Why aren't monkeys evolving now?

[the_human_being]

Theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves.

Wow......considering that theories are the basis of much of science......that is an amazing statement.

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Einstein believed in intelligent design. I am surprised you chose to use him for an example since you claim to be much more intelligent than anyone who believes in intelligent design.

fascinating- meanwhile I was responding to the idiot who said that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- once again:

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Oh wait- that would be you.

Why is it fascinating to you? It's not fascinating to me. Einstein was intelligent. Unlike you, he didn't have to try to prove his intelligence over and over on a forum.

LOL......you mean like you are trying to do?

You and I are participating in a 'discussion' of sorts. You have some wierd hard on about atheists.

You made the bizarre claim that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- so I pointed out what is probably the single most important theory in the last 200 years- Einstein's theory of General Relativity.

That theory has been hugely important to millions of people- who can think for themselves- thereby demonstrating that your claim is just laughably wrong.

Indeed it has been very important. It is also important that Einstein embraced the belief of intelligent design much to the chagrin of all you super-intelligent aheists.

 

[Hollie]

Wow......considering that theories are the basis of much of science......that is an amazing statement.

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Einstein believed in intelligent design. I am surprised you chose to use him for an example since you claim to be much more intelligent than anyone who believes in intelligent design.

fascinating- meanwhile I was responding to the idiot who said that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- once again:

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Oh wait- that would be you.

Why is it fascinating to you? It's not fascinating to me. Einstein was intelligent. Unlike you, he didn't have to try to prove his intelligence over and over on a forum.

LOL......you mean like you are trying to do?

You and I are participating in a 'discussion' of sorts. You have some wierd hard on about atheists.

You made the bizarre claim that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- so I pointed out what is probably the single most important theory in the last 200 years- Einstein's theory of General Relativity.

That theory has been hugely important to millions of people- who can think for themselves- thereby demonstrating that your claim is just laughably wrong.

Indeed it has been very important. It is also important that Einstein embraced the belief of intelligent design much to the chagrin of all you super-intelligent aheists.

Even if that were true, and it isn't, believing in supernaturalism doesn't make it true. It also does nothing to support your gawds vs. any of the other gawds.

 

[the_human_being]

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.

And without being able to quantify the origins of life, your entire claim of evolution and natural selection or rendered moot. You can't have one without proof of the other.

Now I realize you people will never give up trying to push these theories off as fact, but thankfully there are those of us that are intelligent enough to know you're simply pushing a whole load of garbage.

The following might be helpful for you.

Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution

Hollie fancies herself as one of the foremost scientists of the modern era. Let us use her own recent theory, Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution in our discussion.

My laptop has a dual cpu. This "brain" handles all maintenance background functions to maintain my computer. It also utilizes input devices in which to receive external instructions. It has multitasking capabilities. Hollie agrees my laptop was of intelligent design. Its designer possessed intelligence.

Now let us examine Hollie's Tornado theory of my laptop's own intelligent designer:

The intelligent designer of my laptop has a cpu. His cpu was created by a tornado millions of years ago that raged upon the earth and blew into collision atoms that collided from the random blowing about of this tornado. This random and haphazard collision of atoms which we know not from where they originated resulted in a cpu that could handle in the background all the bodily functions. It could weed out all unnecessary it received from its input sensors of sight, smell, taste, and touch a pass on only the really necessary data. It could also multitask and perform the most complex of mathematical equations all the while it could experience and respond to a myriad of emotions. All this was accomplished by a random act divorced of any intelligent interaction.

To this I say B.S.!!

 

[Hollie]

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.

And without being able to quantify the origins of life, your entire claim of evolution and natural selection or rendered moot. You can't have one without proof of the other.

Now I realize you people will never give up trying to push these theories off as fact, but thankfully there are those of us that are intelligent enough to know you're simply pushing a whole load of garbage.

The following might be helpful for you.

Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution

Hollie fancies herself as one of the foremost scientists of the modern era. Let us use her own recent theory, Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution in our discussion.

