Oh look! Nothing that provides any evidence whatsoever of a species gradually transitioning into another species.
In other words, you don't have any evidence that shows a species gradually transitioning into another species. If you have any evidence you'd provide it. You don't nor have you ever.
Being able to predict the result of of phenomenon is not the same as proving biases. If entropy could be reversed, that would be the end of causality. Water could freeze in the sun and melt in the snow. Batteries could spontaneously charge themselves. Life would be impossible. Wrong. The Big Bang theory does not say energy came from nothing. It says the an infinite point of energy rapidly expanded and created the universe. I brought up several institutions to prove a point. I am curious however in why scientists were so eager to produce evolution. I don't have access to Nature or several other peer-reviewed publications so I am at a disadvantage. I have not been trained in biology so I wouldn't know I was looking at the correct information. The issue at hand is not whether or not someone believes in evolution, it is whether or not you believe in science, which you obviously don't since you think the majority of scientists are just trying to push an agenda. Because I doubt you would believe any other media outlet. That's just it, evolution doesn't require a conspiracy theory to make it work. If your theory requires one, it is not much of a theory. And the ToE spans the 19th, 20th and 21st centuries. By "many", what percent do you mean? 5%, 20% 50%, 90%...? I have an answer. It is 2%. That's right only 2% of scientists DO NOT believe in evolution. And here we go with the conspiracy theory again. The real reason of course why their evidence is rejected is because THERE IS NO EVIDENCE. Of course you think that anthropogenic global warming is another conspiracy. So you say. See above.
What you fail to understand is that every single species on Earth is transitional RIGHT NOW. It was different a million years ago and will be different a million years from now. Mutation does not take place within the human life span unless in the very simplest of life forms and on a very minute scale. As explained multiple times to you, no one will be able to place a fish on your kitchen table and watch it become a Frog.
If anyone is playing a game it's you. You have not provided any evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species. You've attempted to use some popular phrases to show relationship and the occasional "transitional species" which are complete species of their own and show no transitioning. But not a single shred of evidence showing the gradual transitioning from one species into another.
Not true. But regardless, you've still not provided any evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species.
I didn't say it did. But there are people who use scientific data to attempt to create something. Of course they can no longer be called scientists because science doesn't prove anything. Yet this is only guess work dependent upon making something fit Not scientists. There are many in the "scientific" community who are religiously anti religious and they can't allow any thing that allows someone to gather the same data and find anything that might alude to something other than what they adhere to. You're misquoting me. I'm all about science. Those pushing an agenda can't be scientist because they can't have an agenda. It's people who want their dogmas taught. It requires the manipulation of data to make it work because there's no evidence to show otherwise. It's just a theory and a weak one at that. The trouble I have is that it's taught as absolute fact in schools and universities. I doubt that seriously. But to teach in a university you must adhere to the current dogma. So if the data came from those alread in position of teaching in universities the hiring process would immediately create bias. You've yet to produce any evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species. Not a single shred. Not true. Conspiracy theories have nothing to do with it. Just like evolution can't produce a species gradually transitioning into another species the pro anthropogenic crowm must, and they've been caught many times, manipulate the date. IPCC just got busted AGAIN a few months ago with their skewed data. You need to stop thinking everything is a conspiracy theory.
Yet you can't provide a shred of evidence. Good grief. Just put up something. Then put up the evidence of a species gradually tranistioning into another species. Nobody is expecting a fish to become a frog before their eyes. But we are expecting there to be evidence in the fossil record of this happening. Put it up.
You should really stop using the term WE as you are the only one who refuses to see everything provided for you.
You like to play semantics, don't you? You do realize that you are falling into the "No True Scottsman" fallacy? Also, you are bringing up the conspiracies, not me. But none of that matters because I know your true motivations. You keep saying that you are all about science and that you are not a creationist, however here is a quote of yours from above that will let everyone know where you really stand (bold highlight is mine): If your arguments are not about religion, then why would you think that those against evolution are "religiously anti religious"? What does religion have to with evolution? A God can exist with or without it as well as not exist with or without it.
It is always funny that people think science can prove or disprove a transcendental being. Using the scientific method, we can only investigate things that can be directly or indirectly affected by experimentation. Anything outside our sphere of influence is mere conjecture. Science will not prove or disprove the existence of a transcendental god. Our major religions all posit that type of being. Thus, those beings are safe from scientific scrutiny.
I know how hard google can be. So, I hope this helps: http://examples.yourdictionary.com/examples-of-speciation.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/evolution-watching-speciation-occur-observations/ http://biomed.brown.edu/Courses/BIO48/23.Cases.HTML http://study.com/academy/lesson/speciation-definition-examples-role-in-evolution.html https://www.ck12.org/section/Eviden...The-Theory-of-Evolution-::of::-CK-12-Biology/ http://ykonline.yksd.com/distanceedcourses/Courses/Biology/lessons/FourthQuarter/Chapter14/14-1.html
+ I've seen everything that's been provided. There isn't a shred of evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species. All that's been put up is extrapolation. Please provide such evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species.
I'm not a Creationist. And my argument isn't about religion. I've been trying to keep this about science and you and others find a need to bring religion up and it's obvious you were taught this by somebody. You and others can't fathom that someone can have a rational reason to not believing in evolution. That being the incredible lack of evidence and need for speculation. Nor can you deal with the fact that I'm not using religion for a reason to not accept it. I'm going to get back the request. Please provide evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species.
Not true. I understand the scientific method very well. Can you provide evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species? Can you use the scientific method to do this?
Are you serious? These are the usual suspects. Not a single one of these sites provide evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species in the fossil record or elsewhere. Maybe YOU should have read them before posting. I have several times. There's the usual extrapolations with artistic renderings but nothing showing the evidence of a species gradually transitioning into another species.
??? You're just denying whatever you see that you don't want to see. The problem here is that you just refuse to accept any form of evidence. If there were a video of speciation happening, you would just claim it was doctored or whatever.
Quite ingenious of those religions, I admit. A shame they cannot be truly confirmed or disproven though. At least, not to my knowledge.
I used to follow this discussion but gave up after asking those who don't believe in evolution to explain how they think all the different forms of life occurred on Earth, and never getting an answer.
