Road runner said the below but I seem to have deleted his name. (My bad)
The thing is I was doing is called "a lie to children" it's a very simplified version of events that bears very little in common with the actuality but gives the gist.
I apologise if I misunderstood your level of comprehension, but was basing my explanation on the level of knowledge you display here, which as far as I can tell is as near to zero as detectable.
So here is a detailed example of how small incremental changes led to a major change over time.
It is the change of fish jaws to become the ear bones in mammals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_...y_ossicles
Quote:I agree with your extrapolation here, and I can add up the pebbles to get explain the final mountain. I don't however feel that a skyscraper can be explained by the same extrapolation (especially if you are only adding pebbles). I can take a number of steps down the road, and add those up, and I will reach the coast. However adding up those steps doesn't get me to Hawaii or the moon.
The issue is not, that I don't understand the claim, but that I question the evidence and reasoning supporting it(or lack there of). You need to connect the dots, from the small variations, to the quite different results that are being posited. Why should I infer that this evolutionary change has taken place?
Alternatively; rather than showing a reason through the mechanism to make the inference, you could show evidence that it has occurred (despite the ability to explain it). I normally find that the evidence given assumes evolution, rather than demonstrating it. That it is little more than this part looks much like this other part over here and since we assume common descent, they must be related (except when it does not fit the model, then this reasoning does not apply). The data points for this connection is usually low and not always congruent across species, yet evolution is fact, so it must have happened. But the question is... why is this a fact?
The thing is I was doing is called "a lie to children" it's a very simplified version of events that bears very little in common with the actuality but gives the gist.
I apologise if I misunderstood your level of comprehension, but was basing my explanation on the level of knowledge you display here, which as far as I can tell is as near to zero as detectable.
So here is a detailed example of how small incremental changes led to a major change over time.
It is the change of fish jaws to become the ear bones in mammals.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_...y_ossicles
You can fix ignorance, you can't fix stupid.
Tinkety Tonk and down with the Nazis.
