ok, firstly I'd like to start off by saying that I'm not that well informed on biology in general and although I understand debating creationists is pointless and stupid, I often find myself in such situations. I have a basic grasp on the very basics of evolution but that's about it.
I was recently debating on youtube (yes I know...lol) and the person I was 'debating' stuck me on ignore for calling them a liar as I was apparently not answering their questions on purpose. So now I'm using another account I have with the knowledge of what will come. With that in mind I thought I ask on here for some advice in regard to certain points the person is/will be making because I don't, as yet, have the knowledge to refute them, and I can't find the right info on the internet in terms a layman can understand.
1) There is no evidence natural selection can lead to evolution.
2) Natural selection and mutations cannot create DNA, (new or otherwise) meaning new organs cannot be created, fins cant turn into feet and apes cant turn into men (LOL)
3) No evidence for organisms 'climbing' up Darwin's Tree of Life
Those are basically the points the person is making. Sounds like a load of crap to me but as yet I don't have the skills/knowledge to show why, so I thought I'd ask for some assistance.
I always thought natural selection was evolution in some respects, rather than leading to it. The environment kind of deciding what mutations were beneficial and which were not.
The creation of DNA has got me as I know pretty much nothing about it. I understood mutation created changes in the current DNA, which was what caused speciation etc, but I could be way off.
And the tree of life thing has me confused. The comment is referring to Dawin's finches at the moment, with them saying, "there is no fossil evidence or any other evidence showing 'pre' finches or finches climbing up the tree of life."
I was recently debating on youtube (yes I know...lol) and the person I was 'debating' stuck me on ignore for calling them a liar as I was apparently not answering their questions on purpose. So now I'm using another account I have with the knowledge of what will come. With that in mind I thought I ask on here for some advice in regard to certain points the person is/will be making because I don't, as yet, have the knowledge to refute them, and I can't find the right info on the internet in terms a layman can understand.
1) There is no evidence natural selection can lead to evolution.
2) Natural selection and mutations cannot create DNA, (new or otherwise) meaning new organs cannot be created, fins cant turn into feet and apes cant turn into men (LOL)
3) No evidence for organisms 'climbing' up Darwin's Tree of Life
Those are basically the points the person is making. Sounds like a load of crap to me but as yet I don't have the skills/knowledge to show why, so I thought I'd ask for some assistance.
I always thought natural selection was evolution in some respects, rather than leading to it. The environment kind of deciding what mutations were beneficial and which were not.
The creation of DNA has got me as I know pretty much nothing about it. I understood mutation created changes in the current DNA, which was what caused speciation etc, but I could be way off.
And the tree of life thing has me confused. The comment is referring to Dawin's finches at the moment, with them saying, "there is no fossil evidence or any other evidence showing 'pre' finches or finches climbing up the tree of life."