My laptop has a dual cpu. This "brain" handles all maintenance background functions to maintain my computer. It also utilizes input devices in which to receive external instructions. It has multitasking capabilities. Hollie agrees my laptop was of intelligent design. Its designer possessed intelligence.

Now let us examine Hollie's Tornado theory of my laptop's own intelligent designer:

The intelligent designer of my laptop has a cpu. His cpu was created by a tornado millions of years ago that raged upon the earth and blew into collision atoms that collided from the random blowing about of this tornado. This random and haphazard collision of atoms which we know not from where they originated resulted in a cpu that could handle in the background all the bodily functions. It could weed out all unnecessary it received from its input sensors of sight, smell, taste, and touch a pass on only the really necessary data. It could also multitask and perform the most complex of mathematical equations all the while it could experience and respond to a myriad of emotions. All this was accomplished by a random act divorced of any intelligent interaction.

To this I say B.S.!!

That's the same silly comparison you tried to make earlier. It was pointless then so why think it's any less pointless now?

 

[the_human_being]

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

You are reduced to making stuff up about me? LOL....

I don't need to know how life began- maybe some mystical god did create the first life and let it keep going- we are unlikely to ever completely resolve something that there can be no fossil record of, but as I said

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works

You are correct again. All evolution requires is a bunch of believers. Evolution is a religion to many.

 

[Syriusly]

Wow......considering that theories are the basis of much of science......that is an amazing statement.

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Einstein believed in intelligent design. I am surprised you chose to use him for an example since you claim to be much more intelligent than anyone who believes in intelligent design.

fascinating- meanwhile I was responding to the idiot who said that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- once again:

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Oh wait- that would be you.

Why is it fascinating to you? It's not fascinating to me. Einstein was intelligent. Unlike you, he didn't have to try to prove his intelligence over and over on a forum.

LOL......you mean like you are trying to do?

You and I are participating in a 'discussion' of sorts. You have some wierd hard on about atheists.

You made the bizarre claim that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- so I pointed out what is probably the single most important theory in the last 200 years- Einstein's theory of General Relativity.

That theory has been hugely important to millions of people- who can think for themselves- thereby demonstrating that your claim is just laughably wrong.

Indeed it has been very important..

So you were just lying- or do you think that you can't think for yourself- when you said this:

'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves-

Since you just admitted that Einstein's theory of relativity was 'very important'

 

[the_human_being]

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

Ah. I see you're still trying to backstroke on one of the nonsense claims coming out of your creation ministries.

Have you considered that being ignorant regarding the evolutionary science makes you a poor candidate to argue against it?

Irony alert.

The irony is that I gave you a comprehensive description of the relevant science community and its acceptance of the there and science of evolution. You couldn't accept that because it clashes with your fundamentalist views.

Hey, I gave you credit for your own theory didn't I. I can't praise you more than I have. You are a legend in your own mind.

 

[Syriusly]

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

You are reduced to making stuff up about me? LOL....

I don't need to know how life began- maybe some mystical god did create the first life and let it keep going- we are unlikely to ever completely resolve something that there can be no fossil record of, but as I said

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works

You are correct again. All evolution requires is a bunch of believers. Evolution is a religion to many.

Whatever fairy tale helps you sleep at night- meanwhile

I don't need to know how life began- maybe some mystical god did create the first life and let it keep going- we are unlikely to ever completely resolve something that there can be no fossil record of, but as I said

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works

 

[the_human_being]

Einstein believed in intelligent design. I am surprised you chose to use him for an example since you claim to be much more intelligent than anyone who believes in intelligent design.

fascinating- meanwhile I was responding to the idiot who said that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- once again:

Einstein's Theory of General Relativity

Oh wait- that would be you.

Why is it fascinating to you? It's not fascinating to me. Einstein was intelligent. Unlike you, he didn't have to try to prove his intelligence over and over on a forum.

LOL......you mean like you are trying to do?

You and I are participating in a 'discussion' of sorts. You have some wierd hard on about atheists.

You made the bizarre claim that 'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves- so I pointed out what is probably the single most important theory in the last 200 years- Einstein's theory of General Relativity.

