Well, there's plankton (very small creatures) in the sea that have very similar abilities to fish, which gives scientists the impression that they evolved into fish!

(does this help?)

---

";JiKailah♥" wrote:

You see, this is where some people get confused. Darwin's theory is not JUST evolution. He just said that we evolved from apes. So when people hear evolution, they

think of Darwin. Well, that's not all what evolution is. Everything evolves.

The subject about humans evolving from apes was a hoax. It was simply a skull of a human and a jaw of an ape - search for the Piltdown Man.

---

"Teh_Skittlez" wrote:

"AlphaT" wrote:

"Teh_Skittlez" wrote:

Flu shots. 

Ah..i love that one

The bodys ability to learn how to fight an illness is not evolution. Its adapting to its bio-surroundings. Try again.



Its kind of like when a bug grows resistence to a certain pesticide. Its adapting to survive. Not evolving over time into more complex beings. And also, alot of your bugs dont pass down pesticide resistance in a benefitiary amount. Usualy less is carried down. If the oppisite were true, Id say wed be praticly waging war with super-bugs. 

That's not even what I meant. But, it actually is an example of evolution. Evolution and adaptation are practically synonymous in Biology. When  a species adapts to survive against something it has become a more complex organism. 

I meant the fact that you need a new flu shot every year is a good example of evolution, because the flu virus (and viruses in general) mutate constantly. 

Ah..so evolution is when something becomes more complex? Thats like syaing Christianity is when someone does the right thing. Evolution has its own belief system, but yes in evolution it includes the truth that things become more adaptable and complex, but that doesent turn them into different animals all togather. I mean all the bug is doing is using what it ALREADY has to adapt. Nothing new is being added, its the system that the bug has to fend off a pesticide. Kind of like whe we learn. Were not evolving are we? The bug is learning how to survive, i mean sure its not they go to mortality school or anything but they have some God Goven system that at least mimics learning.  But back to my main point, Evolution isnt just when an animal becomes more complex. It has to account for its origin, and if weve dug up an evolving species in the making. Just like in christianity, its not just the doing good stuff, its the scientific and historical understanding as it has held up for thousands of years since the beginning stages of time.

And you know, we mutate alot too.... its not like we evolve.


Thank You. 

---

"BethieBoots332" wrote:

Well, there's plankton (very small creatures) in the sea that have very similar abilities to fish, which gives scientists the impression that they evolved into fish!


(does this help?)

Common Creatures, or creatures who have alot in common, institute a common engineer.  

---

Natural Selection doesent go with evolution.

Er... yeah, it does. Natural selection and mutation are exactly what evolution is. Things evolve because they change over time, and that change comes of mutation, which further leads to natural selection, where the traits in the animal that has mutated is either advantageous or disadvantageous for its environment, dictating whether or not that animal lives (reproduces) or dies (goes extinct).

Because your saying evolution is adaptation, which is wrong

No...? Evolution is exactly what I just said. Animals adapt to their surroundings after their genetics mutate and they are given tools that are either more equipped, or less equipped, to dealing with their environment. If they're more equipped, the species flourishes. 

Good. And your also computing that we've found ancestors of evolving species, or that the layers show a perfect map from one species, to two, to all the species that we see today correct? And by what means would you be using to indicate these? Carbon 14? Uranium 238? Uranium 233? Fossil Index?

Perfect? No. Obviously not. There will never be a perfect record of transitional fossils because of natural forces that are enacted upon rock layers, i.e. erosion. However, we have found more than enough to support it. As for all of your questions at the end, yes. 

Id say thats where you jump from science to assumption brother. Id say, that The Flood had something to do with all of this.

No. Given the current scientific data, all of life originated from a universal common ancestor, which would be the ultimate father of life on Earth. There is nothing to say, short of the Bible and various other religious texts, that many different species arose simultaneously from the hand of a divine creator.  There are plenty of very strong scientific theories that support a universal common ancestor, most notably abiogenesis, which we KNOW has happened on Earth.

In that case then the virus is adapting to its bio sourroudings.

In other words, it's adapting to its environment and evolving into a different strain of influenza. 

