Prove to me that Evolution is real

You can see the changes in alleles in populations therefore is real.
Sad thing pic related is famous because of a pseudoscientific idea such as the "the Selfish Gene"

Evolution, just like climate change, is on the spectrum

Checkmate, brainlet

>mfw plebs don't realize that evolution is actually better understood than gravity

>I just can't believe
>I can't believe
Evolution is a theory, which is an explanation
of data, and not a matter of belief, retard. Go
back to your Sunday School and tell them you
were BTFO by Darwin 135 years after he died.

Your belief system is a spectrum

30% of Americans think evolution was guided by God.
I am of a similar belief.
Sure, evolution is real to an extent, but I feel that the perfection of human evolution required God's intervention.

There is a greater morphological difference between man and his closest relative separated by 10 million years and any other animal.

The unprecedented rapid increase of brilliance of man. We just don't see anything close to it occurring in other systems.

The beauty of the human. Beauty can be considered somewhat mathematically if symmetry, uniformity in diversity, averageness and proper proportion as more pleasing.

Humans are more expressive than any other animal. They have 25 more facial muscles than apes relegated to facial expressions.

Humans have a diversity of facial features. We as a species just don't look like ANY other animal, and the mechanism behind this change is probably not adaptation and natural selection.

>There is a greater morphological difference between man and his closest relative separated by 10 million years and any other animal.
>
>The unprecedented rapid increase of brilliance of man. We just don't see anything close to it occurring in other systems.
>
>The beauty of the human. Beauty can be considered somewhat mathematically if symmetry, uniformity in diversity, averageness and proper proportion as more pleasing.
>
>Humans are more expressive than any other animal. They have 25 more facial muscles than apes relegated to facial expressions.
>
>Humans have a diversity of facial features. We as a species just don't look like ANY other animal, and the mechanism behind this change is probably not adaptation and natural selection.

Every single line here is flat out wrong.

People mistake the theory of the origin of species being selection of the fitting with the fact that you can design any system by trial and error, which is called evolutionary mechanism
Just like origins of attraction of objects to one another(gravity) being space curvature is a theory, but you cant deny that it does happen

...

prove to me that evolution is not real

Science doesn't do proofs. It collects evidence across a spectrum.

Again, and demonstrably, evolution has been observed in living species, as well as the fossil record. Your emotional preferences are irrelevant.

>perfection of human evolution
whew

natural selection has been observed in living species, evolution from one species to another has not

If you have to ask you probably haven't much.

Reading a book too hard for you?

presumably due to gravity being presently observable, forcing us to admit we don't understand it rather than make inane projections and pass them off as 'accepted science'

There should be a branch of science concerned with the explanation of science and it's effects to the public.
Because hard sciences don't do it.

Wrong, evolution is the basic for medical studies as well as biological.

If you don't like it, because you don't understand, fine, but the next time you see a doctor, remember the basis of his study.

Gravity being "just a theory" refers to there being no consensus on what it is that pulls people down. Similarly, Evolution being a just a theory refers to there being no clear insight into how or if speciation occurs and how life forms came to be.

Though the line between arguing from bad faith and obliviousness is just as blurry as the line between one species and another when it comes to Scientism.

Not all humans evolved from apes.
Asians evolved from insects.
Africans from baboons.
North Americans from birds and South Americans from reptiles.
White European is a domesticated Middle Eastern hybrid who themselves evolved from camels.
Dinosaur bones are just natural rock formations, they never were live animals.
Evolution as taught is a false interpretation to fit their narrative. It`s all lies.

Tell me again how the internet works thru wifi...
You can't. ... That does not make the internet thru wifi unreal. It mere shows your lack of knowledge concerning the matter.
The fact you use internet does not make you a computer programmer/electrical engineer.

So if you did not fully read the manuscript of Darwin and did not studied biology on a respectable high level, BTFO.

You can have an opinion on how reliable the educational system is, but that's it. You know nothing but scores of last week game and the birthday of, no the birthmonth of, no, no, the gender of your, no, probably you'd guess the gender of your mom right.

