Evolution Theory - please show the proofs

[NoGodaloud ?]

You are aware that humans are animals?

No, i am not. I believe we are distinct to animals, as we have a spirit, which can communicate with God, while animals don't.

We are animals.

OK. Agreed !!!

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation...rences.asp

No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals.' So began a feature article on evolution in TIME magazine ('How Man Began', March 14, 1994). The more I thought about this sweeping statement the more I began to warm to it.
For example, like humans, apes have well formed rational faculties. Their ability to develop an argument, follow a line of logic, draw conclusions and frame hypotheses is quite remarkable.
Also like humans, apes have a marked faculty for language. (This, of course, is intertwined with their powers of reason.) Their vocabulary is enormous, their grammar complex, and their conversations deep and meaningful.
The apes' ability to codify language in writing is further proof of their close relationship to humans. In this respect, it was most gratifying to see the number of apes who wrote to TIME magazine in response to the article on 'How Man Began'. I was particularly interested to follow the line of reasoning of the orang-utan who argued that apes had evolved from humans, not vice versa.
Like humans, apes also have a strong spirit of inquiry. Their research in the fields of astronomy, mathematics, medicine and physics is noteworthy.
Apes also (again, like humans) yearn for meaning in life. This is why they devote so much of their time to philosophy, theology and ethics. The religious sentiments and practices of all apes can be traced back to their intense and endless quest for meaning.
Apes are concerned about questions not only of origin but also of destiny. The best proof I can offer for this claim is the maxim by one famous ape philosopher who said, 'Whether my life leads ultimately to the dirt or to the Judgment, either way, I've got a problem.'
Apes also have, like humans, a refined aesthetic sense. They admire beauty and long to surround themselves with it. When an ape cultivates a garden, puts flowers in a vase, or hangs up a painting, what is it doing if not expressing a love of beauty?
Again like humans, apes have a strong creative impulse. This is seen in their poetry, painting, dance, drama and music. To a lesser extent their creativity is also evident in the way they gather in weekly craft groups to weave baskets, spin wool, knit shawls, and cover photo albums.
The sense of humour shared by all apes is another proof of their close kinship to humans. Their delight in the ridiculous and their love of a good laugh is plain from the popular ape jokes they tell.
Reason, language, inquiry, wonder, longing, religion, morality, aesthetics, creativity, imagination, aspiration and humour ... such intangible but fundamental qualities are by no means unique to humans, as I hope I have conclusively shown. Therefore, in the profound words of TIME magazine: 'No single, essential difference separates human beings from other animals'.
This being the case, Christians are plainly wrong to insist that humans and animals are vastly different. And they are also obviously wrong to insist that this difference arises from the fact that God created us humans in His own likeness. And if they are wrong to insist that God made us in His own likeness, then they are wrong to insist that God has any claim on us.
Furthermore, if God has no claim on us, then we are free — free to be animals like our evolutionary ancestors — free to be as low-down as snakes, and to make pigs of ourselves, and to act like donkeys.
Did I say 'free'?
Hiss! Oink! Hee-haw!

Other animals can express their feelings. It's obvious. As for communicating ideas and beauty, I wouldn't know. I only speak English and bits of French and Portuguese. I don't speak "animal."

oba, você fala português ? que beleza. O idioma mais bonito do mundo......

Symbols of common agreement? I'm going to have to assume you mean something like a nod. Have you ever seen chimps hunt together? How about dolphins moving in pods?

That's certainly not the same thing.

Oh, define language please and tell me why "animal chattering" cannot be defined as such.

A language is a system of communication, constituted of words, grammar, based on speech, written symbols , based on common agreement, or gestures and different kind of vocalisations.

Say what now? We can create new things, that is an exclusive trait to us?

If not, please show examples of criativity of animals.

You honestly think that there is concrete evidence of god and there is no evidence for evolution?

I didnt say there is no evidence for evolution. Actually, micro evolution, and speciation, is a proven fact. No doubt about this.

http://www.christiscreator.com/Thought.htm

many leading creationists of his time & now believe that God programmed large degrees of variation within the gene code which can extend through to the gene pool- though there are ultimate limits ..as observation of population groups in horses for example can show. Regardless of the variation there is also an inherent fixity to nature that separates these from other creatures. Morphologic & physiological observation can classify essential divisions in nature though definition of "species" is a subject still open to debate.

