Any evidence for evolution yet?

There is no proof of evolution. FACT

There is no proof of God. FACT

Believing in either is an act of faith. Arguing for one or the other makes you a 'tard. FACT

This. FACT

Any evolution of evidence yet?
for every belief system or religion - including science and spiritualism.

On the other hand; there is plenty in the way of evidence
telling of devolution, degradation, and decay.

Of course there is. We used to have to club each other to death - now we can vaporize whole populations with a flick of a switch.

I wonder if we buried a Honda Accord in the desert and dug it up 50 years later, would it have become a Mercedes?

Evolution is not based on scientific fact. Theories at best. It takes faith to believe in Evolution and it takes faith to believe in Creationism.

I wonder if the same scientists who promote Evolution also believe in global warming?

I guess that's why it's called "Theory of Evolution".
Just a shame that the other one isn't called "Theory of Creation".

if you don't see this as evidence then you really have some serious misunderstanding somewhere in your understanding of evolution theory.

but speciation itself has been observed. that is proof of evolution...

Last Edited by synapsid on 10/12/2014 03:42 AM

why don't you just take an hour of your life to research what the theory of evolution is??? you hate the theory so much yet you have absolutely no clue what it is... only your ignorant views of it judging by that first part of your post. you also don't even know the difference of scientific theory and normal theory.

Last Edited by synapsid on 10/12/2014 03:48 AM

No but there is plenty of evidence for devolution, right here on GLP.

If the proof that is for evolution was against a man in Texas in a murder trial he would have been executed.

The one thing I can't serious about evolution is the fact some people use it as an excuse to claim there is no God. Have you searched the entire fucking universe for God? WHAT FUCKERY IS THAT?

What god are you refering to?

Mine is never "too" hard.
You first, troll, a picture of the great white father.
Why great white father?
Because, if he were black, the whole world would look like Africa

Captain Ahab?
Is that you?

The existence of a Creator is indicated by the statistical improbability of any part of what we understand as our existence as being any sort of random construct.

The order is anything but random.

Despite valiant efforts by Frankenstein science, there has not ever been even ONE single occurrence of "Life" erupting from inorganic compounds.

Evolution = FAIL

I can't believe it is allowed to be taught as "science" in a children's classroom.

Believing in "Evolution" is like believing in Batman, Superman, or Lux-Luthor, it exists only in the pages of cartoons and comic books.

"Evolution" is nothing more than the delusion of the hapless brain-wash victim being unable to separate fantasy from reality, or cartoons from real evidence.
.

Dunno, mrvfu shows us if a giraffe sticks his neck above the crowd he risk loosing it.

Yeah you probably don't get it....

Standing at one end of a football field trying to hit a silver dollar at the other end with a football while blind folded is extremely hard.

Do it a 10 to the power of 100 and it becomes inevitable.

Thats multiverse theory.

Sad. Where are you evolutionists getting this nonsense from? Do you even know what speciation is?

"Speciation" could occur for trillions of years, and it does not necessitate the origin of a single new anatomical structure.

You would understand this if you knew what speciation was.

Honestly it's like talking to children trying to reason with evolutionists. You guys don't even get basic concepts.

That isn't a theory, it's just a dumb idea. According to the multiverse theory, there is a universe out there where the flying spaghetti monster actually does exist. In fact, such a universe is inevitable.

Seriously. That's what multiverse proponents must believe as a matter of principle.

This is the absurd lengths atheists must go to deny their Creator and all the marks of obvious design that have been left in our universe.

Ffs. This isn't the 1800s anymore. Goddamn.

I do not see any.

there is ample evidence to support some of the mechanisms of evolutionary theory. But evolution is only 'part' of the equation.

No there must not be a universe with a flying spagetti monster. It is more likely that most universes does not function at all well.

Or we could just go with the religious angle and say that the universe is eternal. It has always been. So it was not created.

You know, like religious people say about god.

Could not the universe be magical just like a god?

Everything is magical.

Looking at you? No.

You realize evolution is descent with modification right? It does not just randomly create something new from scratch. It modifies what is already there.

For example, whale fins are just modified arms, hands, fingers. look at the bones of a whale. it looks awfully familiar.

Last Edited by synapsid on 10/14/2014 03:40 AM

Supernatural is science we do not yet understand.

Nachos, even Young Earth Creation is "descent with modification". Gene pools are getting shallower, organisms are getting less healthy. This is all "descent with modification".

YOU believe that all organisms' body plans / anatomical systems originated from a common ancestor over billions of years. You're arguing UNIVERSAL COMMON ANCESTRY, remember?

There is nothing about "speciation" that inherently promotes this kind of evolutionary development.

All you've done is demonstrate you do not understand speciation or evolution theory.... again.

Yet in a couple posts you'll be ignorantly yammering on about how it is proven that we descended from fish because "speciation" happens. You're hopeless.




This is the standard homology argument. It does nothing for you but beg the question of whether similarities imply relatedness.

Evolutionists believed the distal elements of lobe-finned fish were homologous with the digits of tetrapods, for the very same reasons. They looked similar and shared a common organizational pattern at the end of the proximal limb.

A few months ago they discovered that tetrapod digits are organized by different genes than the distal elements of fish. Oops. There goes one homology argument, and it demonstrates the faulty logic in making those assumptions.

Tetrapod front limb pentadactyl patterns look strikingly similar to those on the hind limbs. But nobody believes the front limb evolved from the hind limb. Oops, your homology logic fails again.

I'm sure this is all going over your head, Nachos, since you don't actually study Evolution theory.

Nachos: Dur, the bones look da same, durrr, evolooshun.

My, they have done a number on your reasoning abilities... I feel sorry for you.