loves them too.

Answer 5

Evolution is not a fact. It’s a hypothesis that has never been proved.

We have still yet to see any evidence of one species becoming another. Variations in the same species doesn't equate to evolution. For all we know at this stage is that those variations are preprogrammed in the DNA as possible variations. Mixing of DNA may make a new type of dog, but it is still a dog. So, even if a complex single cell organism managed to spontaneously form with perfect parts one time or even a thousand times, it wouldn't account for the wonderful variety of life here on Earth.

Evolution claims, random change & natural selection make simple things spontaneously transform into more complex things without recourse to intelligent design. Chance and random changes simply do not produce higher levels of organization & complexity.

Answer 6

To start with, there is a lot of evidence for evolution.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_evidence
There's no evidence that suggests evolution is not true. There's also no evidence at all any kind of creation story is true. Many creationists try to prove their doctrine by disproving evolution and the big-bang, but what they pose just holds no water.
The fact that a lot of gaps exist in evolution, doesn't make it less true, because there's enough evidence supporting it. Filling in a god in the blanks is not the solution to find out what really happened. A lot of evidence like transitional fossils will never be found, because they have gone. Though evolution is a slow process, the largest changes in species happen over a relatively short period of time. This is because species adapt more when their surroundings change, like 65 mln years ago when all dino's died and mammals could evolve to what they are today, because they were not hunted by so many big meat eating chickens anymore., and about 6 mln years ago when the Horn of Africa started to split off from the rest of Africa by tectonic movements, the climate over there changed, the landscape and vegetation changed, and our ancestors changed. Because of the short periods the evolution makes it's greatest movements, it is much less likely to find transitional fossils than fossils from stable periods. There have been found enough transitional fossils found to support evolution. For example, you could check out the history of the scientific view on the evolution of the whale. For a long time scientists thought were puzzled by the ancestry of the whale. Just recently they found out, by genetic research at first, that whales and hippo's have common ancestors, and some time later a complete enough transitional fossil was found to support this evolutionary path.
All creationist people can come up with is "god did it", and that's just not enough to be even close to scientific.
If evolution were not true, many sciences that currently contribute to eg. medical research and solutions could not even exist. Also both micro and macro evolution have been observed and proved to exist in lab conditions.
Btw, being an atheist means that person doesn't believe in god. Still this doesn't mean they have to support the theory of evolution, so linking atheists to evolution and science is not necessarily correct. But because most atheists use their own brain and/or the brains of people who are still searching for the "truth" and solutions in our days, and not a bible filled with stone-age people's thoughts, they in general tend to support the theory of evolution.

Answer 7

Ok, what are the holes? What is the missing link? At least there a evidences of existence .... now, what is your evidences of your hypothesis?

-------------

You are really ignorant, aren't you. How much of evolution did you read?

BTW, horse and donkey does mate, it is call a mule.

Anyway, how do you define there are no "in between". If you dig up a set of skeleton from say 5000 years ago compared to a skeleton now, chances are you will see the difference.

There are little "holes" ..... but each day there are new discoveries. Only the major changes are documented, not the every minor changes.

Answer 8

Thank you I agree.

Evolutionists do seem to have more faith in thier theory than many Christians do in God. if we could only bottle that kind of faith!

Many non-scientific people confuse the Macro evolution with the micro.

Darwin himself said that IF his theory were to be true, there would be an ABUNDANCE of links in the fossil record BETWEEN species. At this point in time Darwin would be working on a new theory if he were still alive.

Answer 9

given your attitude, why would anyone bother to provide evidence that you would almost certainly ignore? you could find out for yourself if you were not so determined to maintain your ignorance. the reasons for gaps in the fossil record are well understood, and it would be quite remarkable if the record were perfect. when you look at a movie, do you deny that the actors are really moving because there are only 24 still frames per second? that really is the sort of sophistry you are engaging in here.

Answer 10

What does evolution have to do with atheists?? Hello!! Evolution is not an anti-god. Grow up. Evolution =/= no god. Idiot.

Science is based on theories and testing those theories, not fact. You're embarrassing. Besides, don't you know just how rare it is for dead animals to be fossilized?

Answer 11

I wish you would show me the empty tomb of Jesus because there is no proof.
I wish you would show me one miracle, because there is no proof.

Theories don't claim to be facts and evolution is a theory. It explains many observations better than any other explanation. So today we accept it as the "best" theory.

If we test your beliefs they equally have no proof, they explain nothing, there is no way to test. (And by the way you can test evolution for small adaptations to hostile environments in the lab).

However, I expect a rational argument with you to fail, because I have a theory about ignorant people. My theory is formed based on observations. You are just another example.

How does it feel for you to be nothing more than a statistic supporting a theory that religious folks ignore facts. Yet another reason we discard religion, it is supported only by people who ignore facts.

Have a nice day.