Did evolution happen ?

[fncceo]

HOLE COMMENT

I made no comments about anyone's holes.

That would be rude.

 

[SandSquid]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

Because evolution is the dividing of a species with one remaining successful where it is and another moving off in a new direction. The chimps and gorillas do quite well in the jungle and have remained much the same. Hominids moved onto the ground, out onto the savannah, and the rest is history. Here we are discussing it.

"If Apes Evolved From Monkeys, Why Are There Still Monkeys?"

The fact that there are many species of animals which are unchanged after millions of years, negates the whole "theory" of evolution.

Wrong. Your assumption that they are unchanged is incorrect. Rates of change can vary greatly depending on environmental influences.

There are many species of plant and animal life that hasnt changed one bit over the last millions of years, even though their environment supposedly has. The fact that environment influences hasn't altered those lifeforms, completely invalidates the whole myth of "climate change" and "global warming."

What animal/plant are you saying hasn't evolved??

If you are talking about "living fossils"... Animals which seem to have not changed much in their skeletal remains. Luckily for you there's been a blowup in genetics the past few decades, so lets catch you up from your 1970's views since debunked by science. We've seen with Coelacanths, horseshoe crabs and plenty of other species that not only do we see some changes in the skeletal structure but genetically they have evolved A LOT.

No, that doesn't "invalidate" science. That's proving science.


And you can see animals changing where they live in their environments. Alligators survived the ice age by not living as far north. They lived in the warmer waters of the Caribbean based on fossil records. Now with warming their environment is expanding north. Their environment never changed to force evolution, just the area that environment covered. And of course there's numerous alligator evolutions, from caymans to crocodiles.

 

[Hollie]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

Because evolution is the dividing of a species with one remaining successful where it is and another moving off in a new direction. The chimps and gorillas do quite well in the jungle and have remained much the same. Hominids moved onto the ground, out onto the savannah, and the rest is history. Here we are discussing it.

"If Apes Evolved From Monkeys, Why Are There Still Monkeys?"

The fact that there are many species of animals which are unchanged after millions of years, negates the whole "theory" of evolution.

What do you mean?

The entire premise of evolution is that as change is NECESSARY animals will change to adapt to their environment to survive. If the environment doesn't change in some area's, horseshoe crabs in those area's don't evolve.

And you can see it today. Drug resistant bacteria. Pesticide resistant bugs. Used to be you could wipe out everything with penecillin and DDT. Now there are piles of evolved life forms that can live through it.

If you don't believe in evolution, put your money where your mouth is. Get yourself a case of Gonnorhea. 100% curable 60 years ago with penecillin. And only allow yourself penecillin to cure yourself. If no evolution, you are cured and no problem. It sounds nice in theory to take your stance. But we literally have evolution occurring around us today.


Maybe you think God is dumb. That he gave Whales vestigal legs because he didn't know what he was doing. Maybe you think our tailbone which serves no purpose was God just messing up. I think it was evolution and not God screwing up.

Look people are fallible. We were when we used religion as the reason the Sun moves around the earth. We were on this case too. It doesn't do away with God or the Bible.

that in no way is the premise of evolution

and no whales dont have legs,,,those bones are for muscle

but evolution is ever changing so that way the brain dead cANT EXPLAIN Iit

any moron that thinks human evolved from a rock is a dumbass

Completely wrong. Evolution is NEVER changing natural process, just like gravity.

Any moron who thinks anyone believes humans evolved from a rock is a dumbass.

if it doesnt change then whats the process???

and whats the primordial soup if not rock soup

most evos are to dumb to even know what evo teachs

I'm sure the relevant science community could benefit from your Jimmy Swaggert inspired Theory of Rock Evolution.

Don't question the theory of rock evolution!

well evos are dumber than a box of rocks

Vestigial bones prove that the gods have a sense of humor.

 

[SandSquid]

those bones are for muscle

Vestigial bones and muscles.

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

 

[progressive hunter]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

Because evolution is the dividing of a species with one remaining successful where it is and another moving off in a new direction. The chimps and gorillas do quite well in the jungle and have remained much the same. Hominids moved onto the ground, out onto the savannah, and the rest is history. Here we are discussing it.

"If Apes Evolved From Monkeys, Why Are There Still Monkeys?"

The fact that there are many species of animals which are unchanged after millions of years, negates the whole "theory" of evolution.

Wrong. Your assumption that they are unchanged is incorrect. Rates of change can vary greatly depending on environmental influences.

There are many species of plant and animal life that hasnt changed one bit over the last millions of years, even though their environment supposedly has. The fact that environment influences hasn't altered those lifeforms, completely invalidates the whole myth of "climate change" and "global warming."

What animal/plant are you saying hasn't evolved??

