Thread: Evolution is a Fact - Not a Theory

I quoted a bunch of stuff I thought was interesting. No-one has bothered to explain to mutations of the creation of the eye. I do not support everything I quote it's just out of interest. But this is where I am coming from personally. Just to make it clear. Simple yet complex.

1) I do not believe nor deny the existence of any particular supernatural being unless I want to imagine and make one up when it suits me. I have nothing against any religion or atheism or any other form of belief structure.

2) I do not believe nor deny a particular process of evolution unless I want to make one up that benifits.

3) I am certain we did not emerge from the genetics of apes or monkeys.

Now I have a question for believers in the ape theory. Where is the evidence that apes evolved from humans? When can I have proof of it? A simple question but it is not yet shown how this could be possible.

The theory concerning the evolution of man is under increased scrutiny due to the persistence of gaps in the fossil record, the inability to demonstrate "life-or-death" determining advantageous genetic mutations, and the lack of experiments or observations to truly confirm the evidence for speciation. Overall, the evolution of man pervades as the accepted paradigm on the origin of man within the scientific community. This is not because it has been proven scientifically, but because alternative viewpoints bring with them metaphysical implications which go against the modern naturalistic paradigm. Nevertheless, a closer examination of the evidence reveals evolution to be increasingly less scientific and more reliant upon beliefs, not proof.

The differences reported between human and great ape genomes include cytogenetic differences, differences in the type and number of repetitive genomic DNA and transposable elements, abundance and distribution of endogenous retroviruses, the presence and extent of allelic polymorphisms, specific gene inactivation events, gene sequence differences, gene duplications, single nucleotide polymorphisms, gene expression differences, and messenger RNA splicing variations. Evaluation of the reported findings in all these categories indicates that the CMP-sialic hydroxylase mutation is the only one that has so far been shown to result in a global biochemical and structural difference between humans and great apes. Several of the other known genetic dissimilarities deserve more exploration at the functional level. Among the areas of focus for the future should be genes affecting development, mental maturation, reproductive biology, and other aspects of life history. The approaches taken should include both going from the genome up to the adaptive potential of the organisms and going from novel adaptive regimes down to the relevant repercussions in the genome.

As much as we desire a simple genetic explanation for the human phenomenon, it is much more probable that our evolution occurred in multiple genetic steps, many of which must have left detectable footprints in our genomes. Ultimately, we need to know the exact number of genetic steps, the order in which they occurred, and the temporal, spatial, environmental, and cultural contexts that determined their impact on human evolution.

In other words, this subject has not being investigated properly here and no conclusive results show evidence of ape to human mutation despite any accepted consensus on the subject.

There are no transitional links and intermediate forms in either the fossil record or the modern world. Therefore, there is no actual evidence that evolution has occurred either in the past or the present.

natural selection (the supposed evolution mechanism, along with mutations) is incapable of advancing an organism to a "higher-order".

The final three supposed hominids put forth by evolutionists are actually modern human beings and not part monkey/ ape at all. Therefore, all twelve of the supposed hominids can be explained as being either fully monkey/ ape or fully modern human but not as something in between.

Natural selection can be seen to have insurmountable social and practical inconsistencies.

Natural selection has severe logical inconsistencies.

Evolutionists often have come forth and admitted their own and their colleagues' extreme degree of bias in this matter. Some have admitted that their approach has not been scientific or objective at all. Many admit to the severe lack of evidence for evolution and that they have accepted their conclusions only because they are unwilling to accept that evolution never occurred

Many ...believe in evolution for the simple reason that they think science has proven it to be a `fact' and, therefore, it must be accepted... In recent years, a great many people...having finally been persuaded to make a real examination of the problem of evolution, have become convinced of its fallacy and are now convinced anti-evolutionists."
-- Henry Morris, former evolutionist.