Evolution?

[Patrick]

So do you believe in evolution? Do you think man evolved from monkeys? I know many people don't believe in this but it seems to be a scientific fact.

If you are the type who believes in creationism do you believe in micro -evolution, or small adaptations of a species?

[Awakening]

I am a creationist. I do believe in microevolution, however macroevolution (modern evolutionist theory) doesn't make any sense to me at all.

Man DID NOT evolve from monkeys. It's quite simple - the same "blueprints" were used in the creation of both man and monkey.

If I show you a Boeing 747 and a Helio Courier, you will notice something. They are very similiar. Both have wings, both defy gravity, both have engines, and both require pilots. Does this mean that the Boeing 747 evolved from the Helio Courier? Of course not. All this means is that similar "blueprints" were used in the creation of both. The fact that these two objects have similar features isn't evidence of an evolutionary process taking place. In the same way, it is silly to argue that man evolved from monkeys solely on the premise of likeness.

If monkeys are so similar to us, then why can't they talk? Think logically? Build schools? Manage a restaurant? Write poetry? And why is it that a select number of them simply failed to evolve into humans? As you can see, evolution has too many gaps to fill in.

This brings me to my next point: Evolution requires the presence of transitional forms in the fossil record in order to be a valid theory. However, scientists haven't found any transitional fossil that hasn't been the subject of controversy.

Want to talk about Lucy?
Scientists now agree that Lucy was simply the skeleton of a 3 foot tall chimpanzee. Not evidence.

Want to talk about Nebraska man?
His entire skeleton was made from one tooth, later found to be the tooth of an extinct pig. Not evidence.

Want to talk about Piltdown man?
It turns out his jawbone belonged to that of a modern ape. Not evidence.

Want to talk about Neanderthal man?
Such brain deformations are present because the remains have been linked to a man suffering from arthritis. Not evidence.

You might argue that vestigial organs prove evolution. Please clarify this. What you don't realize is that many of these vestigial organs are necessary for the survival of that creature. As one example - most species of whales can't reproduce without their pelvic bones: what scientists consider to be their vestigial organs. Even when you do find a creature that ABSOLUTELY DOES NOT NEED its vestigial organs, you have to beg the question: In what way does that disprove creationism? It doesn't.

So where is the evidence for evolution? Pushing back to abiogenesis, how does something come from nothing? It doesn't.

How does such order and complexity come from single-celled organisms? How can intelligence come from an unintelligent source? Scientists only speculate that evolution could be possible on the notion that creationism couldn't be true. And why couldn't it? Evolution simply has too many questions to answer before it can be taken seriously.

I believe evolution is a fairy tale for grownups. There's no rock hard scientific evidence to support it.

[Swifty]

Evolution is not a fact by any means. It is a strong theory but still only a theory.

Awakening, all your arguments are incorrect. There are many many many transitional forms found thus far. In fact they almost have the complete transitional forms for modern day horses. Sure there are still gaps especially in the human are but that does not disprove evolution.

Modern day monkeys aren't human and they lack even close to the brainpower we do to do the things you speak of. However monkeys can use tools that far exceeds the mental capacity of almost any other animal. We evolved from a completely different monkey ancestor. It wasn't that some monkeys evolved and others didn't it is that we split off the evolutionary tree into a different direction and modern day monkeys went a different direction. That doesn't mean that one day modern day monkeys couldn't evolve, in fact around the same time of homo sapiens there were 3 other species of humans. It is just that our species won out. Example the Neanderthals were a different species then homo sapiens in fact recent DNA analysis is strongly suggesting that Neanderthals were so different they were not compatible with homo sapiens sexually wise (they could not impregnate a homo sapien)

There are still questions that scientists are asking themselves. One of the biggest problems with evolution is species that are self destructive or give themselves before others. Example there are certain ants in a colony that cannot give birth. They give their lives in service to the queen, in evolution that should not be possible. There is some bird or something like that not sure about all the facts here that actually protect other birds egg's but don't lay their own. Again should not exist in an evolution scenario. Also why do humans risk their lives or give their lives to save others. I am hazy on all the facts in the last few examples but the concept you should understand. That is the biggest thorn in scientists sides today.

