Foolster wrote:
How do creatures when they evolve from one eviron to another (For example from underwater to on land). What i mean is, wouldn't there be multiple steps to surviving (Wouldn't they need land movment and lung power at the same time?)
Well, yeah, ampibians are proof of it, but if you mean the actual adaptive steps I shall try and give some explanation.
Fossils have actually been found of amphibious fish; fish with very primitive fin-arms. Now, the obvious reason for such a creature evolving is simple: There may be food in an isolated lake or something, or in a swamp. If you have ever been fishing, you will know that fish can jump around on land, but it is pretty ineffective.
The likely explanation for the transition from sea to land is food-gathering. Fish that are able to gather more effectively (ie. cross land) are more likely to survive if there is a shortage in one particular area.
How do we KNOW the world is old?
From talkorigins.org:
* Radiometric dating shows the earth to be 4.5 billion years old
* If the earth is old, then radioactive isotopes with short half-lives should have all decayed already. That is what we find. Isotopes with half-lives longer than eighty million years are found on earth; isotopes with shorter half-lives are not, the only exceptions being those that are generated by current natural processes
* Loess deposits (deposits of wind-blown silt) in China are 300 m thick. They give a continuous climate record for 7.2 million years. The record is consistent with magnetostratigraphy and habitat type inferred from fossils
* The abundance and distribution of helium change predictably as the sun ages, converting hydrogen to helium in its core. These parameters also affect how sound waves move through the sun. Thus one may estimate the sun's age from seismic solar data. Such an analysis puts the age of the sun at 4.66 billion years, plus or minus about 4 percent
Now, where is the "evidence" for a young earth?
Are there CREDIABLE cavemen you could point me to (Not Hoaxes, Donkeys or people with rickets)?
Well, Lucy immediately jumps to mind. As Yosarian said, there are many.
Where do the other parts in the flaggellem come from? From what I gather it is unexplianed where those extra (nessicery) parts come from, which defies evolutionary idea of "small steps.
To explain what Yosarian was saying in laymen's terms:
The parts needed to make a flagellum did not need to evolve specifically to "make a flagellum". Two parts may evolve separately for different purposes (there are a number of ideas on the purposes of the parts) and then synthesize for a new purpose via mutation.
It is easy to say "We're here, so we must have gotten lucky" But that is not a scientific method at all,
Even if it is like finding a needle in a haystack, the point is that we are sitting on the needle.
"What sort of proof is it that you want? There is an overwhelming amount of evidence in favour of evolution. "
Again, I havn't seen it if it is there. Maybe I simply missed something and would appreciate anything that could help me understand it.
What you've said so far is proof that evolution COULD happen. What i'd like is proof that it is true, since you claim it is so obvious,
Yosarian has dealt with this.
