Is there any evidence for evolution?

Question

If i evolved from a rock then why is there not an orderly progression in the fossil record that shows how I evolved? Dont layers in rocks prove there was a flood? Doesnt the fact that birds are found in the top layer and clams on the bottom prove that the world was in a flood (birds have hollow bones and feathers and float where as clams do not) not that they are ancestors. Are smaller orginizims actually simpler or is that idea just to make one buy into the simple to complex evolution theory. If bees polinate flowers and flowers feed bees then what evolved first, flowers or bees? If a male needs a female to reproduce, what evolved first male or female? Why are there fossils clams on the top of the tallest mountian in the world? If the moon is millions of years old, why is there only 6000 years worth of dust on it? If trees are millions of years old, why is the oldest tree (the bristle cone pine) only 4000 years old (flood happened 4400 years ago according to bible)?

Answer 1

Yes. There is an astronomical amount of evidence for evolution. There has been NO legitimate evidence found pointing in any direction OTHER than evolution.

Did you enter a "let's see how many logical fallacies I can fit into one question" contest?

Get off the creationist websites. They just feed you misinformation and nonsense.

Start reading here:
http://www.talkorigins.org/
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/
http://www.talkreason.org/
http://www.talkdesign.org/cs/
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://www.noanswersingenesis.org.au/

Answer 2

Just in case you are serious


--- If i evolved from a rock then why is there not an orderly progression in the fossil record that shows how I evolved?

You did not evolve from a rock, but from a soup of naturally occurring organic chemicals. There is a reasonable progression in the fossil record.

---Dont (sic) layers in rocks prove there was a flood?

No. It proves that there were oceans. There are places where there are no sedimentary rocks. Why were they not flooded?

----- Doesnt (sic) the fact that birds are found in the top layer and clams on the bottom prove that the world was in a flood (birds have hollow bones and feathers and float where as clams do not) not that they are ancestors.

No. Why are there no mammal fossils down with the early dinosaurs? would they not float/sink the same?

---- Are smaller orginizims (sic) actually simpler or is that idea just to make one buy into the simple to complex evolution theory.

Smaller organisms are simpler, just because ther eis less of them. However, in the fossil record we see much simpler organisms of the same size in the older layers.

---- If bees polinate (sic) flowers and flowers feed bees then what evolved first, flowers or bees?

Insects. Plants use pollen for sexual reproduction. Insects evolved to eat that pollen. Plants then evolved flowers to that insects, while eating some of the pollen would transport more of it.

---- If a male needs a female to reproduce, what evolved first male or female?

Neither. The first organism were asexual and reproduced asexually. There are still organisms that are hermaphroditic. Sexual reproduction is an evolutionary advantage because it can introduce changes through gene combination rather than just a gene mutation process.

---- Why are there fossils clams on the top of the tallest mountian (sic) in the world?

Because of plate tectonics. They were once ocean floor.

---- If the moon is millions of years old, why is there only 6000 years worth of dust on it?

There is not. That is a fallacy.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/moon-dust.html

----- If trees are millions of years old, why is the oldest tree (the bristle cone pine) only 4000 years old (flood happened 4400 years ago according to bible)?

Trees have been around for millions of years. The oldest living tree is about 4800 years old. about 400 years before your flood date.

There are older organisms:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King%27s_Lomatia

That is a plant that has been cloning itself for 43,600 years. How did it survive the flood?



There is loads of evidence for evolution. you have to actively deny it not to realize that evolution is a fact.

Answer 3

Let s look at the facts. Science says the Earth is 4.5 billion years old. There are 6 billion base pairs per diploid cell in our human DNA, not counting mitochondrial DNA. So, if we had a "successful" mutation (that s an oxymoron, you can t add information, only lose it) ever single year since the Earth formed, you still come up 1.5 billion years short. Science therefore defeats science. It is not possible by any stretch of the imagination in an scientific context, but is therefore only possible in the imagination and in the religion of the secular world, called evolution. Therefore, it is not only against the odds....it is not possible at all. In addition, the scientific probabilities of forming life are known to prove it is impossible. Third, there is no scientific evidence at all that can show that any information has ever been added to a genome, only lost and mutated into a lesser living organism. Better look somewhere else, because evolution is not the answer and we are wasting a lot of government tax money trying to make it sound like it is the answer to the observations we are studying.

