That's not how it works. *facepalm* An animal doesn't give birth to an entirely different animal. The changes are gradual, over hundreds of thousands and/or millions of years. Humans didn't just pop out one day. The answers are easy to find, for those who are truly interested.
Tha That changes nothing. You can't explain why a species has some number evolving over millions of years while others don't when they both live in the same environment. Can you?
It's not one or the other, Spooky. A baby is born with a mutation that makes life unsustainable. Baby dies; no evolution. Another baby is born with a mutation that is advantageous. Baby thrives, and grows up to have babies, some of whom MAY have the mutation. If the mutation is beneficial enough, eventually everyone will be born with the mutation, and now it's no longer a mutation, but an entirely different animal. This takes millions of years. Quit pretending that your cat will give birth to an elephant. That's not, in any way, how it goes down.
Yup. You've never heard of a virus mutation? That's a super duper sped up version of evolution in action.
What is your proof they didn't just pop out one day? The 6th day specifically. Show us proof that man changed over hundreds of thousands or millions of years. There is no proof of this. It's all observational science. Not experimental science.
Sure. If you ignore the mountains of evidence, you won't see any evidence. We tried that once with the kids. They kept claiming we were the parents. We kept saying there's no evidence. Didn't work.
There is no mountain of evidence. If there was you would be providing some. But, you can't. You confuse observation science with experimental science. You look at something and make decisions based on your prejudices and lack of understanding. There is no empirical evidence.
All animals and plants share the same DNA which is basically a code of only four 'letters' which code for the same amino acids from which all proteins are made.
These science deniers will cry, "but the virus will mutate into something less dangerous!" without realizing they are discussing evolution in action. Evolution = survival of the most optimal mutations.
It's the 21st century, a lot of the information is available at their fingertips. It's not hidden knowledge. lol
Evolutionary theory is the cornerstone of modern biology.Since Darwin proposed the theory of evolution by natural selection, a mountain of evidence has accumulated to support the theory. A greatly expanded fossil record since Darwin's time, the discovery of DNA and the process of genetic replication, an understanding of radioactive decay, observations of natural selection in the wild and in laboratories, and evidence in the genomes of many different organisms, including humans, have all bolstered the validity of the theory of evolution. We didn't evolve from apes,humans and all living primates share a common ancestor. As French philosopher Albert Camus put it: "Man is the only creature who refuses to be what he is."
You ask that question, but accept the claims of religious doctrine which has no foundation at all in being 100% factually true empirically. Funny. That statement exhibits both emphatic skewed bias (accepting something as true because someone has asserted it is is so) and a misunderstanding of the scientific method which does not advance knowledge by ‘proving’ anything as 100% certain nor the method’s advocate suggest a 100% standard. Einstein’s Special Theory of Relativity, continues to be supported by every challenge and is the basis for countless technology developments, yet, do you suppose Einstein, himself, would have suggested his explanatory mathematical model represents reality at a 100% level?
Besides other responses above, communities of species do divide themselves along many diffrent lines - food preference, climate, altitude, dry/wet, oher competition, etc., etc. They don't just live in the same environment. So, beneficial changes to a species in one environment can be different from what is beneficial change in some other environment. Plant and animal species and speciation clearly demonsrate this.
All experimental science IS observation. Experiments are one way to control observation - attempts to exclude extraneous factors. The mountain of evidence for evolution is called "biology". Exerimental science depends on falsification - not proof of truth. In math one can prove a postulate to be true. In nature that's not how it works, because unlike math proofs where all predicates are fully defined, we don't know absolutely everything about this universe. Newton was sure he was right, but he didn't know about relativity/light speed. No theory about gravity from Newton holds up today except in special circumstances. So, the actual challenge against evolution is to provide a falsification or alternative that is in some way superior. So far, biology stands.
Yes, that is evolution. The observed physiological change over a population is due to a genetic change over that population
That is not evolution and you know it. You aren't changing from one species to another. You can't prove Apes changed into mankind so you start doing this nonsense about genetic changes and call that evolution. Like population control murderers started using Global Warming but soon found out that didn't work so they changed their verbage to Climate Control. Same thing, Population control.
LOL! in math, theorems are proven true. Postulates are accepted as fact without proof. So, that means your "theorem" is false since you don't know a thing about math and your high school geometry class. It's not for those who don't believe your crap to prove your crap. It's up to you to provide the proof for evolution and biology is no proof. There is nothing in biology that proves an ape changed into a new species called Man.
