We need a reason to believe evolution. We need some example of it happening that is not just words... and not simply some engineered genetics. Here's what we need.
We need Critter A that we think evolved into Critter B. Then we need the DNA of Critter A, and the changed DNA of it's offspring, baby Critter A+. Then we need the DNA from the grandchild - baby Critter A++. We need the whole line of DNA, showing how the changes came about, until it was finally Critter B.
We don't have anything close to the above.
Everything we have so far can be explained by adaptation, like-begets-like, and simple change. We don't have one thing where a critter changes into another critter, naturally.
But, even if we DID find one critter that changed into another, we would still have to find a whole bunch of them to even begin to suggest that evolution is the way present-day critters - plants and animals - came about.
We are so far from this that we might as well say...
Evolution is a hoax.
unfortunately we have 0 examples of spontaneous generation like god supposedly did it and we have thousands of examples of evolution.
We don't know if God used spontaneous generation or not. All we know is that God is the Cause for life and everything else. God made it all. How He did it is not known, scientifically or otherwise, other than that He spoke it all into existence.
The only examples of critters changing from one kind to another is in the words of people. We have no proven examples of it. The only science used that might come close to proof is political science, which includes the use of lies when necessary, to make the politics work. The basic proof for evolution we would need is shown here -
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.49036647 - which is quoted above.
Everything we have so far can be explained by adaptation, like-begets-like, and simple change. We don't have one thing where a critter changes into another critter, naturally.
What?
But... Adaptation IS evolution.
That's like literaly the same thing.
Evolution is the selection of species based on what is most adapted to its environment...
What would be the difference between adaptation and evolution for you? Because evolution is EXACTLY adaptation but on bigger time frames.
He is a knucklehead, I explained that to him like 20 times. Adaption through generations is evolution. Yes adaption itself is not evolution if it happens once and it's not passed through generations but since it is passed many times, it is evolution.
Yeah that's like... The basic definition!
If some parts of the species adapt well to an environment they will have more offsprings hence spreading their genes faster hence it leads to the evolution os the species Oo
If you accept adaptation BADecker then you accept evolution for the simple reason that they are the same thing.
Or be my guest and define what is different between adaptation and evolution...
Again, there are countless forms and methods of adaptation that are not evolution in the sense of this thread. Evolution has no proof for its existence. It has a lot of talk behind it, but no proof.
In addition, if evolution existed, why would it have to be adaptation? It wouldn't, necessarily. The words
natural selection indicate some choice involved. Choice doesn't always have to be adaptation.
In all this talk, what is and where is the proof that evolution exists, and that the observations that many people call evolution are really evolution, and not something else without evolution? After all, the word
evolution can mean something like
the industrial evolution. But that is not the kind of evolution we are talking about. We are talking about a kind of evolution where one kind of plant or animal changes into another, completely different, kind. This doesn't exist. Show the proof that the
adaptation is this kind of evolution, and not simple change, the programming for which is built right in the DNA, etc.
Evolution is a hoax.
