Evolution Theory - please show the proofs

[NoGodaloud ?]

@NoGodaloud?

I'm sorry, but quotes from creationists are not "scientific evidence".

many creationists are scientists. and their papers are scientific.

in case of the answer i presented , the author

http://www.discovery.org/p/41

has received two Ph.D.s, one in Molecular and Cell Biology . So he certainly is a specialist in the field, and knows as well, what he is talking about. Truth said, there are different standpoints, and just because one is proponent of creationism, that does not mean, that his aruments are not scientific.

If you think that Francis Collins' support for evolution is flawed because it is disputed by scientific evidence, please provide the evidence that disputes it.

http://www.discovery.org/a/4529

There is no evidence here that variations in their gene for EDA would (or even could) lead to the origin of a new species, much less to the new organs or major changes in body plans needed for macroevolution. The same can be said for the only other example cited by Collins, variations in disease-causing viruses, bacteria, and parasites.

Collins merely assumes that microevolution can be extrapolated to macroevolution. Despite seventy years of genetic research the extrapolation remains an assumption, and the distinction between micro- and macroevolution is no more “arbitrary” now than it was then.

---

you presented this paper amongst others as proof for evolution of speech. So i am asking you to present the part of the paper, which essentially convinced you, evolution of speech is possible. If you cannot do that, you failed.

Indeed you did and I told you that there wasn't a single part of that paper that convinced me and I gave you an explanation as to why. I have not failed. I've given you everything you asked for in your flawed question.

So why have you presented it then , in first place ? present a paper then, which carries the arguments which explain and convince you about evolution of human speech.