...but does evolution exist? If you are unbiased there is no doubt.

and Awakening a fairy tale...and um the story of god isn't?!? There isn't even any proof of a god so he is closer to santa clause or the tooth fairy then evolution. Also monkeys share about 99.9% of our DNA structure. If you want to do an example of that compare a Pentium 3 computer to a Pentium 4 running the exact same everything except the chipset. That is how close we are to monkeys. In fact the deviation of all life on earth deviates by no more then like 12% in their DNA structures.

[Awakening]

Swifty, all your rebuttals are incorrect.
Here's your first paragraph:

"Modern day monkeys aren't human and they lack even close to the brainpower we do to do the things you speak of. However monkeys can use tools that far exceeds the mental capacity of almost any other animal. We evolved from a completely different monkey ancestor. It wasn't that some monkeys evolved and others didn't it is that we split off the evolutionary tree into a different direction and modern day monkeys went a different direction (Assuming one believes the theory, you still haven't provided proof). That doesn't mean that one day modern day monkeys couldn't evolve, in fact around the same time of homo sapiens there were 3 other species of humans (Again, assuming one believes the theory - show me a transitional form from primate/ape/monkey --> human). It is just that our species won out (How do you know this?). Example the Neanderthals were a different species then homo sapiens in fact recent DNA analysis is strongly suggesting that Neanderthals were so different they were not compatible with homo sapiens sexually wise (They could not impregnate a homo sapien) (I just showed you that the neanderthals were a hoax. Address my points.)"

Evolution - Neanderthal Hoax, Sources
http://www.museumofhoaxes.com/hoax/weblog/permalink/neanderthal_hoax_exposed/
http://sniggle.net/archforg.php
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/piltdown.html

And here's your second paragraph:
"and Awakening a fairy tale...and um the story of god isn't?!? There isn't even any proof of a god so he is closer to santa clause or the tooth fairy then evolution. Also monkeys share about 99.9% of our DNA structure. If you want to do an example of that compare a Pentium 3 computer to a Pentium 4 running the exact same everything except the chipset. That is how close we are to monkeys. In fact the deviation of all life on earth deviates by no more then like 12% in their DNA structures."

The story of God isn't a fairy tale because unlike evolution, it has proof.
Bible. Validated by Dead Sea Scrolls and fulfilled prophecies. There are hundreds. If you want me to list some, I will gladly.
Jesus. Validated by non-Christian historians, such as Josephus, Tacitus, Pliny the Younger, and Alexandria. Even atheists (and the general consensus of the scientific community) accept his existence as a historical person.

Tell me: What verifies evolution?

Stop assuming things went a certain way. Science deals with that which is testable, observable, and verifiable. Evolution fulfills not one of these. Any transitional forms society has claimed to find only show resemblances to species, not biogenetic sequences.

It's a spinning dot producing single-celled organisms (you should know about this, you seem to be an evolutionist) versus an eternal and intelligent god.

And sorry, evolution is just bogus. I've formally debated evolutionists for over 12 years (since freshmen year in high school), they bring up the same stock every single round.

[Trilobite]

I've always been fascinated with evolution. I personally think its true. I can't be certain - nobody can for sure. I do think people are too uptight about it, when you think about how we'll never really know the truth as to where species originated.

I have a slight interest in evolution in technology, but I've been far more interested in that of living organisms. It fascinates me how some small insignificant changes which would be overlooked in lifetime scale, but on a longer timeline the changes could add up so much, a species changes its form many times.

But, I don't know enough about it. I only ever use it in fictional purposes...

I don't like to see it bashed however. It has as much credibility as any other theory on the origin of living species, yet people seem to hate it so much. I guess I just see more sense in it from what I know, and can't understand people's fear towards it. Free thought, right?

[kruzzen]

I think God creating evolution and those who figured it out made it look totally different than what God wanted but he allowed this through free-will.

:) Opinions?