1-b.When one considers the massive amounts of information in the basic building blocks of living systems it comes as no surprise that nature has large degrees of latitude for change. On the other hand the chemistry of the cell is a limiting factor & even over vast reaches of time it is unthinkable that large categories of biology could ever cross these major divides through even Darwin's speculations. I find it untenable with neither fossil evidence nor observation supporting the view that this type of change is possible. Darwin thought in time his theory would be supported by further evidence in paleontology but the reality is there are as many gaps in the record as there ever was. In the end evolution is a leap of faith & not true science.

And, yes, i believe there is plenty of evidence of Gods existence for the ones that are able to SEE.

i believe Theism explains best our existence, and i believe, the God that revealed himself in the bible, is the creator of all that exists. What are my reasons to believe so ?

1. All scientific evidence leads us to believe, the universe most probably had a absolute beginning, about 13,7bio years ago, therefore must have had a cause, since, from absolutely nothing, nothing derives. Absolutely nothing is the absence of ANY thing. Othwise, why is there something, rather than nothing ?
You might not agree with this sentence. But than rationalize with me. What other alternatives do we have ? I believe, only two. And this is not a FALSE dilemma, but actually the only reasonable alternatives. They are :

1. the universe is eternal, and existend eternally in some form, or the other. Various models have been idealized, like oscillating universes, steady state, multiverses etc. Each of them however brings its own problems,and is in the end not a satisfying answer. The two which i use to cite commonly are :

the second law of thermodynamics.

Science supports Einstein's claim that the universe is a closed system. That means it has finite energy. Even though energy cannot be created or destroyed (by any natural processes), over time the useful energy in the universe becomes more and more useless. This is known in science as the Second Law of Thermodynamics. If the universe were eternal then all of the energy would have become totally useless by now and I wouldn't be writing this article and you wouldn't be reading it either!

and secondly,

http://elshamah.heavenforum.com/philosop...y-t296.htm

Will you ever get to eternity by counting, adding one number onto another? The answer is no, you won't. You started--you came into existence--at some point in time. That's when your clock started running and the moments began to add up, one event upon another. But as you go forward into eternity, if you make an assessment at any particular point, your cosmic clock will show a finite age, counting from the time you started to the time you're at. Now, you can keep going on forever and ever, but no matter how long you continue going on you will still have a particular age identifying the length of time of your existence. That particular age will never be an infinite amount. Do you see how that works? This is why you can never count to infinity, because infinity is not a particular number; by definition it's an innumerable amount. At every stage along the counting process you are always describing a finite number, even though that number gets larger and larger as you count. In the same way, you will never live to eternity even though you live forever and ever, even though you never cease to exist, because at any given point in the process you will still have an age, even though the age is getting larger and larger as you move deeper and deeper into eternity.

Since beyond our universe, there was no time, no space, and no matter, that cause must be timeless, beginningless, eternal, spaceless, transcendent, invisible, personal, incredibly powerful. That description fits best to the God of the bible.

2. The universe is finely tuned to permit life on our planet. Over 120 fine tune constants are know up to know, and as more time pasts, more are discovered. This might be due to chance, to physical need, or to design. Chance is a very bad explanation. Some advocate a Multiverse. But to have just one life permitting universe, you need 1 to 10^500 attempts to get it done. Thats a 1 with 500 zeros. If we put it in comparison, that in our universe, there exist around 10^80 atoms, this shows how improbable it is, that a Multiverse could explain finetuning. It could not be by physical need, since if so, why are there many planets, which are not life permitting, but our is ? So its best explained by design. Our earth/solar/moon system is a very strong evidence. Our solar system is embedded at the right position in our galaxy, neither too close, nor too far from the center of the galaxy. Its also the only location, which alouds us to explore the universe, In a other location, and we would not see more than stellar clouds. The earth has the right distance from the sun, and so has the moon from the earth. The size of the moon, and the earth, is the right one. Our planet has the needed minerals, and water. It has the right atmosphere, and a ozon protecting mantle. Jupiter attracts all asteroids , avoiding these to fall to the earth, and make life impossible. The earths magnetic field protects us from the deadly rays of the sun. The velocity of rotation of the earth is just right. And so is the axial tilt of the earth. Beside this, volcano activities, earth quakes, the size of the crust of the earth, and more over 70 different paramenters must be just right. To believe, all these are just right by chance, needs a big leap of faith. This is indeed maibe the strongest argument for theism.