That theory has been hugely important to millions of people- who can think for themselves- thereby demonstrating that your claim is just laughably wrong.

Indeed it has been very important..

So you were just lying- or do you think that you can't think for yourself- when you said this:

'theories are worth very little to people who can think for themselves-

Since you just admitted that Einstein's theory of relativity was 'very important'

I agree that a theory is as its name implies, a theory.

 

[the_human_being]

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.

And without being able to quantify the origins of life, your entire claim of evolution and natural selection or rendered moot. You can't have one without proof of the other.

Now I realize you people will never give up trying to push these theories off as fact, but thankfully there are those of us that are intelligent enough to know you're simply pushing a whole load of garbage.

The following might be helpful for you.

Five Major Misconceptions about Evolution

Hollie fancies herself as one of the foremost scientists of the modern era. Let us use her own recent theory, Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution in our discussion.

My laptop has a dual cpu. This "brain" handles all maintenance background functions to maintain my computer. It also utilizes input devices in which to receive external instructions. It has multitasking capabilities. Hollie agrees my laptop was of intelligent design. Its designer possessed intelligence.

Now let us examine Hollie's Tornado theory of my laptop's own intelligent designer:

The intelligent designer of my laptop has a cpu. His cpu was created by a tornado millions of years ago that raged upon the earth and blew into collision atoms that collided from the random blowing about of this tornado. This random and haphazard collision of atoms which we know not from where they originated resulted in a cpu that could handle in the background all the bodily functions. It could weed out all unnecessary it received from its input sensors of sight, smell, taste, and touch a pass on only the really necessary data. It could also multitask and perform the most complex of mathematical equations all the while it could experience and respond to a myriad of emotions. All this was accomplished by a random act divorced of any intelligent interaction.

To this I say B.S.!!

That's the same silly comparison you tried to make earlier. It was pointless then so why think it's any less pointless now?

But you still haven't debunked your theory. The genesis of a theory should debunk his/her own theory shouldn't SHE?

 

[Syriusly]

The theory of evolution is among the most robust and well documented theories in science.

It should be pointed out that "Origin of Species" accomplished two very different things.

First:, it demonstrated through a catalog of scientific detail the historical fact of evolution (assuming an understanding of the difference between levels of scientific certainty and the theories that explain them). Using fields as diverse as biology, comparative anatomy,selective breeding, geography and animal behavior, Darwin laid out the evidence and formed a working theory that evolution (descent with modification) had actually occurred.

His evidence was overwhelming. Within little more than a decade after his theory was published, most of the leading biologists of his day were convinced that evolution (descent with modification) was true.

Secondly, Darwin proposed a theory for explaining what we would learn to be fact: "Natural Selection." Contrary to the claim by IDiots that "the gawds did it" by magical means as a way to explain the diversity of life on the planet, (completely unsupported and it assumes the requirement for supernaturalism), Natural Selection makes no such requirement and makes no requirement for coincidence or supermagicalism. Evolution instead defines the objective criterion of "reproductive fitness" as the completely natural mechanism for driving biological change.

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

Well once again this has devolved into those who hate science and believe in 'Creationism'(whatever that is) putting their fingers in their ears and going la la la la

You can believe any fairy tail you want.

Meanwhile science marches on- and the "Theory of Evolution" is part of that march. Not my problem you are left behind with the Flat Earthers.

 

[the_human_being]

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.
.

Whatever dude- believe in whatever fairy dust you want to.

Adaption over time is evolution. You can deny it and you can deny that the Earth is spherical.

Not my problem.

Not mine either. The reason you guys say evolution requires millions and millions of years is because you can't prove it without making such a claim.

 

[Hollie]

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

You are reduced to making stuff up about me? LOL....

I don't need to know how life began- maybe some mystical god did create the first life and let it keep going- we are unlikely to ever completely resolve something that there can be no fossil record of, but as I said

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works

You are correct again. All evolution requires is a bunch of believers. Evolution is a religion to many.

The theory of evolution requires evidence to sustain the theory. That evidence exists. Your denial of the evidence does nothing to refute it. It only makes you religious extremists appear truly out of touch with reality.