If you are talking about "living fossils"... Animals which seem to have not changed much in their skeletal remains. Luckily for you there's been a blowup in genetics the past few decades, so lets catch you up from your 1970's views since debunked by science. We've seen with Coelacanths, horseshoe crabs and plenty of other species that not only do we see some changes in the skeletal structure but genetically they have evolved A LOT.

No, that doesn't "invalidate" science. That's proving science.


And you can see animals changing where they live in their environments. Alligators survived the ice age by not living as far north. They lived in the warmer waters of the Caribbean based on fossil records. Now with warming their environment is expanding north. Their environment never changed to force evolution, just the area that environment covered. And of course there's numerous alligator evolutions, from caymans to crocodiles.

A change within species based on environment and breeding is not evolution

 

[progressive hunter]

those bones are for muscle

Vestigial bones and muscles.

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

 

[alang1216]

Evolution deals only with living things, NOT how living things came to be.

Most creationists are, by choice, almost completely ignorant of just what evolution teaches.

we are talking about evolution so dont change the subject,,,and you obviously know nothing about it since at its core it teachs we came from a primordial soup and evolved from there

please go educate yourself before speaking again

Thanks for so eloquently proving my point. I may not know much, but I do know the difference between evolution and abiogenesis.

 

[TNHarley]

Attenborough is probably the greatest living Englishman and his brother ran Jurassic Park. I think he pretty much nailed the intelligent design nut.

Evolution happens. Fact.
Our origins are questionable though.

 

[SandSquid]

those bones are for muscle

Vestigial bones and muscles.

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

 

[progressive hunter]

those bones are for muscle

Vestigial bones and muscles.

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

link please

 

[SandSquid]

Because evolution is the dividing of a species with one remaining successful where it is and another moving off in a new direction. The chimps and gorillas do quite well in the jungle and have remained much the same. Hominids moved onto the ground, out onto the savannah, and the rest is history. Here we are discussing it.

"If Apes Evolved From Monkeys, Why Are There Still Monkeys?"

The fact that there are many species of animals which are unchanged after millions of years, negates the whole "theory" of evolution.

Wrong. Your assumption that they are unchanged is incorrect. Rates of change can vary greatly depending on environmental influences.

There are many species of plant and animal life that hasnt changed one bit over the last millions of years, even though their environment supposedly has. The fact that environment influences hasn't altered those lifeforms, completely invalidates the whole myth of "climate change" and "global warming."

What animal/plant are you saying hasn't evolved??

If you are talking about "living fossils"... Animals which seem to have not changed much in their skeletal remains. Luckily for you there's been a blowup in genetics the past few decades, so lets catch you up from your 1970's views since debunked by science. We've seen with Coelacanths, horseshoe crabs and plenty of other species that not only do we see some changes in the skeletal structure but genetically they have evolved A LOT.

No, that doesn't "invalidate" science. That's proving science.


And you can see animals changing where they live in their environments. Alligators survived the ice age by not living as far north. They lived in the warmer waters of the Caribbean based on fossil records. Now with warming their environment is expanding north. Their environment never changed to force evolution, just the area that environment covered. And of course there's numerous alligator evolutions, from caymans to crocodiles.

A change within species based on environment and breeding is not evolution

No, alligators moving to where they can survive isn't evolution. What is would be
Champsosaurus evolving into modern crocodiles and brachychampsa Montana evolving into the American Alligator

What you are proving is evolution exists, and goes at different speeds among different species. Thanks for debunking yourself.

Your argument on monkeys and humans while dozens of other species are the same way and that branching from extinct parent species is pure ignorance.

I get it. You are ignorant on this topic, otherwise you wouldn't have brought that up. OR you are intentionally trying to use falsehoods to support your cause.

Either way you've been proven on it multiple times. Thanks for debunking yourself and showing you have no knowledge on this topic. Yes I will believe a biologist or a geneticist over an uneducated twat on the net who can't even defend his basic lies.

Please, go and educate yourself first. Then maybe when you have an educated opinion, return.

 

[SandSquid]

Vestigial bones and muscles.

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

link please

Take five seconds on google and educate yourself using peer reviewed studies and actual scientists.

If your goal is to stick your head in the sand and say "look, the sun doesn't exist since I can't see it and I have no desire to educate myself further".

That is on you. Not going to hold your hand and babysit you, if you are that fucking hopeless that you can't learn on your own if you don't like what you would learn so be it.


Thanks but I have no desire to debate those who willingly choose to be ignorant on the subject here.

 

[progressive hunter]

The fact that there are many species of animals which are unchanged after millions of years, negates the whole "theory" of evolution.

Wrong. Your assumption that they are unchanged is incorrect. Rates of change can vary greatly depending on environmental influences.