Read some real books. You might learn to communicate with intelligent people for a change.

ironically you preached about your intellectual delusion the whole post and didn't actually address the argument I made
this might not be the forum for you, I'd suggest /r/atheism, on the off chance you didn't recently migrate from there

Yes, I suppose it is a trick of the mind created by evolution (evolution deceives us, didn't you know?) that humans are more beautiful, expressive, soulful with unique variation.

If I had a cow's body, I would think the very same thing about cows...

#
I didn't know there was such a board. But then again, a plumber is more useful in a place where there is no one else to fix the shower then in a community full plumbers

10/10, I cannot believe I am taking this bait.
Even if you chose to ignore the imperfect fossil record just because, surprise most organism don't die in ideal conditions, how do you answer for all of the radioactive elements with known half-life and decays? How do explain the measured decay pf carbon 14 in dead organic matter that proves itself itself far older than 6000 years?
Listen OP, if the universe is rigged so God can test you against mountains of evidence, no amount pf evidence will change your mind. Live your life freely and happily and give thr same respect to non-believers.
As to the posts on Intelligent design, ID and abiogenesis are almost certainly untestable and not falsifiable. We can agree that evidence suggests evolution. ID only belongs in theology and philosophy because the claim of outside influence is not (currently testable.
tl;dr science only cares about testable statements, and has little to do with athiesm.

then go to /x/, no one here wants to hear egotistical, emotionally charged, ad hominem driven excuses for arguments, learn to debate a topic without involving your feelings or get off my board reee

...

What the fuck?? Living in Greece and I can assure you that most priests are actually clever enough to believe in evolution... They just say that Adam and Eve is a metaphor. You are right though learning how to think critically actually leads to atheism, since you can understand all the religious bullshit

The great thing about science is that it is always true wether you choose to believe it or not.

Traits people have arise due to information in their DNA being expressed (genes). These traits can also be passed on to offspring (fathers and sons have similar DNA and similar traits). This also applies to other organisms. If one trait is better than another the organism with the better trait is more likely to survive into adulthood and have children pass on the genes for that trait to the next generation (eg. a bear with bigger claws is more likely to survive and breed than one with smaller claws) if more big claw bears survive and have big claw children than small claw bears, big claws will become more and more common until small claws don't exist anymore. When this process happens over and over again for millions of years the organism can look very diffrent to what it did at the start. Millions of years ago there was an ape-like organism (not the same as todays apes) this went through many changes until it eventually looked like humans today.

Thats evolution explained in a way even a retard could understand.

If evolution is real then why isn't there evolution today??? Checkmate atheist

Yes, yes. Well done user. However...

What do you think about the Harry Potter franchise?

>perfection of human evolution

>Shitty eyes with shitty, non-efficient wiring
>Shitty smelling and hearing
>Brain wired to make long-term planning inherently difficult

You're right, user. We really are superior in every way!

>He doesn't think if he was a cow he'd find other cows attractive because he thinks humans are "objectively" beautiful

Gr8 b8 m8

The fact that most stars in the night sky are farther than 6000 light years away is always my go to.

Beauty is different from sexual attraction.

It's sufficient.
If God is a master engineer, a sufficient design would be efficient (maximum result with minimal effort), so perfect in its own way.

I think owls are beautiful but I probably wouldn't fug one.

>He literally thinks beauty is objective
Wew.

Then that's not perfection, you goalpost moving mong. As long as other animals have better more-efficient equipment than we do, we aren't the pinnacle of shit.

You found your way over from /tv/?

>I just can't believe it that
Okay then. Why are you here?

There is a sliver of truth in beauty being objective. Certain mathematical qualities are universally met with attraction by humans. Symmetry and harmonics in music for example.

An actual mental phenomena? Sure. Driven by elegant forms? For me.

It is exactly perfection. Why would God have to redesign the eye when it functions sufficiently? The overall design would be less efficient, requiring more effort for a similar result.

