Why is evolution hiding?

[Esquilax]

[Phatt Matt s]

This is a process that we call "learning." Are you against learning, TC?

No, thank you for sharing your knowledge and I consider you a wise man

Would you prefer that science didn't own up to the mistakes it makes, just to maintain the pretense of being all knowing?

Only if I've got my head up my ass.

Or would you rather a scientific method that corrects for its errors and always works to remove them from play?

If I didn't prefer that I don't deserve to be alive

Why would small changes in species over time not add up to big, noticeable ones eventually too?

It makes sense and those who embrace this idea are not dummies. It is still theory.

Nylon isn't naturally occurring, and no other bacteria can do this; where do you think they developed this ability, if not through new information being added to their genetics via evolution?

Didn't know that thanks!

generally takes many millions of years to become as noticeable as you're imagining...
Bacteria evolves very quickly

[SteelCurtain]

[Phatt Matt s]

[SteelCurtain]

[Phatt Matt s]

[Chas]

Well the purpose of this thread is to have meaningful discussion, because painfully I do not know many things; need to learn how to facilitate such fruitfull discussion that isn't of a pornographic or worthless nature, and by challenging beliefs about evolution, I can learn.

My hope and intention is not an argument, but the opportunity to learn, though this probably will turn into an argument, and much can be learned from that as well.

THis would include but is not limited to growing in patience, understanding human nature, desensitization, and examples of how not to behave.

If your desire is to learn, read some books on evolution.

[Phatt Matt s]

Thank you though for leading me to consider the rareness of fossilization. My mind is open.

[SteelCurtain]

Oh, boy. That article is just...bad. There's no other way to describe it.

To start out, No, evolution is not a scientific law. Laws are mathematical statements with no explanatory power for observed phenomena. They are boiled down empirical generalizations. To say that Evolution is not a Scientific Law, and therefore is worthless is like saying the same for the Theory of Gravity, or Cell Theory. Again, this is an example of preying on the lack of understanding of the masses.

And the dog evolving into a cat thing is on equal par with the crocoduck. It is shameful how they are purposefully passing on misinformation. The examples this article is giving, are just... sad.

Natural selection doesn't create solutions that make you perfectly fitted to your environment. Do you see how this is leading you down a path? They present a solution as if it were fact, like 'If natural selection were true, then eskimos would be hairy." And you think, "Well, yeah!" In reality, the only way that would be true is if Eskimos somehow lost the knowledge about clothing, then the hairiest of them would statistically be more likely to survive into adulthood and have children, and the hairiest of those children would be even more likely to survive, and so on. But they have clothes. Hairy-ness plays no part in the survival of their genes. Same with the silver equator people. Just sad.

Seriously, TC, if you actually read this article and bought what it was selling, then you need to read up on what evolution actually posits. That article makes a lot of claims that are just bare assertions, and offers no evidence to back it up. If an article has that many subjective arguments in it, that should spark your BS meter. Try Dawkins' "The Greatest Show on Earth," or Jerry Coyne's "Why Evolution is True," the latter being a little less science-y.

Thank you though for leading me to consider the rareness of fossilization. My mind is open.

This is clear as well as greatly appreciated. It is precisely why this thread hasn't become a flame-fest.

[popeyespappy]