There are many species of plant and animal life that hasnt changed one bit over the last millions of years, even though their environment supposedly has. The fact that environment influences hasn't altered those lifeforms, completely invalidates the whole myth of "climate change" and "global warming."

What animal/plant are you saying hasn't evolved??

If you are talking about "living fossils"... Animals which seem to have not changed much in their skeletal remains. Luckily for you there's been a blowup in genetics the past few decades, so lets catch you up from your 1970's views since debunked by science. We've seen with Coelacanths, horseshoe crabs and plenty of other species that not only do we see some changes in the skeletal structure but genetically they have evolved A LOT.

No, that doesn't "invalidate" science. That's proving science.


And you can see animals changing where they live in their environments. Alligators survived the ice age by not living as far north. They lived in the warmer waters of the Caribbean based on fossil records. Now with warming their environment is expanding north. Their environment never changed to force evolution, just the area that environment covered. And of course there's numerous alligator evolutions, from caymans to crocodiles.

A change within species based on environment and breeding is not evolution

No, alligators moving to where they can survive isn't evolution. What is would be
Champsosaurus evolving into modern crocodiles and brachychampsa Montana evolving into the American Alligator

What you are proving is evolution exists, and goes at different speeds among different species. Thanks for debunking yourself.

Your argument on monkeys and humans while dozens of other species are the same way and that branching from extinct parent species is pure ignorance.

I get it. You are ignorant on this topic, otherwise you wouldn't have brought that up. OR you are intentionally trying to use falsehoods to support your cause.

Either way you've been proven on it multiple times. Thanks for debunking yourself and showing you have no knowledge on this topic. Yes I will believe a biologist or a geneticist over an uneducated twat on the net who can't even defend his basic lies.

Please, go and educate yourself first. Then maybe when you have an educated opinion, return.

but evo teachs we all evolved from rocks,,,

wheres the proof

 

[progressive hunter]

those bones are for muscle to attach to help them give birth


DONT KNOW WHY IT DIDNT POST THE HOLE COMMENT

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

link please

Take five seconds on google and educate yourself using peer reviewed studies and actual scientists.

If your goal is to stick your head in the sand and say "look, the sun doesn't exist since I can't see it and I have no desire to educate myself further".

That is on you. Not going to hold your hand and babysit you, if you are that fucking hopeless that you can't learn on your own if you don't like what you would learn so be it.


Thanks but I have no desire to debate those who willingly choose to be ignorant on the subject here.

its your claim so you back it up

 

[SandSquid]

No, they are vestigal and serve no purpose. Same as the snakes vestigal legs, or animals in the deep pacific with zero sunlight having vestigal eyes that do not see anything.

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

link please

Take five seconds on google and educate yourself using peer reviewed studies and actual scientists.

If your goal is to stick your head in the sand and say "look, the sun doesn't exist since I can't see it and I have no desire to educate myself further".

That is on you. Not going to hold your hand and babysit you, if you are that fucking hopeless that you can't learn on your own if you don't like what you would learn so be it.


Thanks but I have no desire to debate those who willingly choose to be ignorant on the subject here.

its your claim so you back it up

Actually in response to your lie which you haven't been able to back up.

And it's fucking 5th grade science. Not sure if maybe you just never made it that far, or ignored it or just live in your own world where basic science and educating yourself is beyond your ability.

But yeah, thats on you kiddo. If you want to fight about how you wish to remain ignorant of basic facts, that's your stance. I'm not going to let someone intentionally trying to be a moron bring me down to their level. You've made it clear you have no desire to educate yourself on the topic at hand, since then you can't spout your easily scientifically disproven lies.

Thank you.

 

[progressive hunter]

have you always been this ignorant or are you just evolving???

the snakes use their hooks everytime they have sex and the whales couldnt give birth without their muscles being attached where they are

The group of snakes you are talking about with pelvic spurs are those where those leg appendages push outside the snake, not the ones with the structure still existing internally. And studies have shown while some species use them for reproduction it isn't necessary for all and many with them don't. Why are they there still?

Why do dozens of species have eyes that don't have vision?

Why do all whales have vestigal legs even though some don't use them? Why do many embryo's start with legs in whales, but they disappear in development and why do they have defined femurs and tibias which are not needed at all? And why do the ones who do use have evolved larger legs? Why do some of those legs have digits even which are not used?

Why does a whale shark, who filter feeds on plankton still have teeth?

Why does a Galapagos Cormorant have wings? They don't use them to fly or steer underwater. with no predators to fly away from they forgot them.

Why do owls have vestigal hands on their wings?

Why do dandelion who reproduce through cloning, have male and female sex organs?

Why do humans have wisdom teeth and appendixes, which only serve to hurt our survivability, and can be removed with zero negative impact?

On animals erector pili are used to puff up their fur and make them appear larger and scarier to predators. Goosebumps on people (same reaction) serve no purpose. Why?

