Evolution has not been proven and probably never will be in our lifetime.

Question 1:

1. Ardipithecus Ramidus
2. Australopithecus Anamensis
3. Australopithecus Afarensis
4. Australopithecus Africanus
5. Australopithecus Garhi
6. Paranthropus Robustus
7. Paranthropus Boisei
8. Homo Habilis
9. Homo Erectus

Enough for you?

And no, there aren't tons of them. Fossilisation is an extremely rare process

Question 2:

Evolution has been observed outside of the lab many, many times. I't called micro-evolution. A classic example of this is the case of the peppered moth.

Question 3:

Abiogenesis or the origin of life has nothing to do with macro evolution. We will never know for sure the details of what the atmosphere or conditions on Earth were like over four billion years ago.

Should have just quoted this.

You don't prove scientific theories, you attempt to falsify them.

I would venture to guess there isn't a person alive that could even prove the Earth was here 4 billion years ago.

Ok astrology may not be a science. That doesn't change my point.

Getting old is not evolution. I think you should do some reading about what evolutioary theory is all about.

read ALL my posts above. I'm NOT religious.

Evolutionists are just as bad as the religious when it comes to this issue. You jump before reading or listening. You're almost no different than religious zealots.

Asking me to accept Evolution given the information we have today is like handing you a Bible and asking you to accept Jesus as your creator.

Thank you for proving the theory of evolution.

Evolution is the changing of a species due to it's enviroment, for instance FOOD. Dinosaurs were already becoing extinct becasue of the changes in the earths temperature, climate and oxygen levels.

Man evolved when he learned to stand up in the grass lands gave him a better chance of seeing his predators.

For an anti Evolutionist you certainly do agree with it.

If you believe in the creation theory prove to me the earth was created in 6 days. Lay it out in a day by day order, demonstrate creation as you ask us to demonstrate evolution.

okay. correct me if i'm wrong. evolution does not say man evolved FROM apes. it says that man and apes evolved from the same critters. rodents.

That is absolute hogwash.

How much do you even know about the evidence for evolution?

Exactly

NUTRITION allowing bones to grow to their full potential is NOT evolution.

So a guy starving who is skinny is skinny because of evolution? No it's because he hasn't been fed. omg

I still dont see there is a conflict, you can beleive in god, jesus and the bible and still believe in evolution. God didnt write the bible, he was just the leading character :)

You need to re-read your bible. Jesus' daddy is the creator. The son is the saviour.

It changes. It's was once apes, now it's rodents. Tomorrow it will be kangaroos.

I prefer a response from someone that actually knows the answer, thank you.

He never once said he beleived in the creation theory :)

Okay before I even go any further, those who think they know anything about the theory of evolution, read this and then get back to me with your objections:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Ive long suspected that Australians come from Kangaroos, they all have long noses and are good at sports :glugglug

It's the same thing.

I know that you can't prove or disprove evolution over millions of years the same as you can't prove or disprove we were put here by God. Finding a few varying bones in the ground does no such thing.

Hawking. I have a BS in physics by the way.

OK, so if you read Genesis you see that right away God created the light and the darkness and called the light "day". There's the definition of a day for you. One light rules the day, the other light rules the night to give light upon .. surprise! The Earth! The author called the next evening and morning "the next day". Each new day of "creation" begins with "and the evening and the morning were the nth day".

Also, the creation story has all the "flying fowl" created on the same day as all the creatures of the sea which is very much in conflict with evolution.

The story is clearly in an extremely deep conflict with evolution when the only way you can reconcile the two stories is to assume that day refers to a period of time in an undiscovered place called heaven where either due to a massive gravitational or due to its moving at an extremely high velocity one day is actually millions. "Day" is defined in the bible in a clear enough way.

Nobody "knows" the answer. People become so irrational when it comes to this discussion.

So what do you believe in?

Evolution, creation, something else or just like a good argument?

Or you can not believe in either. I never said they couldn't co-exist, I said there is no way in hell to make me accept evolution based on the information available today.

No it's not the same thing.

If you are truly interested, read this: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

:1orglaugh :thumbsup

That sounds pretty far fetched. I'd have to see some convincing poll numbers from groups that I would be willing to believe. Polls funded by people like Kent Hovind don't count.