Evolution is a spectrum

hominids came from africa, they evolved from an ape-like creature (not a fucking chimp, chimps also evolved from this "common ancestor" as they call it).
It's best pictured as an enormous family tree, with single-celled bacteria at the top and us at the bottom. blacks a bit further up ofc

It's not nessesarily that evolution has been proven to be true, it's that its the only plausible hypothesis for the origin of species

Well, at least you're less annoying than the one Veeky Forums guy.
Your first paragraph is solely opinion. You're welcome to believe that evolution is duller than creationism. In the grand scheme of things, it kind of is. Dullness vs excitement is about the least viable way of determining whether or not something is valid though.

What was wrong with these fossils? Don't just give us nothing. In science, you back up falsifiable claims with physical evidence. Don't be like what's-his-face in Euthyphro. Show us you know what you're talking about.

Dawkins is kind of a dick and should stick to his field of expertise like Bill "It's a Spectrum" Nye should have done so as well.

I really don't want to touch the last part because that's the juiciest of bait.

user. He's just posting a /tv/ meme.

>sufficiently
That is such an arbitrary definition even you must realize it's stupidity.

>God is a mediocre engineer who designed a vast array of eyes, including absolutely fantastic ones that see ultraviolet and infrared, ones that see a a half a mile away as clearly as we see things right in front of us, but didn't put any of those into his "perfect" being because it was "too much effort"
Idk who your god is but I'm pretty sure he's an idiot.

Can people see well enough so they can gather food? It works well enough.
What's the problem?

No, I believe in the natural process of evolution and the intervention of God for human "evolution"

But yes, why work more when God is trying to work less?

>Asians evolved from insects.
You mistake asians with turks user.

If that's all we needed, we could have much, much worse eyes than we do.

You're just trolling, right? You realize how stupid your logic is? You're basically saying "all of our traits are good enough for us to survive which proves we are God's creation", yet evolution necessitates that our traits be good enough to survive lest we wouldn't be able to reproduce. Being "good enough" doesn't imply God's perfection, it implies exactly the opposite.

This whole conversation started with you claiming humans are perfection relative to other animals. I think you've moved your goalposts far enough that you're well out of that range at this point so we're done.

>God is lazy ant won't put any extra effort into making his favorite creation a little bit better
Top kek. What a shitty deity.

Well, evolution left us with sufficient eyes and they turned out as good as they did. Have to have somewhat decent eyes to farm and build houses.

No, that's not my entire argument. Just a counter-argument to "unintelligent design" argument.

Certainly a more harmonious creation than other animals.
The overall design of the creation is perfect.

But it's not a good one. You just keep implying it's exactly as good as it needs to be, but that's bullshit. A third of our population has to wear glasses because variation in our eyes are so wide, and parts of our ocular vision are completely unnecessary. If we don't need to see ultraviolet, then we could also get by just fine without seeing violet. 2 cones would be more than enough to differentiate between colors.

>Certainly a more harmonious creation than other animals.
There are animals on this Earth that do not age. Their cellular reproduction does not decay. They live indefinitely until killed by some other force and never experienced the great human suffering that is aging.

>The overall design of the creation is perfect.
It takes a gene mutated to start a tumour, a sudden peak in nutrients to make an algal bloom (sometimes with toxins that only harms animals but also humans) and a basket of rabbits to fuck up an entire island bigger than most countries.
I wouldn't call something so easily ruined "perfect". A "perfect" creation would be expected to have more resistence and resilience.

Ah, but you are missing the big picture. It is an entirely self-reliant system. It all works on it's own and builds itself up into greater complexity without help from God. This is what a self-reliant design looks like.

Yes, but the evolutionary path did not produce a body which is suitable for technology(which God would infuse with brilliance) with those traits. God fulfills his aims as he does.

Hmm.. well like you said, we could survive with worse.... Also perhaps environmental and genetic factors are at play which decrease our visual ability... but I mean it's still good enough anyway.

Do you have any evidence that God intervened in our evolution?

