Macro-evolution isn't unobservable. It's just not directly observable(most of the time, anyway save for fast reproducing organisms like bacteria).
Crimes scenes are rarely ever directly observed. Forensic scientists have to rely on indirect observations to deduce an event that they weren't...
No, let's see you address the sequential changes of the highly suggestive progression in synapsid Evolution.
Nice try, but I'm not gonna let you dodge this and let you fall back on "I'm more interested in cats, so show me changes among them. Examples of other groups of organisms don't count...
Well address the smooth sequential/transitional changes in the fossil record of proto-mammals. Make that fit into the creationist framework, if you can.
The best way I would be able to do it is to assume some god deliberately made it look like Evolution took place and kept killing off...
Yeah no.
Let me ask you, can you prove that the Greek gods Zeus or Poseidon exist? If you can't, it means your Christian bible is wrong. See how stupid that sounds? It's unfair for me to ask for proof of something that you or your religion doesn't even claim. Man did not evolve from frogs...
It's also like a double-theory, so-to-speak, isn't it?
There's the theory that explains how Evolution happens(selection, mutations etc...), but Evolution it self is a theory because it explains the morphology and traits of life forms.
It's a theory that has a theory to explain the theory...
A scientific theory is an explanation for observed phenomenon. It also makes predictions.
Evolution explains the variety of organisms and it makes various predictions such as where certain fossils should be or certain characteristics of genes(such as the prediction of the fused chromosomes in...
As said already, it is photoshopped, but I'm sure it's possible to breed a horse to have that pattern.
Afterall, Japanese humans have unwittingly breed a certain group of craps to have samurai faces.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIeYPHCJ1B8
That's how Evolution works. Nothing stops being anything as it evolves. There's a reason why it's called Evolution and not Transformation. Also "fruit fly" is not a species. It's an entire family containing thousands of different species. Same with dog(or canine) under most formal contexts.
The...
It wouldn't disprove it, it just wouldn't be in accordance with it. It would just be considered a different thing entirely and not Evolution.
I don't think it would take anything away from the evidence in support of Evolution though, especially if we don't know what caused a bacteria to turn...
In other words, you know without a shadow of a doubt is that some species existed at one time, but didn't exist at another(later) time. But that later time, an almost identical but slightly different population existed. But they didn't exist at an even later time. But you still know without a...
Well actually, hydrogen and lithium atoms as well as a large percentage of helium atoms are the oldest. All of the heavier atoms were made later in stars.
Okay maybe I shouldn't use the word "design". As life forms evolve, they build on basic features.
And that's exactly what the fossil record shows. As we look at older fossils, the general features of life forms get more and more basic.
And that's the real question. If evolution is false, why...
That's what Evolution is. It's building upon basic design, not just randomly changing things around. It doesn't predict that eagles will transform into squirrels. Noticed I used the word transform instead of evolve?
The word 'evolution' in general context means a process of development...
Yeah that is probably a better example. It's easy to draw a line between unicellular and multicellular. This article even puts together four concrete criteria for something to be considered multicellular.
Bacteria with bodies – multicellular prokaryotes | Lab Rat, Scientific American...
Thanks :) People should know that there's nothing wrong with being wrong. :)
I thought Evolutionary Biologists actually defined birds as a paraves dinosaur capable of sustained flight(or descended from such like an ostrich) and any direct ancestor or relative that couldn't was simply...
Hmm... I guess you're right. I suppose it doesn't work with color either.
But I think with Evolution, it might be case specific. Like I think the definition of birds is a paraves dinosaur that is either capable of sustained/indefinite flight(ignoring energy/fatigue limitations) or has...
The first purple word in that paragraph is 'purple' :p
On a serious note, with color, it probably is easier to define. We can say the moment the frequency of light stops peaking at red is when it stops being red. The word that emits an equal amount of blue light as red light is the first word...