---

"AlphaT" wrote:

"BethieBoots332" wrote:

Well, there's plankton (very small creatures) in the sea that have very similar abilities to fish, which gives scientists the impression that they evolved into fish!



(does this help?)

Common Creatures, or creatures who have alot in common, institute a common engineer.  

Or a common ancestor. Kind of like how man and apes are similar in so many ways. Because they evolved simultaneously from a common ancestor. 

---

"AlphaT" wrote:

"BethieBoots332" wrote:

Well, there's plankton (very small creatures) in the sea that have very similar abilities to fish, which gives scientists the impression that they evolved into fish!



(does this help?)

Common Creatures, or creatures who have alot in common, institute a common engineer.  

Cool, even though I have no idea what that means C:

---

"-Zachary-" wrote:

Er... yeah, it does. Natural selection and mutation are exactly what evolution is. Things evolve because they change over time, and that change comes of mutation, which further leads to natural selection, where the traits in the animal that has mutated is either advantageous or disadvantageous for its environment, dictating whether or not that animal lives (reproduces) or dies (goes extinct).

Your giving me the definition of Natural Selecion, but insisting adaptation means evolution. Just like what i told Skits, Evolution must account for its origin and so does Natural Selection. In my opinion we got Natural Selection and Common Ancestor fro The Flood.


No...? Evolution is exactly what I just said. Animals adapt to their surroundings after their genetics mutate and they are given tools that are either more equipped, or less equipped, to dealing with their environment. If they're more equipped, the species flourishes. 

Okay without dragging this out into a Thesis Essay ill just ask one question. Wheres a benefitial mutation witnessed by scientists? Or this "tool giving".


Perfect? No. Obviously not. There will never be a perfect record of transitional fossils because of natural forces that are enacted upon rock layers, i.e. erosion. However, we have found more than enough to support it. As for all of your questions at the end, yes. 

Thats funny, because Uranium 233 has nothing to do with fossil indication.

No. Given the current scientific data, all of life originated from a universal common ancestor, which would be the ultimate father of life on Earth. There is nothing to say, short of the Bible and various other religious texts, that many different species arose simultaneously from the hand of a divine creator.  There are plenty of very strong scientific theories that support a universal common ancestor, most notably abiogenesis, which we KNOW has happened on Earth.

Then why is it still a theoretical? Why are their scientists who are still young earth creationists? And please show me a mother nature made evolution that we have observed happening.

In other words, it's adapting to its environment and evolving into a different strain of influenza


Yeah well i explained before...its using its system to defeat THE system.

 

---

"-Zachary-" wrote:

"AlphaT" wrote:

"BethieBoots332" wrote:

Well, there's plankton (very small creatures) in the sea that have very similar abilities to fish, which gives scientists the impression that they evolved into fish!




(does this help?)

Common Creatures, or creatures who have alot in common, institute a common engineer.  

Or a common ancestor. Kind of like how man and apes are similar in so many ways. Because they evolved simultaneously from a common ancestor. 

Yeah, i forgot how much LUCY destroyed my theory. Try Again. 

---

 but that doesent turn them into different animals all togather.

Yes it does. It's why we can look into the fossil record and see ancient fish growing legs over millions of years until they're finally ready to live on land. Then they continue to evolve as competition arises, gaining abilities like flight, or more passive things like fur for warmth. 

The bug is learning how to survive, i mean sure its not they go to mortality school or anything but they have some God Goven system that at least mimics learning.

What... no, what? Evolution is not a directed process at all. Selective breeding, sure, making different types of dogs and such. But it has nothing to do with what the animal WANTS. You can't WANT to evolve, and suddenly start evolving. It occurs out of mutation, which is entirely random, and then takes millions of years to achieve some extreme results, like turning from a completely sea-based animal into one that can walk on land. Doesn't take nearly as long for traits that already exist (like moths being colored) to adapt to their environment and flourish while the other, less advantageous colored moth dies off.

And you know, we mutate alot too.... its not like we evolve.

We do evolve. It just happens extremely slowly, as it always has. The extreme vast majority of mutations are really, really, really bad. 

---