There is no proof of evolution...?

Question

The Creationists keep telling me that there is no evidence for evolution. The most common claim they make is that no animal has ever produced a different kind of animal. Well let me turn this argument against them. There is no evidence for creationism. Have you ever seen an animal get created??? I sure havent. I have never been walking down the sidewalk, when boom, chicken pops up out of nowhere. Never once have I gone to get the morning newspaper, when zap, camel just pops into existence. I think there is a hell of a lot more evidence for evolution then there is for God zapping creatures into place for no apparent reason.

Answer 1

you are correct .. it doesnt just pop .. u need to have the technology and full understanding of how somthing works to create it .... now ... do u think its possible man will eventually understand living orgamisms enough to to create them from scratch? ... i do and i do believe there was a creator ..

Answer 2

There's a large difference between lacking proof and lacking evidence. Proof is an absolute claim that can be explained and backed up on all levels, where as evidence is just occurrences, examples, among other bits that support the claim. There's an overwhelming mound of evidence to support the theory of evolution, but like most things in science, it cannot be 100% proven - which is why it's a theory.

There are plenty of animals that have produced other animals, which is where we get "common ancestors". You'd never believe that birds, lizards, mice, and even bears all come from a very distant common ancestor, would you? However, the ancestors of these modern day animals can be traced back to one form of dinosaur.

Creationism has even less of a standpoint to argue. You're right - none of us have ever seen an animal just pop out of nowhere, similar to spawning in various video games. People make the claim that it begins in the womb where God "touches" it with his divinity, in a sense. However, this can be stricken down by anyone who's taken 9th grade biology or 6th grade Heath and knows that conception is purely because of two animals donating their genes.

You make an excellent point, dear.
Enjoy your evening. :)

Answer 3

THERE IS NO PROOF O EVOLUTION!!!

The "Big Bang" theory IS A TOTAL FAKE!!!

God created us in HIS own image....have you ever seen a fossil(s) w/a "mixed" species?? I DON'T THINK SO!!

Yes, there are mules which are a mix of a horse and a donkey...

God does NOT zap creatures into "place".

Evidence for creation is ALL AROUND US! Just look. How do YOU think that humans and all animals around the world got here??

As I said before God created us in HIS own image. He loves us.....

How bout u read the Bible.... THAT IS THE BEST AND MOST ACCURATE BOOK IN THE WHOLE WORLD!!!

Hope tht this helps/answers ur question!!

Answer 4

The question is not really whether or not there is proof for or against evolution but where you are starting from. If you believe in evolution you are starting from the belief that there is no God and that everything just happened to come about by chance, millions and billions of years ago. If you believe in creationism, you are starting from the belief that there is a God who created all things a few thousand years ago.

Today we would not be able to see an animal created because that only happened at the beginning of the world. You cannot just say that since you do not see this happening that creationists do not have any evidence for their stand. This is historical science, something that cannot be repeated. It happened in the past. Similarly, how do we know if the big bang occurred and that chance random processes brought about life? That happened in the past as well. I know that evolutionists say that they have repeated what has happened in the past (life in a test tube), but that was under very controlled circumstances.

But from a creationists standpoint we have the Bible whose author is One who has been there from the beginning. It is infallible. Check it out and www.answersingenesis.org for more information.

Answer 5

You don't really understand either evolution by natural selection or creationism, but that's OK - with creationism there's nothing there to understand because it's just the Bible dressed up in fancy words, and evolution is a theory that takes a certain amount of serious exposition.

There is an overwhelming amount of evidence in support of the idea that life on this planet evolved by natural selection. The evidence that it didn't is purely anecdotal, but unfortunately that anecdotal evidence is what we call the 'Bible', which is a book written very, very late in terms of what we know to be the timeline of planet Earth.

The evidence for evolution is the fossil record, which is full of gaps, but it does at least explain how we got to be here. The trouble with creationism is that it doesn't explain anything at all - it just says 'God did it' and then doesn't explain who or what God is.