Your YEC'ist views already disallow acceptance of science knowledge regarding biological evolution. Evolution is an accepted fact among the relevant science community.

Have you ever taken the time to understand that it is with near exclusivity that those who reject the science of evolution are Christian fundies.

It's comically tragic that your fundamentalist worldview derives from nothing more than the religious tales and fables you were given and like most fundies, you never thought to objectively critique the dogma.

Proof of creationism, supernaturalism and gawds would not take the form of a book that we know was created by men and which we know was changed, edited and revised such that we have no way of knowing the original contents. - and a book containing no eyewitness reportage re: the religious traditions that were the basis for the religion, an arbitrary compilation of writings from murky sources collected and edited decades after the alleged occurrence of the events for which the believers would maintain it provides an infallible account, thus readily attributing divinity to writers unknown (while not to those haphazardly excluded), the compilers, editors, translators, scribes, etc., who had a hand, literally or figuratively, in the literary project. To err is human - but you are among the legions of book worshippers upon whom the believers bestow godhead.

 

[the_human_being]

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

I see. You are a student of Hollie's Theory of Tornado Evolution. It was all about cars and junk yards or something.

Well once again this has devolved into those who hate science and believe in 'Creationism'(whatever that is) putting their fingers in their ears and going la la la la

You can believe any fairy tail you want.

Meanwhile science marches on- and the "Theory of Evolution" is part of that march. Not my problem you are left behind with the Flat Earthers.

I haven't seen any post from anyone claiming anything about a flat earth either. Could you post the post number so I can go back and read it, or is this another excuse to drag something else into the fray that has no bearing?

All of these threads end up the same. They begin by an atheists wanting to showcase his perceived intelligence and when confronted, nothing ius proven and no one's minds are changed. It will happen again whenever another atheists reads a new book or sees something on a web site that he wants to plagerize and claim intelligent superiority.

 

[indiajo]

Indeed it has been very important. It is also important that Einstein embraced the belief of intelligent design much to the chagrin of all you super-intelligent aheists.

Well, he didn't.

Einstein was a non religious Jew. He used some phrases that have religious roots sometimes. As I do when I greet someone in Bavaria. Atheist or not, who cares. Intelligent design appeared only about 20 years ago, developed by some dumbnuts, misusing every quote from any relevant person they could find.
Einstein truly said for example: "God doesn't play dice".
Did he reference to god by this statement? Certainly not. He just let out his disapproval of physical theories about quantum mechanics that could not be perfectly described by physical laws existing at the time.
You completely ignore the understanding of our surroundings at the time the various involontary stooges lived. When Einstein developed the theory of relativity, mankind was only aware of living in a galaxy. Our galaxy. The universe was believed to be static. Nothing existed besides the Milky Way. We did not even know something about Andromeda.
You are absolutely blind for the development of knowledge about the universe during the past 50 years.
You deny on one hand this physical facts, many of your fellows deny Einsteins theories as well, yet you dare to quote him to proof the existance of god?
Retards.

 

[the_human_being]

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.

And without being able to quantify the origins of life, your entire claim of evolution and natural selection or rendered moot. You can't have one without proof of the other.

Now I realize you people will never give up trying to push these theories off as fact, but thankfully there are those of us that are intelligent enough to know you're simply pushing a whole load of garbage.

You're intelligent enough to cut and paste from the ICR.

You just refuted your own claim to being intelligent.

But Hollie, how intelligent can you possibly expect to be? Your brain was slammed together by a tornado wasn't it?

 

[the_human_being]

Indeed it has been very important. It is also important that Einstein embraced the belief of intelligent design much to the chagrin of all you super-intelligent aheists.

Well, he didn't.