Answer 4

Everyone says that there is mountains of evidence, but they ve provided none. This is the epitome of idiocy. It s called a missing link for a reason... No one has found it.

There are many different types of evolution the two major ones are Micro and Macro Evolution.

Micro Evolution - Changes within the species. This does happen and it can also be called adaptation.

Macro Evolution - Changing from one species to another. This doesn t happen and there is no evidence for it.

People always give examples of micro evolution as evidence for macro evolution when they are two completely different things. Therefore there is NO EVIDENCE for evolution. (obviously not talking about micro evolution)

Answer 5

Why are there no dinosaur-sized fossils above or below the dinosaur containing layers? Nope -- no single flood.

Clams at the top of Everest, geologic upthrust.

You ignore co-evolution. Bees and flowers developed together until they became dependent upon each other. There are many flowers that do not depend on insects. Similarly, male and female developed simultaneously.

The moon dust argument extrapolates one engineer's potential worst-case-scenario estimate, ignoring all other estimates that didn't give the result wanted, and completely ignoring observations. A reflector left on the Moon would have too much dust to work by now if the number were true.

Every cut-and-paste Creationist lie you posted here has been answered numerous times.

Answer 6

no there's no evidence. Darwin just came up with the theory and every scientist from then on it just accepted it [/sarcasm]

Please point out where exactly in any evolution literal it states that we evolved from rocks - go on!

Your increduality over evolution doesn't make it any less true. Literally thousands of scientists all over the world for many decades have dedicated their lives to the research and study of evolution. Do you not think, if it were wrong, someone would have perhaps - mentioned it - bearing in mind that in doing so they'd get an nobel prize.

Stop accepting the bullsh!t of people who have an agenda, are not interested in real science and more than likely aren't properly trained.

If you have a genuine question about evolution then you should ask it in the science section, to do it in R & S makes you seem like a deceitful coward. Shame! Shame on you!

Answer 7

One question at a time. Those mountain tops you mentioned were at one time on the bottom of the ocean. Some mountain ranges have not always existed. The land mass of India which used to be part of Antartica broke off and collided with Asia. It was a slow motion collision that took millions of years. The end result was that the tallest mountain range in the world came into existance. It is called the Himalayan mountain range. Wecome to plate tectonics.So right there your claim to all the other silly junk about a world flood falls apart.

This thing about moondust has been discredited numerous times by NASA no less. I don't know why it keeps getting repeated over and over. Maybe it is because christians think they can decieve people into buying their manure over scientific facts. It is like that lie they tell about Darwin recanting evolution on his deathbed.

If god is supposed to be eternal why does it bother you people that the Earth is 4.5 billion years old instead of 6000 years. Seems like you are placing limits on your tin horn god. He should be able to move glaciers and other things at his pace not yours.

You see, you people can't stand the idea that we are right. It sticks in your craw.

Answer 8

An intelligent question is framed from a standpoint of some basic knowledge. The question you ask simply tells any reasonable individual that you have almost no education or comprehension of the points you are mounting an attack with.
In order to criticize evolution and not look the fool, you must first be conversant in basic geology, plate tetonics, paleontology, biology etc. When you can ask a reasonably intellegent question after understanding the subject matter you question please come back, i will welcome your question whole heartedly. I don't think you glorify ignorance, therefore I think that you must be afraid to really learn anything about the subject? Are you concerned that you faith is that weak?

Answer 9

I suggest you read a book like The Panda's Thumb by Stephen Jay Gould, that might help you understand more about evolution than what your preconceived notions and nonscientific Biblical references relate.

Answer 10

No, but there is evidence that we was created by Gawd! The BIBLE Proves it! Case Closed!