Answer 6

I once heard the funniest thing....we were in Bio class at Uni when this girl puts her hand up & says, "I'm sorry if this seems disrespectful, but were you there?".
The prof goes "Er, I don't understand your question. Was I where?".
She goes "Were you around when all this so called evolution happenned, because if you were not then how can you teach it like it was fact?"
The prof smiles & says "Ah yes, I get at least one of these every year. And in response I have this to say; no I was not around but if you are using this as your argument for creationism then I want to get the name of your cosmetic surgeon because you sure do look good for a 2000 year old woman."
She blushes & stammers & has no further argument.
Apparently the local Sunday School has been encouraging their students to ask teachers in biology classes if they were there as an argument against evolution.....if that's the best you have then I would quit before you start looking stupid...oh, too late.

Answer 7

1) Anyone who says that there is no *evidence* for evolution is under a misapprehension. There is evidence *supporting* evolution, but there is, indeed, no evidence which *proves* evolution scientifically. This is why it is still a theory.

2) Anyone who says that there is no evidence for the creation of life is under a misapprehension. There *is* evidence supporting the creation of life - but, indeed, far less than that which supports evolution. Likewise, there is no evidence which *proves* creation scientifically. I do not know if creationism has been "granted" the status of a theory yet - I believe that, scientifically, it is still considered a hypothesis.

Both views are supported scientifically *only* by circumstantial evidence. The *amount* of circumstantial scientific evidence is much greater for evolution.

BTW, I believe that the method most likely used by God to create life was evolution.

Jim, http://www.life-after-harry-potter.com

Answer 8

Because all things were created initially, and then the laws of physics and conservation of energy/matter applied. When they say there's no evidence for evolution, this is because most if not all evidence can be explained as either supporting both evolution and creationism, more formally known as Intelligent Design (ID), or, not supporting evolution at all. Creatures can adapt to their environment, yes, but not to the extent of changing forms from one to another.

Answer 9

There is evidence for a lot of things, including evolution, but proof for either will probably never come to be -- and even if it were, there would still be people who rebel. It is unfortunate, since I think that evolution teaches us far more about the true nature of humanity than belief in a god ever will.

The fact is, science requires the absence of personal bias. Belief in god is a bias, but so is a belief in evolution -- either way, it's a belief. How can you do proper scientific research if your beliefs will influence the outcome? True scientists are open to any kind of answer, not just one that supports their personal belief, and that's why so many scientists are actually agnostics rather than atheists.

Answer 10

there is evidence but no substantial proof
hence it is called a theory
evolution is the zapping of new creatures into existence over millions of years
god supposedly can do it in 2 seconds
whats not to believe??

Answer 11

Evolution is constant and inevitable, simply because reproduction is not, and can never be, 100% perfect and flawless. There will always be mutations and errors of copying. That is evolution, by definition.

As to one animal producing a completely different kind: Here's an example:

What distinguishes a dog from a cat is a vast number of genetic differences - theoretically, if you took a newly fertilised dog ovum and manually made every single genetic change which distinguishes it from a cat, probably hundreds of thousands of them, then what would ultimately grow out of that ovum would be a cat. However, the chances of *all* those changes, and *exactly* those changes and no others, happening at random, by accidental mutations, in one generation, is far too small for it to ever happen.

There is a high probability of one or more mutations in every generation, but the chance of one *specific* mutation occurring in a genome of many millions of bases is very small indeed. Suppose each required change between a dog and a cat is only one base, and the choices are an insertion, a deletion or a replacement. Suppose at a conservative estimate there are a million bases, and that there are 250,000 genetic changes between a dog and a cat. The probability of the first change occurring correctly, by random chance, is one in 3 million or 0.00000033. The probability of two correct changes is the product of their probabilities or 0.0000000000001. I'm sure there haven't been 3 thousand billion dog births on the planet, so even here we have gone far beyond the limits of plausibility, and we've only considered 2 correct genetic changes (and overly simplified ones at that), out of 250,000. If you wanted chance alone to provide exactly the right 250,000 genetic changes to make a cat from a dog, you would have to live through the entire history of uncountable trillions of universes to have even the most miniscule plausible chance of it ever happening. In other words, you might as well regard it as utterly impossible. If it ever happened, it would completely disprove evolution, because it's inconceivable that evolution could produce this prodigiously unlikely outcome.

The fact that we don't see such events confirms evolution, rather than contradicting it.