Evolution: Your thoughts?

I was unable to find any threads regarding this with the search function, so woopsies if there was already one. B:D

Thread title. Read it. Answer it. HOWEVER. I do NOT want this to devolve (uCwutIdidTHAR?) into mindless "waahh, you insulted my beliefs" or "you gullible buffoon, believing in that nonsense" and the like.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

There is proof of evolution because in the layers of Earth, you can see that fossils 'devolve' as you go down. The debate is about who or what caused evolution.

So don't say that God created everything in the modern world.

Hate is such a weak emotion

Skeletal structures improve as you go up layers.

Hate is such a weak emotion

Improving skeletal structures shows little in that regard. I could find a guy today with a deformed skeletal structure and look back a thousand years and find a guy with a nigh faultless one. And that's assuming that adaptations automatically are for the benefit of the species, which simply isn't even close to being true. Quite the opposite actually.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

But, genetic mutations are possible. Ever heard of a peppered moth? They were designed to blend in with lichens but when the industrial age happened, lichens turned black from soot and smoke. Peppered moths camouflaged with these black lichens due to a random genetic mutation.

Hate is such a weak emotion

The distinguished LinkZelda spake:

But, genetic mutations are possible. Ever heard of a peppered moth? They were designed to blend in with lichens but when the industrial age happened, lichens turned black from soot and smoke. Peppered moths camouflaged with these black lichens due to a random genetic mutation.

Actually, yes I've heard of them. But that's the point, I questioned nothing of the mutations, simply that evolution seems to present them as something that will happen simply because an organism is under pressure. Here's my stance and the problems I see with evolution:

Evolution in and of itself is a description of how environmental pressure can result in changes in an organism. Said adaptations are theoretically random, yet in other places, it is stated that said organism(s) evolved to suit their environment. This is a contradiction...sort of. The living being evolved to suit environmental stress, yet the resulting adaptation was random? Basically the whole giraffe situation. Technically, all adaptations are random, but the giraffe evolved to suit its environment. See what I mean? Unless I;m just plain missing something. RaptorofDoom has a blog that could probably get across what I --at 3am =_= -- am trying to say.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

Or, perhaps better put as a description of how adaptations can result in an organism being better suited for its environment.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

Adaptations are random. The only reason why evolution makes them adapted to the environment is because of nature.

The long necked giraffes survived to reproduce and the short necked ones died because of competition.

Therefore, a random genetic mutation caused giraffes to adapt to environmental pressure.

Hate is such a weak emotion

The distinguished Skittles spake:

Or, perhaps better put as a description of how adaptations can result in an organism being better suited for its environment.

As I said earlier, they got food other species couldn't so they were better off (the other species could only get the lower down leaves).

Hate is such a weak emotion

Evolution is extremely interesting to me, yet I know nothing. :3

I've started to learn about evolution in class though. About nature's selection, variation, adaptation, and all that good stuff.

There are two types of evolution--macroevolution and microevolution. Macroevolution is evolution on a grand scale. An example of this would be apes evolving into humans. Microevolution is evolution of organisms on a small scale in a relatively short period of time. For instance, the different breeds of dogs are a result of microevolution. There isn't enough evidence for macroevolution to show it has occurred. Some paleontologists just found a few human bone fossils, put it together, and called it one of the steps from apes to humans. You may think that "Lucy" is evidence but really all she is is a bunch of human fossils. They don't have enough evidence for macroevolution because it never occurred. On the other hand, there is plenty of evidence, microevolution is real because there really are different species of dogs, birds, bears, etc. (By believing in microevolution but not macroevolution, doesn't mean I half believe in evolution and half don't.)

genius isn't everything

The reason there isn't evidence for macroevolution is because of the ridiculous amount of time it is supposed to take.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

I think evolution is possible,and way more likely than us just appearing out of nowhere. But that does bring up a question; where did the first life come from?

I'm not weird, you're just too normal!

The distinguished lugia oFTo spake:

I think evolution is possible,and way more likely than us just appearing out of nowhere. But that does bring up a question; where did the first life come from?

Well, there are two prevailing theories, only one of which I know of, called abiogenesis, where inorganic matter ends up forming a self-replicating molecule like RNA.

It's my job to help the next generation, and set a good example for them. And for that I'll gladly lay down my life.

I'm a Christian, and evolution defies the whole theory of God.

But it's been proven, or semi-proven.
o_o

4/5 People suffer from diarrhea. Does that mean the other enjoys it?