You are only answering part of the question there bucko. That's not supporting your cause, saying 'well at times some of those vestigal organs may be used in certain species" and ignoring the rest which don't use them.

link please

Take five seconds on google and educate yourself using peer reviewed studies and actual scientists.

If your goal is to stick your head in the sand and say "look, the sun doesn't exist since I can't see it and I have no desire to educate myself further".

That is on you. Not going to hold your hand and babysit you, if you are that fucking hopeless that you can't learn on your own if you don't like what you would learn so be it.


Thanks but I have no desire to debate those who willingly choose to be ignorant on the subject here.

its your claim so you back it up

Actually in response to your lie which you haven't been able to back up.

And it's fucking 5th grade science. Not sure if maybe you just never made it that far, or ignored it or just live in your own world where basic science and educating yourself is beyond your ability.

But yeah, thats on you kiddo. If you want to fight about how you wish to remain ignorant of basic facts, that's your stance. I'm not going to let someone intentionally trying to be a moron bring me down to their level. You've made it clear you have no desire to educate yourself on the topic at hand, since then you can't spout your easily scientifically disproven lies.

Thank you.

when you tell me how to prove a negative, or that something didnt happen I will back it up

to date there is not one single piece of evidence that we evolved from a rock much less anything else evo claims

 

[Hollie]

Wrong. Your assumption that they are unchanged is incorrect. Rates of change can vary greatly depending on environmental influences.

There are many species of plant and animal life that hasnt changed one bit over the last millions of years, even though their environment supposedly has. The fact that environment influences hasn't altered those lifeforms, completely invalidates the whole myth of "climate change" and "global warming."

What animal/plant are you saying hasn't evolved??

If you are talking about "living fossils"... Animals which seem to have not changed much in their skeletal remains. Luckily for you there's been a blowup in genetics the past few decades, so lets catch you up from your 1970's views since debunked by science. We've seen with Coelacanths, horseshoe crabs and plenty of other species that not only do we see some changes in the skeletal structure but genetically they have evolved A LOT.

No, that doesn't "invalidate" science. That's proving science.


And you can see animals changing where they live in their environments. Alligators survived the ice age by not living as far north. They lived in the warmer waters of the Caribbean based on fossil records. Now with warming their environment is expanding north. Their environment never changed to force evolution, just the area that environment covered. And of course there's numerous alligator evolutions, from caymans to crocodiles.

A change within species based on environment and breeding is not evolution

No, alligators moving to where they can survive isn't evolution. What is would be
Champsosaurus evolving into modern crocodiles and brachychampsa Montana evolving into the American Alligator

What you are proving is evolution exists, and goes at different speeds among different species. Thanks for debunking yourself.

Your argument on monkeys and humans while dozens of other species are the same way and that branching from extinct parent species is pure ignorance.

I get it. You are ignorant on this topic, otherwise you wouldn't have brought that up. OR you are intentionally trying to use falsehoods to support your cause.

Either way you've been proven on it multiple times. Thanks for debunking yourself and showing you have no knowledge on this topic. Yes I will believe a biologist or a geneticist over an uneducated twat on the net who can't even defend his basic lies.

Please, go and educate yourself first. Then maybe when you have an educated opinion, return.

but evo teachs we all evolved from rocks,,,

wheres the proof

Even by the standards (such as they are), of the nonsense you find at creation.com, the above is the silliest yet.

 

[WinterBorn]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

First of all, evolution does not say we evolved from modern apes. It says we have a common ancestor.

Second of all, the modern apes will a niche in their environment. They will not evolve into something identical to one that exists. Especially now that it is common for species to be far less isolated.

 

[progressive hunter]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

First of all, evolution does not say we evolved from modern apes. It says we have a common ancestor.

Second of all, the modern apes will a niche in their environment. They will not evolve into something identical to one that exists. Especially now that it is common for species to be far less isolated.

they only changed to that in the last few yrs since they couldnt prove we came from apes,,,just like the did with global cooling to global warming to now climate change

and they cant even show what we evolved from now so they say a common ancestor,,,

well other than we all came from a rock

 

[WinterBorn]

If evolution it a fact, then why are there apes today like there were hundreds of thousands of years ago? And why haven't they evolved into humans, like evolutionists believe?

First of all, evolution does not say we evolved from modern apes. It says we have a common ancestor.

Second of all, the modern apes will a niche in their environment. They will not evolve into something identical to one that exists. Especially now that it is common for species to be far less isolated.

they only changed to that in the last few yrs since they couldnt prove we came from apes,,,just like the did with global cooling to global warming to now climate change

and they cant even show what we evolved from now so they say a common ancestor,,,

well other than we all came from a rock

The last couple of years?? Bullshit. I was taught that in the 9th grade in 1974.