He doesn't. He just keeps insisting it's self-evident in how "perfect" human beings are in design, but his evidence for this perfection is just circular logic always circling back to "God designed it that way so it's perfect"

Well, ever seen Richard Dawkin's climbing mt. improbable video? If evolution is highly unlikely in a scenario then there should be an alternative.

Besides that, I think the manner in which God worked with evolution, is by spreading the idea to the mind of apes telepathically, which triggered a change in their brain chemistry, which triggers hormones, which activates a sort of "transposon mechanism." There should be a relic of this transposon mechanism in our DNA still if we know to look for it.

The only people who argue over evolution are retarded religious people and pop culture scientists.

Harmonious is a better word. You just wished I was trying to make that argument. :oP

As far as the perfection of the design, I would have to bring metaphysics and mysticism in it to show you how it is most brilliant.

>a body which is suitable for technology
Our body isn't suitable for technology,technology is suitable to our body.
And even the second statement is debatable considering the amount of problems the human body suffers due to its use/misuse

It's hard to prove evolution because genetic mutations are on a spectrum.

>I would have to bring metaphysics and mysticism in it to show you how it is most brilliant.

Well transposons do exist in our DNA, but they also exist in plenty of other animals. I don't know if there are any transposons that are unique to humans, but I wouldn't have thought so.

>I just can't believe it

ironically has no problem believing in talking snakes, and that "god" created the world in 7 days and man from literal dirt.

why is something with actual evidence, like evolution, harder to believe than a guy living inside a whale for a week?

>I just can't believe it that we evolved from an ape.
Not the issue, user. Mutations and shit happening when all the machinery already exists is no big deal. The problem is, where did the machinery come from? You can't explain extremely complex protein structures such as RNA and ribosomes just appearing like that, all working together in harmony to encode and decode information and in turn create new complex proteins to be used by the organism.
You can throw dirt and water together and wait all you want, maybe even something like an lipid encapsulation forms that can be deemed a "cell", but it will NEVER EVER develop the actual tools needed for life.

Nobody is saying you can.

Then there's no reason to believe in it.

Evolution as understood by orthodox science is an ad hoc position that is part of the modern world view belief system. Evolution probably happened, but not just through random genetic mutations and natural selection. How the universe works including the possibility of evolution is cooler than our present scientific and spiritual understanding.

kek

>it will NEVER EVER develop the actual tools needed for life.
Says who? I think the real answer is "it is exceedingly unlikely". But even remote possibilities become reasonable possibilities when compounded over a few billion years.

And it certainly doesn't imply we should jump to the conclusion. It was intelligently designed.

>orthodox science
Opinions discarded

Miller managed to create simple organic mollecules by replicating the conditions of the primitive Earth.
That experiment didn't last that long, imagine if we did something like that for a scale of thousands or even millions of years.

>But even remote possibilities become reasonable possibilities when compounded over a few billion years.
>dude time lmao
I don't think you really understand the impossibility of everything falling in place like that. Thinking you can just slap some time on it to make it work is retarded. Reminds me of bad jokes about QM and finding your car outside your garage one day because lmao tunneling, there's some odds!

Good job. Now create a wide variety of complex organic molecules that seemlessly work together to enable encoding and decoding information for proteins, allow it to duplicate it so that reproduction is possible, and while you're at it why don't you add a system of storing and using energy.
That's what's needed to make functional cells, utterly incomparable to creating some simple organic molecules.

>I don't think you really understand the impossibility of everything falling in place like that.
And you don't seem to understand how large the planet is and how long it lasted in its primordial state.

But id love to hear your explanation of why it's so astronomically low. If you have calculated the odds I'd very much like to hear them. If your response is simply "dude just think about it lmao" then don't bother.

>I just can't believe it that we evolved from an ape.
>I can't believe that the Earth is more then 6,000 yrs old.

It's not that you "can't" -- it's that you refuse to.

>Implying that in due time that would not be possible
Obviously you don't get life from one day to the other, this things take time