Evolution Theory - please show the proofs

[HeyItsZeus]

Evidence Forum

---

Stop asking for evidence if you don't give a fuck when it is given to you!It seems to me that you are slightly confused as to what evidence is! I can safely assume that if you evolved overnight, theoretically speaking, you would just ignore it and say "It is only by the glorious power of god that this could happen." If you deny all of the previous evidence, this post should be locked due to precious time being wasted on a pointless post.

[NoGodaloud ?]

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

(Dawkins, Richard [zoologist and Professor for the Public Understanding of Science, Oxford University], "The Blind Watchmaker," [1986], Penguin: London, 1991, reprint, p.229).

"Eldredge and Gould certainly would agree that some very important gaps really are due to imperfections in the fossil record. Very big gaps, too. For example the Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists."

(Romer Alfred S. [late Professor of Zoology, Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University], "The Procession of Life," The World Publishing Co: Cleveland OH, 1968, pp.19-20)

"A record of pre-Cambrian animal life, it appears, simply does not exist. Why this lamentable blank? Various theories have been proposed; none is too satisfactory. It has been suggested, for example, that all the Pre-Cambrian sediments were deposited on continental areas, and the absence of fossils in them is due to the fact that all the older animals were seadwellers. But that all these older sediments were continental is a theory which opposes, without proof, everything we know of deposition in later times. Again, it is suggested that the Pre-Cambrian seas were poor in calcium carbonate, necessary for the production of preservable skeletons; but this is not supported by geochemical evidence. Yet again, it is argued that even though conditions were amenable to the formation of fossilizable skeletal parts, the various phyla only began to use these possibilities at the dawn of the Cambrian. But it is, a priori, hard to believe that the varied types present in the early Cambrian would all have, so to speak, decided to put on armour simultaneously. And, once again, it has been argued that the whole evolution of multicellular animals took place with great rapidity in late Pre-Cambrian times, so that a relatively short gap in rock deposition would account for the absence of any record of their rise. Perhaps; but the known evolutionary rate in most groups from the Cambrian on is a relatively leisurely one, and it is hard to convince oneself that a sudden major burst of evolutionary advance would be so promptly followed by a marked 'slowdown'. All in all, there is no satisfactory answer to the Pre-Cambrian riddle."

[Edwardo Piet]

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

It's not supposed to.

Beside this, macro evolution is not a proven fact,

No facts are proven. Apart from tautologies.

and lacks in a series of points as a satisfying explanation of the biodiversity on earth.

Evolution in its essence is just life evolving. This much is a scientific fact, including species to species evolution. Scientific facts are not proven facts. As I said, there's no proof besides the tautological kind.

[Minimalist]

If it doesn't start "IN THE BEGINNING...." he's not interested, Shel.


Here's what his Moonie 'scholar' believes.

Unification Church beliefs are summarized in the textbook Divine Principle and include belief in a universal God; in striving toward the creation of a literal Kingdom of God on earth; in the universal salvation of all people, good and evil, living and dead; and that a man born in Korea in the early 20th century received from Jesus the mission to be realized as the second coming of Christ.

I guess he takes his allies where and when he can find them!

so what does this have to do with the issue we are debating ?

It means that like every thing else you are trotting out the issue of "creationists" lying about their so-called "credentials" has also been well explored.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html

For example.

Clifford Burdick, a researcher for the Creation Research Society and a member of the Creation-Science Research Center, is a "flood" geologist who has spent forty years trying to prove that giant humans once roamed the earth and even mingled with the dinosaurs.

Burdick has displayed a copy of his Ph.D. from the University of Physical Sciences (Phoenix, Arizona) in Carl Baugh's Glen Rose Creation Evidence Museum. According to Ronald Numbers' The Creationists [2]: "[Creationist Walter Lammerts'] inquiries revealed the University of Physical Science to be nothing more than a registered trademark. As described in its memographed bulletin, 'The University is not an educational institution, but a society of individuals of common interest for the advancement of physical science. There are no campus, professors or tuition fee.'"

[Edwardo Piet]

Min, you're going to have to fix that post yourself because I can't even tell which part is your writing!!

[Minimalist]

Got it.

Too many quote tags!

[Edwardo Piet]

Phew *wipes brow only not really I'm just saying so for effect oh damn I've spoilt it now*.

[NoGodaloud ?]

It means that like every thing else you are trotting out the issue of "creationists" lying about their so-called "credentials" has also been well explored.

What you are saying, a Moonie cannot be a qualified scientist. What utmost nonsense you are talking.......

[Thor]

It cracks me up when creationists come on a forum like this and demand that we "prove" evolution. These folks could very easily take a college course, do independent research at a library or the internet, and even attend seminars on the subject. But instead, they come here and throw down a gauntlet.

I'm sure there are some on this forum who are very knowldgeable regarding Evolutionary Theory, but we are limited in what we can do and demonstrate on a forum such as this. It is indeed difficult to do an in depth presentation of Evolutionary Theory here.

This is sort of like someone coming onto a discussion forum and insisting that inoculations really do nothing and it's a scam conducted by doctors and pharmaceutical companies. Then they demand for us to "prove" that inoculations are truly effective. Kind of difficult to do under the circumstances. Especially when the one doing the demanding has a preconceived notion and no amount of evidence will "prove" things to their satisfaction.

[downbeatplumb]

We can however think abstractly, appreciate beauty, express love, make decisions, and know to distinguish what is right, and wrong. We have also a spirit, and can accept or reject God in our lives.
No animal, no ape is able to do this.

I demand you supply evidence for this lack of love, appreciation of beauty, moral code and (most laughably) the ability to 'make decisions', (Really a dog cant choose to turn left?)

on the having of a spirit I'll let you have that, no animal has one and niether do we.