Someone does know. And you are not that person.

I'm agnostic. I don't know.

What I believe of my own volition, is that man was always man. Rodents were always rodents. Apes were always apes. That's just my gut feeling.

yep but the creation theory people actually have the last laugh. Because if you beleive in evolution and you are right, when we day thats it, you cant say told you so. But if you beleive in the creation theory, when we die the smug fuckers will be saying, I told you so :glugglug

Not true, evolution can and has been observed by almost every biologist. Speciation has been documented by a few biologists as well. Creationists have issue because someone told them that evolution explains the origins of life, but it doesn't.

Wow, you REALLY need to get yourself into a classroom and read the scientific literature.

The bottom line is that the vast majority of people who argue against evolution have no idea or understanding of the arguments in favour of it or the evidence supporting it.

Way to much misinformation in this thread.

found my answer:

http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mevolution.html

Dear Straight Dope:

I am not a believer in evolution, but I ran across this expression, and wondered why it isn't used in arguments against evolution. The expression is: If man evolved from monkeys and apes, why do we still have monkeys and apes? --John Steward

SDSTAFF David replies:

Why isn't this argument used against evolution? Well, it is--it's just used incorrectly. Let's start with a quote from the recently re-released publication, Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences (Second Edition). In the section on "Human Evolution," the publication notes, "today there is no significant scientific doubt about the close evolutionary relationships among all primates, including humans."

Evolution doesn't work as a simple find-and-replace function. Have you ever seen the evolutionary "tree" diagrams in a science book? Those trees show how different species branch off and go in different evolutionary directions. That doesn't necessarily mean everything else dies. As the National Academy of Sciences document notes, archaeological finds "reveal a well-branched tree, parts of which trace a general evolutionary sequence leading from ape-like forms to modern humans."

The NAS publication actually answers your question directly in its Appendix of Frequently Asked Questions. It says:

"Humans did not evolve from modern apes, but humans and modern apes shared a common ancestor, a species that no longer exists. Because we share a recent common ancestor with chimpanzees and gorillas, we have many anatomical, genetic, biochemical, and even behavioral similarities with these African great apes. We are less similar to the Asian apes orangutans and gibbons and even less similar to monkeys, because we share common ancestors with these groups in the more distant past.

"Evolution is a branching or splitting process in which populations split off from one another and gradually become different. As the two groups become isolated from each other, they stop sharing genes, and eventually genetic differences increase until members of the groups can no longer interbreed. At this point, they have become separate species. Through time, these two species might give rise to new species, and so on through millennia."

In other words, the "ape-like" animals that eventually gave rise to humans split up into several branches, all of which evolved in different directions. Some of those lines became become extinct; others survived. One of the surviving groups includes you and me (and in theory P.E. teachers, although one wonders). Other survivors include the various species of monkeys and apes we find today.

So, John, I've convinced you, right? Attaboy--always nice to have another ally in the fight against ignorance. Incidentally, you can find the NAS publication on the web at http://books.nap.edu/html/creationism/. Lots of good info in there!

:1orglaugh

Yeah God knows I guess, huh?

Hey, here's a little something to chew on. If you weren't around 200 million years ago when this process supposedly took place, you can not know for certain.

I'm glad you have that much faith in other mortal men. It's nice to know authority figures out there can tell you anything and as long as they have a Phd and are called a Scientist you'll accept what they believe without questioning it. That's one of the reassosn why patients wind up dead in hospitals. They don't question their doctor.

Humans and chimps are believed to have an ancestor about 5-7 million years ago. It would have been ape-like, not rodent like. But of course if you go much further back you will eventually have a rodent-like ancestor as all mammals are (as are all animals) related.

I thought you were never going to show up.

At least you have some idea about the subject at hand.

I remember from a previous thread.

Mine is an example of Evolution over a few hundred years, multiply that by thousands, factor in enviroment and breeding and you have evolution.

Too clever for you?

If I showed you a 1,000 piece jigsaw with only 200 pieces would you deny the existance of the jigsaw?

That is evolution and unfinished jigsaw.

So come on what do you believe in?

lol yeah sucks either way.