And,....not only is there no fossil evidence that prove Darwinian evolution.....but there is no evidence of any kind.
"But where is the experimental evidence? None exists in the literature
claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another.
Bacteria,
the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study,
with generation times of 20 to 30 minutes, and populations achieved after
18 hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there
is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another, in
spite of the fact that populations have been exposed to potent chemical
and physical mutagens and that, uniquely, bacteria possess
extrachromosomal, transmissible plasmids.
Since there is no evidence for
species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not
surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic to
eukaryotic cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher
multicellular organisms." The Times Higher Education Supplement, April 20, 2001
SECTION: BOOKS; BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE; No.1483; Pg.29
HEADLINE: Scant Search For The Maker
BYLINE: Alan Linton
Yet, morons continue to march lock step with the Leftists who propagate the myth.
From the OP:
Some dunce contributed this to a thread dealing with Darwinian evolution...."the majority of scientists say it's a fact!"
Amazing.
There is abundant evidence for evolution, such as Darwin's Finches. There is NO evidence for Creationism but, since it is theologically, ideologically, and socially superior it must be true? Let me think, should I believe you or my lying eyes?
I've been happy to use your posts because they allow me to reveal how every myth and fable of the Left, and their ignorant followers, is false.
Educated folks know Darwinian evolution is a fabrication.
Soooo....you probably don't have the background to understand this evisceration, but....perhaps some will.
You, because you are a dunce, said this:
"There is abundant evidence for evolution, such as Darwin's Finches."
1. "A particularly compelling example of speciation involves the 13 species of finches studied by Darwin on the Galápagos Islands, now known as Darwin's finches." "Science, Evolution, and Creationism," p. 10. by National Academy of Sciences
Pretty good example of how Darwin's theory may have begun as a scientific theory, but is now no more than ideology. Darwin's finches are an instance not of speciation, but of variation within a population.
2. Darwin studied different finch species on the Galápagos Islands, later attributing the differences in beak size and feeding habits amongst these birds to evolution. Thirteen species live on the Galápagos Islands themselves and one species on Cocos Island, some 600 kilometers to the northeast. Although these birds are classified into 14 different species, they closely resemble one another, possessing similar body shapes, colors, and habits. According to the National Academy of Sciences book, these birds evolved from a single species that came from South America. Darwinists have been portraying these birds as an example of evolution by means of natural selection, and the best-known proof of evolution!
3. Darwin wrote in his
Origin of Species that the emergence of new species by means of natural selection is a very slow process, which is why it cannot be observed, but only inferred. But in an article in the April 1953 edition of
Scientific American magazine, the ornithologist David Lack claimed that the evolution of the birds on the Galápagos had taken place in the recent past, and that this could even be seen as proof of differentiation between species.
4. Peter Grant and his wife Rosemary Grant, two researchers who first went to the Galápagos Islands in 1973, with the aim of observing the effects of evolution on the finches, and carried out detailed studies and observations in the following years. They are thus remembered as experts on Darwin's finches. Peter Grant, in fact, suggested that the evolution of the Galápagos finches was still going on. Peter R. Grant, "Natural Selection and Darwin's Finches," Scientific American, October 1991, pp. 82-87
5. The Grant's studied individual members of the medium ground finch species on the Galápagos for years, and regularly monitored some 20,000 finches across several generations, kept careful records of both their beak size, and of the weather....rainfall...on the island. The amount of rain is of vital importance for the finches, which feed on seeds. In years when rain is plentiful, the finches can easily find the seeds they need to grow and reproduce. In years of drought, however, the number of seeds produced by plants is limited and may not be enough; as a result some finches die of starvation.
6. After a drought period, the average beak was approximately half a millimeter, or 5%, larger in 1977 compared to 1976. Taking this as their starting point, the researchers suggested those finches which fed solely on small seeds were weeded out, while those with beaks capable of breaking and opening larger and harder shells survived.
In an article in the journal Scientific American published in October 1991, Peter Grant declared that this research was direct proof of evolution. According to Grant, 20 selection events were sufficient to turn the medium ground finch into the large ground finch; if it is assumed that there is a drought every 10 years, then such a change could happen in as little as 200 years. Grant renewed his claims in subsequent articles, insisting that finches had verified Darwinism and proved that natural selection caused living things to evolve. Peter R. Grant, B. Rosemary Grant, "Speciation and Hybridization in Island Birds," Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London B 351, 1996, pp. 765-772
7. But hold on..... With the rain there was an abundance of seeds,
and the beak size in medium ground finches returned to its previous value to before the drought of 1977. This astonished evolutionists, who were expecting regular growth in beak size. In short, the findings show that there is no such thing as evolutionary change. Average beak size sometimes rises above a fixed value according to the seasons and sometimes falls-in other words, it fluctuates. As a result, there is no directional change.
Just as the English peppered moth population varied with the air pollution in the Industrial Revolution....the finch population varied with rainfall.
8.The 1999 booklet published by the National Academy describes Darwin's finches as "a particularly compelling example" of the origin of species. The booklet goes on to explain how the Grants and their colleagues showed "that a single year of drought on the islands can drive evolutionary changes in the finches," and that "if droughts occur about once every 10 years on the islands, a new species of finch might arise in only about 200 years." Rather than mention
that selection was reversed after the drought, producing no long-term evolutionary change, the booklet simply omits this awkward fact. "
Jonathan Wells, "Icons of Evolution", pp. 174-175; See also National Academy of Sciences, "Science and Creationism: A View from the National Academy of Sciences", Second Edition, Washington DC, 1999
The above, and more detail, found here:
http://www.nationalacademyofsciencesrefuted.com/regarding_speciation.php
Have I put you in your place enough....or do you need to be embarrassed even more?
