Well a lot of people have been telling me evolution is real. They give me the most craziest surreal 'facts'. Has anyone discovered any fish with legs? Any humans with gills or fins? If you put all the pieces of a watch into you're pocket and shake it around for trillions of years, will it ever become a watch? Is there but one possibility? Or if you completely dismantle a chicken and a fish, and put it into a box, shaking it around for trillions of years. Will it ever become a fish with wings? or a chicken with fins? :l
You mean you're not insulting him? His arguments have been shattered, yet he continues to say silly, irrelevant things that even you are tiring of, no?
evolution (as i call it "evilution" is a false idea about how everything came together. It involves natural selection, mutations. So basically it means that a fox or something evolved into a whale (impossible). Or a seal into a bird. Or something like that.
The way you state this seems to indicate you think there are no real rules as to what can transition int what. We would never see a seal turn into a bird or a fox into a whale. These are modern animals on different evolutionary branches and such changes would actually debunk the theory. If given the right environmental factors we might see the ancestor of a fox eventual evolve to live in the water like a whale with similar features, but that wouldn't make it a whale.
EVILUTION IS A THEORY NOT FACT! IT IS NOT EVEN SCIENCE!
This is complete fail. First off you are clearly not understanding what a theory is and have clearly not bothered to read through this thread as it has been define a number of time now. But I will spoon feed this yet again.
"Theory; A scientific explanation of related observations or events based on hypotheses and verified multiple times by different independent researchers."
So yeah by calling it a theory you got science. Now for the "not a fact part. As noted it has been observed both in the lab and in nature. (I have already given examples to you)
"Fact; An objective, verifiable observation. They can be, and have been, verified many times."
Since we have objectively and verifiability observed evolution take place many times, it's a fact.
Their scientists are busy arguing about the ancestors of each animal.
There really isn't much debate here as you might think. We have a pretty good grasp on things overall. For example we can follow this path fish to amphibians, to reptiles, to mammals and birds.
On the other hand Creation scientists all agree that God made everything. Oh ya. United we stand, divided we fall.
Considering there are over 10,000 different religions running around each with different denominations such as Christianity for example having over 34,000 denominations. Religion really isn't that united. But that's besides the point.
'aight then. When living organisms reproduce, they pass on their traits to their "child" through their genes (don't argue that this isn't true unless you want to explain why people look like their parents). These genes sometimes undergo mutations, in which a piece of their genetic code is changed, altering what they would pass on to their child. The mutations can be tiny things, such as just a slight bit stronger, or a slightly bigger beak. These mutations can be a good thing or a bad thing. If it's a bad thing, the child is more likely to die. If it's a good thing, it's more likely to live. If organisms with good mutations are more likely to live, this also means they're more likely to reproduce more. This means more of the species children will have better mutations. This means the best mutations are the ones passed on, and will create better species. Over millions of years, these mutations start to change how the animal looks to the point where it doesn't look like it's ancestor. The mutation humans are best known for is the brain. Over millions and millions of years, mutations in the brain allowed for more and more neurons to be packed closer and closer together, creating the brain the humans have today.