Einstein was a non religious Jew. He used some phrases that have religious roots sometimes. As I do when I greet someone in Bavaria. Atheist or not, who cares. Intelligent design appeared only about 20 years ago, developed by some dumbnuts, misusing every quote from any relevant person they could find.
Einstein truly said for example: "God doesn't play dice".
Did he reference to god by this statement? Certainly not. He just let out his disapproval of physical theories about quantum mechanics that could not be perfectly described by physical laws existing at the time.
You completely ignore the understanding of our surroundings at the time the various involontary stooges lived. When Einstein developed the theory of relativity, mankind was only aware of living in a galaxy. Our galaxy. The universe was believed to be static. Nothing existed besides the Milky Way. We did not even know something about Andromeda.
You are absolutely blind for the development of knowledge about the universe during the past 50 years.
You deny on one hand this physical facts, many of your fellows deny Einsteins theories as well, yet you dare to quote him to proof the existance of god?
Retards.

You really do need to do a search about Einstein on the Net. You are just another atheist who just signed on and wants to showcase your ignorance.

 

[Hollie]

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.
.

Whatever dude- believe in whatever fairy dust you want to.

Adaption over time is evolution. You can deny it and you can deny that the Earth is spherical.

Not my problem.

Not mine either. The reason you guys say evolution requires millions and millions of years is because you can't prove it without making such a claim.

Evolution does not necessarily require millions of years.

Really, Bunky, take some time learn about the science you hope to vilify. You science loathing extremists making pointless and uneducated statements just serves to reinforce a lot a negative stereotypes about you Flat Earth'ers.

 

[the_human_being]

The theory of evolution is among the most robust and well documented theories in science.

It should be pointed out that "Origin of Species" accomplished two very different things.

First:, it demonstrated through a catalog of scientific detail the historical fact of evolution (assuming an understanding of the difference between levels of scientific certainty and the theories that explain them). Using fields as diverse as biology, comparative anatomy,selective breeding, geography and animal behavior, Darwin laid out the evidence and formed a working theory that evolution (descent with modification) had actually occurred.

His evidence was overwhelming. Within little more than a decade after his theory was published, most of the leading biologists of his day were convinced that evolution (descent with modification) was true.

Secondly, Darwin proposed a theory for explaining what we would learn to be fact: "Natural Selection." Contrary to the claim by IDiots that "the gawds did it" by magical means as a way to explain the diversity of life on the planet, (completely unsupported and it assumes the requirement for supernaturalism), Natural Selection makes no such requirement and makes no requirement for coincidence or supermagicalism. Evolution instead defines the objective criterion of "reproductive fitness" as the completely natural mechanism for driving biological change.

"Natural selection" is also a theory, based only in supposition.

To say life on earth was born out of "chance" is wackier than to say it was created by a higher intelligence.

Natural selection is also a theory, based upon the facts as we know them.

Has nothing to do with the origins of life.

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.

And without being able to quantify the origins of life, your entire claim of evolution and natural selection or rendered moot. You can't have one without proof of the other.

Now I realize you people will never give up trying to push these theories off as fact, but thankfully there are those of us that are intelligent enough to know you're simply pushing a whole load of garbage.

It's all they have to hang their existence on. Sad really. I'm a practicing electrical engineer though semi-retired now and these monkeys working at Walmart think they know more about science and mathematics than I do. It would be laughable were it not so sad.

 

[the_human_being]

It has everything to do with the origins of life. .

Not at all.

If you see a car driving to you from down the road, you don't need to know where the car started driving in order to observe that the car is indeed moving.

We have the genetic and paleo evidence to show that evolution is happening.

Evolution does not require knowing how the first cell divided in order to know how evolution actually works.

No, you don't have proof at all of evolution. You may have observed adaptation, or mutation, but there is no such thing as evolution.
.

Whatever dude- believe in whatever fairy dust you want to.

Adaption over time is evolution. You can deny it and you can deny that the Earth is spherical.

Not my problem.

Not mine either. The reason you guys say evolution requires millions and millions of years is because you can't prove it without making such a claim.

Evolution does not necessarily require millions of years.

Really, Bunky, take some time learn about the science you hope to vilify. You science loathing extremists making pointless and uneducated statements just serves to reinforce a lot a negative stereotypes about you Flat Earth'ers.

Again where's the flat earth posts? I haven't see a single one of them.