new fossil helps solve which evolved first in bats, wings or echoloction.

  • Thread starter Thread starter ranma1/2
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 24
  • Views Views 4K
One question to the atheists:
Do you see with your own eyes the evolution(the process of evolution)?
If evolution existed it would exist today.a?
 
One question to the atheists:
Do you see with your own eyes the evolution(the process of evolution)?
If evolution existed it would exist today.a?

Strange you should address this to atheists as opposed to evolution...no matter.

Scientists have witnessed the speciation of fruitflies which shows it to be true. So yes, evolution has been observed.

And yes evolution is still going on.

"A surprisingly recent instance of human evolution has been detected among the peoples of East Africa. It is the ability to digest milk in adulthood, conferred by genetic changes that occurred as recently as 3,000 years ago, a team of geneticists has found.

The finding is a striking example of a cultural practice — the raising of dairy cattle — feeding back into the human genome. It also seems to be one of the first instances of convergent human evolution to be documented at the genetic level. Convergent evolution refers to two or more populations acquiring the same trait independently.

Throughout most of human history, the ability to digest lactose, the principal sugar of milk, has been switched off after weaning because there is no further need for the lactase enzyme that breaks the sugar apart. But when cattle were first domesticated 9,000 years ago and people later started to consume their milk as well as their meat, natural selection would have favored anyone with a mutation that kept the lactase gene switched on.
Such a mutation is known to have arisen among an early cattle-raising people, the Funnel Beaker culture, which flourished some 5,000 to 6,000 years ago in north-central Europe. People with a persistently active lactase gene have no problem digesting milk and are said to be lactose tolerant. "

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/10/science/10cnd-evolve.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
 
Neither creationism nor evolution can be passed off as fact at present. Both are proposed theories with their own respective problems, and perhaps neither is true and there is a 3rd explanation to be found. Until then, we do what we can with what we have, so to speak.

id disagree with you on a couple parts.

creationism isnt a scientific theory, evolution is.
evolutoin is essentially the variation of alles in a population over time and that is a fact. (most of the theory is how we and other things evolved)
and evolution is supported by mountains of scientific evidence, creation simply isnt supported by any evidence.
 
Hey please stop with those craps!!!
Evolution is propaganda!

'Propaganda' for what? This is the forum to "explore the field of scientific discovery" and, like it or not, evolution is the generally accepted scientific theory. Just like every other scientific theory it is not "passed off as fact". It is just more likely to true than any currently recognised scientific alternative. Creationist alternatives are not scientific, and there is no scientific evidence to support them.
 
Last edited:

Similar Threads

Back
Top