please post link to article showing that science has evidence of one species evolving into another different species. Example, Frog into Chimp. The evolution of a single species, e.g. a horse, is well documented, however I don't think you will find evidence of a horse coming from a lizard. I am particularly curious to see the link to the scientific study that showed they were able to observe the evolution of one species into another in the laboratory...

Rick,
Take any genetics 101 or microbiology class in college and you will see it for your own eyes. Just by changing the environs you can manipulate the offspring of a whole host of critters rather quickly. This is elementary evolution. You can even create amino acids and polypeptides out of a spark and some water, ammonia and methane.

The biological creation is actually every well understood. Complicated for sure but well understood.

The creation of the soul on the other hand is the stuff of Bibles!

Untrue. The "abolition party" was the Republican party. Lincoln, was the abolition/Republican party's first elected. Up to the Civil Rights Act of 1964, it has been the Republican party that has led the way for civil rights. From the Dixiecrats to the Democrats, they were the segregationalists. From Al Gore's father, to the ex-KKK member Robert Byrd, to Bill Clinton's mentor (William Fulbright).

Have you ever heard Byrds explanation? He essentially excuses his KKK past as an ill-advised youthful indescretion. He scares the crap out of me.

Uh, no offense, but I have certainly taken Microbiology and Genetics in the course of my education (as well as quite a few other science classes) and unless you are talking about crossing fruit flies and such I'm not sure exactly what you are getting at.

My question was to please post a link showing where scientists have been able to prove that one species can evolve into an entirely different species...not showing that you can change a fruit fly's eyes white.

And as far as amino acids and such I agree that you can create them with electicity...the issue is how do those molecules become a living organism.

Let me help you with that...One doesn't exist...The similarities between differing species suggests a single designer, not "evolutionary" relationship.

There is evidence. Loads of it. Staggering evidence growing daily. Is it totally chance that all primates have 98% DNA homology? (Don't answer that!)

The reason we don't see a crystal clear DNA record of the divergence of species is that the process just takes too damn long. No, you can't take a butterfly into a lab and turn it into a giraffe. It doesn't work like that!

Like everything else in life, if you really want to get closer to the truth, you have to open your eyes and take a hard, objective look at the facts.

We apparently read very different history books. I am at a loss to reconcile your accounts. It is true enough that Lincoln was the republican party's first president. He was no aboltitionist (at least not at first). In fact he was fairly intent on packing all of the blacks up and sending them back to Africa. He spent considerable time trying to sell this idea. He was quite pragmatic about the issue of slavery, and held that Blacks were inferior to whites.

What do you think this guy was thinking?

'Can you tell me anything you know about evolution, any one thing that is true?' I tried that question on the geology staff at the Field Museum of Natural History and the only answer I got was silence. I tried it on the members of the Evolutionary Morphology Seminar in the University of Chicago, a very prestigious body of evolutionists, and all I got there was silence for a long time and eventually one person said, 'I do know one thing – it ought not to be taught in high school'."

Dr. Colin Patterson, Senior Palaeontologist. British Museum of Natural History, London.


Did the good Dr. Patterson skip your class, or had he simply an axe to grind?

You are reading the history rewriters, or those who have a vested interest in shoving reality down the memory hole.

Actions are the test of a man, not his words...Lincoln's actions betray your assumed thesis.

No, it is evidence of a single architect.

no, he's justs a dumb ass....

Look at cyctochrome C sequences over all species (not just mammals). We're talking wheat, flies, yeast, etc. The patterns are pretty obvious. Except perhaps to those who don't want to see it...

That's the whole problem in a nutshell.

"nut" being the operative word...

"In essence, the probability of the formation of a cytochrome-C sequence is as likely as zero. That is, if life requires a certain sequence, it can be said that this has a probability likely to be realized once in the whole universe. Otherwise some metaphysical powers beyond our definition must have acted in its formation. To accept the latter is not appropriate for the scientific cause. We thus have to look into the first hypothesis.' -- Ali Demirsoy

What, the first 40 years wandering in the desert wasn't enough for you?

:)

a single architect!?

Don't you mean, 'a married architect? --family values, you know. :cool:


Also, consider the design there . . a waste dump right next to a recreation area !? . . . seems the halmark of design by committee.

While I would agree with you that there is a striking similarity between monkeys and humans, you still aren't answering my question. Please post a link where science has PROVEN that one species evolved from another...

Mul is right, partially anyway, there is no such evidence. The only thing we have is theory and supposition and (dare I say it?) a BELIEF that things must have happened this way.

Please do not misunderstand me...I completely agree with the assertion that species evolve over time. I just don't buy the eventual conclusion of evolution (if you apply it to all life) which is that everything came from some sort of intial bacterial life and somehow morphed into the vast array of life we have today. Now it seems that many of you are simply skirting that question by saying that evolutionists don't necessarily portend to know where life began. I say you MUST consider that point if your assertion is that we evolved from apes who evolved from dogs who evolved from lizards, etc. You eventually must ask yourself where did it all start? To simply dismiss that question because your theory won't explain it isn't scientifically honest (in my opinion).

I think the quote I posted a few pages back really sums it up...I think that evolution IS God's way of creation. I certainly don't believe that there was a sudden POOF and all life appeared.

I really don't understand why this discussion seems to always degenerate into "creationists are idiots" and "evolutionists are going to hell". How about having some respect for someone else's beliefs and not denigrating them by calling them backward or idiots, etc?

yes, quite a "heavy hitter" in academia:

http://yunus.hacettepe.edu.tr/~demirsoy/index-eng.htm

where do you find these crackpots? Do they all go to some national conference or something?

ahh....found it:

http://www.darwinismrefuted.com/science_materialism_01.html