3. Life. Abiogenesis has not been able to explain the existence of life on earth. Science cannot explain it. There are strong reasons to believe, a natural origin is not probable, and a bad explanation. First of all, why whould dead rocks need to evolve, to create life ? Secondly, just one living cell is more complex than the most complex machine created by man. A living cell is irreducible complex. All parts must be on place, making a gradual evolution not possible.
Even the simplest cell needs DNA , which is a information carrier. Information is always created by a mind. There i no natural mechanism known to man, to create information. Information is by essence spiritual, and not physical. There is no bridge to cross the gulf from material to spiritual. Even through millions of years of evolution. Its not possible. Add to this the moral argument, experience of miracles, the testimony of the bible, and you have a nice case of theism.

[Zen Badger]

My previous experiences with creationists have proved that NO amount of evidence will ever change their minds.

And quite frankly I couldn't care less if you accept evolution or not.

But I will make the point that all of the physical sciences, Geology, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Biology, Genetics, Paleontology, etc,etc,etc....

All point to an old universe, an old earth and the time frame necessary for evolution to work.

There is ABSOLUTELY no evidence at all for the creation myth.

As to transitional species, yes there are thousands of them. Because all species are transitional, or have the potential to be so.

And if you knew anything about how evolution works you would know that.

P.s the fact that we can talk does not count as evidence for your invisible friend

[NoGodaloud ?]

But I will make the point that all of the physical sciences, Geology, Astronomy, Astrophysics, Biology, Genetics, Paleontology, etc,etc,etc....

All point to an old universe, an old earth and the time frame necessary for evolution to work.

old earth creationism doesnt exclude the possibility , the earth and the universe, to be billions of years old.

[Zen Badger]

old earth creationism doesnt exclude the possibility , the earth and the universe, to be billions of years old.

The possibility?

[Edwardo Piet]

old earth creationism doesnt exclude the possibility , the earth and the universe, to be billions of years old.

All creationism lacks evidence though. Unlike evolution which has a motherload. And if evolution were ever falsified, that would do nothing for creationism.

[Zen Badger]

And your response to my point regarding transistional species?

[NoGodaloud ?]

old earth creationism doesnt exclude the possibility , the earth and the universe, to be billions of years old.

All creationism lacks evidence though. Unlike evolution which has a motherload. And if evolution were ever falsified, that would do nothing for creationism.

evolution does not explain the origin and finetuning of the universe, chemical evolution, and the arisinf of life on earth. Beside this, macro evolution is not a proven fact, and lacks in a series of points as a satisfying explanation of the biodiversity on earth.

---

And your response to my point regarding transistional species?

how do you explain the sudden arise of fully developed fossils in the cambrian strata without any trace of earlyer transitional fossils ? the fossil record is not evidence, but rather the oposit. a big headage for evolutionists.

[Zen Badger]

A question if I may......

From whence do you derive your understanding of Evolution?

---

Re precambrian fossils....

http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&source...51X37e1KxQ

[LastPoet]

No, i am not. I believe we are distinct to animals, as we have a spirit, which can communicate with God, while animals don't.

It's all about it really, you think you are something special, don't you? There goes the humble Xtians out of the window...

[The Omnissiunt One]

evolution does not explain the origin and finetuning of the universe, chemical evolution, and the arisinf of life on earth.

So? It's not supposed to. Just because you don't have all the answers you want, it doesn't mean you can just make up any explanation you want to.

Beside this, macro evolution is not a proven fact, and lacks in a series of points as a satisfying explanation of the biodiversity on earth.

Creationists are the only ones who draw the macro-micro evolution distinction. Macro is just micro over a longer time.

And your fossils in the cambrian strata without any trace of earlyer transitional fossils ? the fossil record is not evidence, but rather the oposit. a big headage for evolutionists.

There are numerous scientific theories for how the Cambrian explosion occurred. God is not one. God is not an explanation. God is, 'I give up! Don't hurt me, reality!'