Proof Of Human Evolution

[Azure]

ID should be based on faith not proof. Why some people try to credit it as science is beyond me.

[Skyceman]

Originally Posted by troutman

Competing fruit flies show evolution in action



An experiment by University of California, Davis graduate student Daniel Bolnick has captured evolution in action, provided support for a long-standing hypothesis in evolutionary biology, and could help explain how some new species arise from old ones.

No. Fruit flies are commonly used as THE creature for investigating evolutionary genetics because genetically they are relatively simple. Yet they have never proven evolution with them:

Radiation such as x-rays will produce mutations and various frequencies and strengths of x-rays have bombarded these insects in the laboratory, producing, for example, wing abnormalities known as apterous, vestigial, dumpy, etc. Since 1910 geneticists have documented over 3,000 mutations in this creature, yet science journals have not documented a single fruit fly evolving into something else, no matter how often and badly they're mutated. Indeed, the late evolutionist Pierre-P. Grassé said, "The fruitfly (Drosophila melanogaster), the favorite pet insect of the geneticists, whose geographical, biotopical, urban, and rural genotypes are now known inside out, seems not to have changed since the remotest times."

Grassé, Pierre-P. "Evolution of Living Organisms"

[Kev]

True definition of Futile: men who devote their entire life to proving a theory which in effect says that this life is the only one they will ever have.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Kev

True definition of Futile: men who devote their entire life to proving a theory which in effect says that this life is the only one they will ever have.

Do you know what "futile" means?

[Kev]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

Do you know what "futile" means?

Well, the first formal definition I found was:

"Having no useful result."

"Synonyms: barren, bootless, fruitless, unavailing, useless, vain"

These evolutionists spend their entire life trying to prove a theory which essentially says they just wasted the only life they had proving the theory that reaffirms it was their only life they had. Sounds pretty "fruitless, unavailing, useless, and/or vain" to me.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Kev

Well, the first formal definition I found was:

"Having no useful result."

"Synonyms: barren, bootless, fruitless, unavailing, useless, vain"

These evolutionists spend their entire life trying to prove a theory which essentially says they just wasted the only life they had proving the theory that reaffirms it was their only life they had. Sounds pretty "fruitless, unavailing, useless, and/or vain" to me.

I don't think it's useless for a person to spend their life trying to figure out where human beings came from.

It's certainly no more useless than someone spending a life trying to convince themselves and other people that they will have another life when they are dead. Sounds pretty "fruitless, unavailing, useless and/or vain" to me.

[troutman]

http://mic.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/full/149/12/3565

Gradual evolution in bacteria: evidence from Bacillus systematics

This one is way over my head.

http://www.actionbioscience.org/evolution/lenski.html

Evolution in action. Evolutionary change continues to this day, and it will proceed so long as life itself exists. In recent years, many bacterial pathogens have evolved resistance to antibiotics used to cure infections, thereby requiring the development of new and more costly treatments. In some frightening cases, bacteria have evolved resistance to every available antibiotic, so there is no longer any effective treatment. In the case of HIV, which causes AIDS, significant viral evolution occurs within the course of infection of a single patient, and this rapid evolution enables the virus to evade the immune system. Many agricultural pests have evolved resistance to chemicals that farmers have used for only a few decades. As we work to control diseases and pests, the responsible organisms have been evolving to escape our controls. Moreover, scientists can perform experiments to study evolution in real time, just as experiments are used to observe dynamic processes in physics, chemistry, and other branches of biology. To study evolution in action, scientists use organisms like bacteria and fruitflies that reproduce quickly, so they can see changes that require many generations.

I think I'm getting confused betwen the semantic meanings of observation and evolution in action.

[Kev]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I don't think it's useless for a person to spend their life trying to figure out where human beings came from.

But the they aren't trying to "figure out" where humans came from at all. They are just trying to find evidence to support the theory they believe. If they were honestly looking for that answer with an open mind, then it wouldn't be futile.

The irony is, if they were to prove the theory correct, then they would (if they had any common sense at all) realize that they just spent x amount of years of their life (in some cases their whole lives) proving that they have no life beyond the current one. hmmm.

It's like someone deciding that they are going to prove that a human can't survive under water, then submersing themselves in the ocean for 3 hours, and eventually drowning. Sure, anyone can argue they accomlished something, but where do they go from there? Oh right, nowhere, they're dead.

I guess the advantage these ones have is that if they were to succeed in proving evolution, they can then take the remaining years for life left and invest them into something like, oh... I don't know, maybe how to extend human life, because they are going to need it to make up for the time they just lost.

[Cheese]

Originally Posted by Kev

But the they aren't trying to "figure out" where humans came from at all. They are just trying to find evidence to support the theory they believe. If they were honestly looking for that answer with an open mind, then it wouldn't be futile.

The irony is, if they were to prove the theory correct, then they would (if they had any common sense at all) realize that they just spent x amount of years of their life (in some cases their whole lives) proving that they have no life beyond the current one. hmmm.

It's like someone deciding that they are going to prove that a human can't survive under water, then submersing themselves in the ocean for 3 hours, and eventually drowning. Sure, anyone can argue they accomlished something, but where do they go from there? Oh right, nowhere, they're dead.

I guess the advantage these ones have is that if they were to succeed in proving evolution, they can then take the remaining years for life left and invest them into something like, oh... I don't know, maybe how to extend human life, because they are going to need it to make up for the time they just lost.

Didnt you just waste at least half an hour of your life trying to make a futile attempt at letting us know how futile it is?

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by Kev

But the they aren't trying to "figure out" where humans came from at all. They are just trying to find evidence to support the theory they believe. If they were honestly looking for that answer with an open mind, then it wouldn't be futile.

The irony is, if they were to prove the theory correct, then they would (if they had any common sense at all) realize that they just spent x amount of years of their life (in some cases their whole lives) proving that they have no life beyond the current one. hmmm.

It's like someone deciding that they are going to prove that a human can't survive under water, then submersing themselves in the ocean for 3 hours, and eventually drowning. Sure, anyone can argue they accomlished something, but where do they go from there? Oh right, nowhere, they're dead.

I guess the advantage these ones have is that if they were to succeed in proving evolution, they can then take the remaining years for life left and invest them into something like, oh... I don't know, maybe how to extend human life, because they are going to need it to make up for the time they just lost.

Wow. What a strange argument. It's kind of hard to argue with that kind of logic (and no, not because it's so "right").

I've got a question for ya. If all these scientists are wasting/have wasted their lives studying evolution, what made them do it? Are they stupid, or is there something sinister at work here that has made all these millions of people waste their lives?

Oh, and just as an aside... I know you think science is a waste of time but they have proven one thing and for your own safety I think you should know it -- it wouldn't take 3 hours to prove that humans can't survive under water.

[Kybosh]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I've got a question for ya. If all these scientists are wasting/have wasted their lives studying evolution, what made them do it? Are they stupid, or is there something sinister at work here that has made all these millions of people waste their lives?

I just want to chime in on this statement here. I do not study evolution however I am a research scientist. From personal experience there are times that research definately feels futile but then there are moments of brilliance that make it all worth while. Research is definately NOT a futile practice be it on evolution or religious scripture.

For the benefit of Kev the main reason that research is done is to have the opportunity to be the first person to make a certain discovery or advance the science that much further (that and to get the women. . . research scientists get all the ladies). I can't really describe it but even a minor success in the lab feels euphoric.