Is evolution real?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Yes
>why did god create me this way??
No
Yes
Ok retard
Its irrelevant due to climate change.
Even the robots are evolving
Fuckin kek
Obviously
>No
intelligent design, bro
so intelligent
>implying black molds won't survive
you do know that there are molds that use melanin to process the radiation leaking out of chernobyl, my dear manfaced child?
Do americans shit in markets?
Probably
Microevolution yes, macro no
No. It's adaptation and an organism can devolve in order to adapt to a harsher environment.
Fucking frogs are worse than leafs!
Micro-economics is real
Macro economics is not
Bricks are real
Brick buildings are not
Yes, but it doesn't disprove intelligent design.
>No. It's adaptation and an organism can devolve in order to adapt to a harsher environment.
>Fucking frogs are worse than leafs!
so what you re saying is that an organism can... "evolve" accross time...?
A couple of years ago I would have said yes obviously. But now I’m working on the assumption that everything I have been taught is a lie
Macro only exists in the fevered imaginations of materialist atheists who didn't like how Darwin suggested that God used evolution to make variety out of pre-existing first forms, read a fucking book sometime.
If you are asking did white people evolve from monkey's then no.
Not for Niggers.
Idiots dont understand that the small "adaptations" over time, eventually lead to differences large enough so that they cannot breed. This is speciation and its readily observable using FST distance
No where can we find these small changes amounting into completely different forms of animals. You're taking an inch, and then driving cross country
>if you go inch by inch you can never walk a mile
i never understood why lots of people understand the small changes as facts but then act it's magic once time spans of thousands, hundreds of thousands or millions of years are involved
Explain how the fruit fly experiments where they ran countless generations never became new species.
Kind of this. The problem with macroevolution is that it is really hard to see the emergence of new species. It's one thing to see mutations and occasionally see a beneficial mutation, but it's another thing to see a specie completely seperate emerging in the wild. Is there any good article tackling this?
>explain why this 3 year experiment isn't the same as millions of years
sorry you got us scientists there, we made it all up
nice argument! you got me convinced
So it can lay on its side and maintain a flat profile, while still having the benefit of two eyes facing one direction.
They bred them faster than regular fruitfly breeding times, nigger.
so? it's still not nearly enough
faster relative to what? i dont think you understand how long a million years is
yes but it doesn't really matter
cope
no, a christian, an atheist and a jew say so
youtube.com
if EVOLUTION is not real then how does AMERIMUTT exist?
No
the climate and environments and conditions fluctuate and change way to quick for species to adapt at the same speed.
The physical world is not real, your whole life was a dream.
Every single generation is that. There is no magical point where this becomes that, because our definitions are just that, imaginary defined boundaries that are human constructs. Notice how there are species which can still breed, yet cannot produce fertile offspring. You act like dog breeds dont exist. All bulldogs for example are birthed cesarean, because we bred them into a dead end evolutionarily.
They arent countless, and they did not as the core of the experiment, try and breed a fly so different it could no longer breed with ones from outside their group.
Note the words "we bred".
Nature doesn't select nearly as selectively as humans do. The timelines involved for evolution require millions of years worth of stable environments not constantly interrupted by global catastrophes, except whoops, that's exactly the geological picture we get.
Even a kajillion year old earth would not produce life of any kind, much less the kind of life we find in the fossil record or all around us. You can produce "Shakespeare-like" text segments out of a random letter generator, but unless Shakespeare-like segments have some sort of in-built viability in the universe of such texts which allow it to persist across generations while the incoherent nonsense dies off, you'll never get any work of Shakespeare, especially since we are not in an infinitely old universe with infinite subatomic particles dancing arbitrarily. Additionally, a literary critic given any text of Shakespeare will come to the conclusion that it was written by a human intelligence who existed in a particular era of history and make credible speculation about what that human was like; if told that it was generated via some sort of "Infinite Monkeys" algorithm, he will note it as a profound statistical improbability, but nothing more.
Plus, if you believe in evolution, _your brain_ is a product of that long string of random chance. Why trust any idea that you could produce out of your head, if that's the case?
>Nature doesn't select nearly as selectively as humans do
that's wrong tho
Yes and peepole is like over 9000 gorillion years old.
sorry i didn't read your entire post so let me update mine
every single thing you wrote is wrong
>be God
>design and create everything perfectly
>humans ruin planet
>cause & effect
>humans: why did God do dis??
>Why trust any idea that you could produce out of your head, if that's the case?
Why trust the notion of God then, memeflaggot?
This is what I’ve always wondered. If a new species emerged, how would it even be able to mate with others around it. And even if it came from a litter with the same mutation, wouldn’t they be breeding within themselves and become highly inbred? I don’t get it but maybe the labcoats have an explanation
Evolution explains,more accurately, how life progressed. It does not explain how life began.
it's upsetting to me that liberals and atheists and everyone else have poisoned the evolution well.
it's not really a controversial or pozzed observation.
evolution does not allow for a species to suddenly give birth to a different species. the change is far more gradual than that. we're biased to think on human timelines.
but no mother ever gives birth to a 'new' species.
gradual changes in response to external factors over a long enough period of time can, eventually, cause life to be significantly different than it was before.
you guys want to throw the baby out with the bathwater over this stuff but just look around you, it's so obvious and it's the simplest explanation.
don't hide behind God or Christ, because they didn't give you reason, and all the evidence before you, for you to just throw it out because of biases and spite towards people who believe in this.
God started this show in motion, he gave us the spark of life in all it's wonder, and to deny it based on politics or ignorance is demeaning
because new species don't 'emerge' like that.
they are the same species as their parents,
and as their children.
the human brain is not equipped to handle the kind of timescale we're talking about.
no. evolution is taught by satanists that worship satan as they laugh at you thinking you came from apes.
Shit changes and adapts and stays the same thing: check.
Your ancestor and the ancestor of all animals was a single celled organism. lolno