Is There Evidence for Evolution? Show it to us.

Evolution is a belief held by most intellectuals all over the world, despite the fact that there is no real scientific evidence for it at all. Some claim that evolution is a proved scientific fact, based on a multitude of scientific proofs, but they are unable to document even one of these supposed proofs! I'm not surprised that they can't, after all no one has ever seen evolution happen, for the simple fact that it cannot be detected within the lifetime of a single observer. A process which has never been observed to occur, in all human history, should not be called scientific IMO.

I'd like to see this so-called proof or (evidence as they like to call it) of evolution and I'm not talking about some long drawn out thesis on how evolution works. Show us the hardcore evidence. I would like to see evolutionary biologists put their theory to the test and give us some rigorous evidence that it is true, if they can, instead of merely arguing about mechanisms and presenting plausible scenarios. A few predictions of the theory that pan out or fail to materialize will not settle the issue, but rather some meaningful statistical tests. Until this is done, I would suggest that they recognize that this is a theory without a shadow of support.

As the famous saying goes "extraordinary claims demands extraordinary evidence". If they have evidence let's see it, but keep in mind that limited and weak evidence is not enough to overcome the extraordinary nature of these claims.

Now I know most of the ones who believe in this hogwash are gonna come in here and try to reverse the thread and demand that someone show them the evidence of God. But I am suggesting that if you can't present any hardcore evidence for evolution then just stay silent. This is a challenge for the evolutionist, a chance for them to finally reveal this so-called mounds of evidence that they have.

Show us the lab results, or a time lap video of evolution, give us something besides a long born thesis. I really do want to see this evidence.

Bachelor of science here. There is no absolute proof of macroevolution. It cannot be tested using the scientific method. Microevolution however can be replicated.

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Evolution has many forms and is not just relegated to species specifically. All things are created and all thing evolve in a natural way, we see evidence of this everyday. Proof? It is not necessary to provide proof of something evolving. You are the proof. One day you were born, the next day you started to see, the next day you started to crawl, the next day you started to walk, etc.

Every idea starts the creative process. Then the idea evolves into something else, then someone comes along and improves it, also, a form of evolution.

originally posted by: avgguy
Bachelor of science here. There is no absolute proof of macroevolution. It cannot be tested using the scientific method. Microevolution however can be replicated.

When you say it can be replicated, how is this done? And exactly what kind of test have been done? Can you provide an example?

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Evolution has many forms and is not just relegated to species specifically. All things are created and all thing evolve in a natural way, we see evidence of this everyday. Proof? It is not necessary to provide proof of something evolving. You are the proof. One day you were born, the next day you started to see, the next day you started to crawl, the next day you started to walk, etc.

Every idea starts the creative process. Then the idea evolves into something else, then someone comes along and improves it, also, a form of evolution.

Are you saying that in order for something to evolve it must be created first, or do you mean something else?

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Bacteria can evolve ie: MRSA. The evolution from one organism to another would be macroevolution. This is the main one we here here about when we talk about evolution. It is not scientific because it can't be replicated or tested.

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Are you saying you are incapable of reading what I posted, seems pretty straightforward to me, what part do you not comprehend? Common sense is necessary to understand.

Did I stutter?

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

I never saw God create a new species either, guess we can rule out creationism.

I really do want to see this evidence.

I would be willing to bet there are tens of thousands of books and papers written in support of evolution.
Now if I were being rude I would suggest you go and read some.
However I do not suppose that any of that information would prove it to you. So,
my question to you is why do you suppose someone here would be able to prove it to you if none of that information cannot.

As the famous saying goes "extraordinary claims demands extraordinary evidence". If they have evidence let's see it, but keep in mind that limited and weak evidence is not enough to overcome the extraordinary nature of these claims.

Extraordinary claims? Any more extraordinary than creationism?

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Oh this thread....again.
Shouldn't it be on you to show that it is wrong if you think so?

The science is there, they don't claim it to be fact but just the best possible explanation.

a reply to: avgguy

Micro-Macro, schmikro-schmackro. There is no need to make this complicated with fancy schmancy words.

It is really very simple.

Created, evolved, improved, evolved. Idea, created, evolved, improved and evolved some more.

Repeat after me, created, evolved, improved, evolved again.

Every single organism is created, then evolves then improves itself thereby evolving some more.

originally posted by: soulpowertothendegree
a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

Are you saying you are incapable of reading what I posted, seems pretty straightforward to me, what part do you not comprehend? Common sense is necessary to understand.

Did I stutter?

So instead of answering the question you want to get snotty, ok. Common sense would tell you that this thread is about Evolution, you know, the kind that many claim is the proof of man coming from apes. Or are you confused by the title?

a reply to: theantediluvian

So you don't have any evidence to bring to the table then right?

a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

i always thought punctuated equilibrium was more accurate then evolution but even then. . .

As for proof of evolution I don't believe there is direct proof, as your looking for, but many have Faith.

a reply to: TerryMcGuire

Sure, I could look it up and read tons of pages on it, but why? Alot of people on this site claim that there is evidence, I'm simply asking them to show us the evidence they have. Is that to big of a task?

a reply to: Sremmos80

How can it be the best possible explanation if there is no solid proof for it? Are we suppose to accept it on faith?

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

So in other words, you believe everything has to be created first right? That's all I was asking, it was a yes or no question.

originally posted by: RealTruthSeeker
a reply to: Sremmos80

How can it be the best possible explanation if there is no solid proof for it? Are we suppose to accept it on faith?

It's not advisable to do cartwheels on thin ice.
Could end in a Darwin Award.

Just sayin.

originally posted by: AnteBellum
a reply to: RealTruthSeeker

As for proof of evolution I don't believe there is direct proof, as your looking for, but many have Faith.

Not according to all the evolution guru's on this site, according to them there's tons of it, but for some reason we still haven't seen any.

a reply to: soulpowertothendegree

It's not even close to being that simple, but if it makes you feel better then believe that.