[Vivacity]

Evolution is just a theory, and like with any theory there will always be evidence for it and against it. With evolution there is extremely strong evidence for it, so therefore I'm going to roll with it until there's extremely strong evidence against it. I'm not going to bother posting any fancy sites, or quote any people with degrees on the matter, because if you want the evidence for my arguement you can simply google it and read it yourself.

[Celestial Dragon]

I do believe in evolution. While it is a theory, at least part of the theory is correct. There are changes and modifications, and animals aren't anything like what they were a long time ago. That tells us something like evolution happened, does it not? I think evolution is pretty much a fact, although I don't really know all that much about the arguments against it.

Evolution is actually an incredibly fascinating subject. Huzzah, evolution. So fancy.

[Herb]

I personally believe in evolution.

Awakening
Your views are very biased. Obviously you are a strong believer in god and I have met people like you many times. In order to understand something you have to look at BOTH sides and listen to it all then put the pieces together for BOTH sides and compare. I am not even going to waste my time with debating someone as biased as you are.
I do however have one question for you....
If the world is only about 6000+ years old, like the bible claims, then how do you explain the millions of year old dinosaur bones?? They existed there is TONS of proof.

[Fly]

I believe in evolution also.

We as a species had to come from somewhere, and the ape is our closest kin.

Until it's proven wrong, I'll still believe it.

Great debate every one.

[Nekara]

Man DID NOT evolve from monkeys. It's quite simple - the same "blueprints" were used in the creation of both man and monkey.

If I show you a Boeing 747 and a Helio Courier, you will notice something. They are very similiar. Both have wings, both defy gravity, both have engines, and both require pilots. Does this mean that the Boeing 747 evolved from the Helio Courier? Of course not. All this means is that similar "blueprints" were used in the creation of both. The fact that these two objects have similar features isn't evidence of an evolutionary process taking place. In the same way, it is silly to argue that man evolved from monkeys solely on the premise of likeness.

If monkeys are so similar to us, then why can't they talk? Think logically? Build schools? Manage a restaurant? Write poetry? And why is it that a select number of them simply failed to evolve into humans? As you can see, evolution has too many gaps to fill in.
You are right. Man did not evolve from monkeys. Man and monkeys evolved from the same ancestor, which was neither man nor monkey :P. It is funny how people keep confusing that.
The funny thing is, you said it yourself. Boing 747 didn't 'evolve' from 'Helio Courier'. They're based on the same blueprints and principles. In biological terms, that translates to ancestor. In the end, both 'Boing 747' and 'Helio Courier'.go aaaaall the way back to the first plane built.
If you keep insisting on disbelieving evolution, I suggest you do some research on the issue yourself, rather than being lazy and demanding it from others. Surely, you can google and read articles on pubmed yourself? :p

Your 'talking' argument is... weird. Some people can draw. Others cannot. Does that mean they can in no way be related? And no, the argument of man evolving from the same 'ancestor' as monkeys is not 'just' based on likeness. It's based on archeological and genetic research. The likeness was just the first hint. Dolphins are like fish. But they are only veeeeeeeeeeeeery distantly related. Why? Because they're mammals who evolved to obtain features similar as fish. How do we know that? Once again, archeological and genetic research. But if we based things on likeness, we'd say they're very closely related.

Let me give you an example of evolution.
There are two populations of rabbits. One north of a mountain range, and one south of a mountain range. Now, assume this is several thousand years ago. Due to the fact that climate fluctuates over time, the temperature in the overall area drops. Both north and south of the mountain range. At the north it starts to snow in winter, at the south, it doesn't. At the north, the rabbits with thin fur/skin die, at the south they don't, because it's warmer there. As this trait is inheritable by genes, at the north, more and more rabbits will have the genes for thick fur and skin.
This is evolution.
Yes, that’s right. This is what evolution is. A change of the gene pool in one population compared to the other. This change gradually, over hundreds and thousands of years can lead to different species. Evolution is a result of natural and sexual selection and not a cause. Heck, even the fact that you're not the same as your dad or mom (genetically) is evolution, even though it just covers two generations.

[xAnonymousx]

But actually, evolution doesn't say we evolded from monkies, but it says that we share a common ancestor with apes.
Just like elephants, mastodons and mammoths, they evolved from the same animals. :eek: