Where, on this planet, is the 'INDISPUTABLY PROVING' evidence for Evolution?

There is no evidence to support the theory of evolution, well not for our species at least. There is masses of evidence to support evolution of all other species on this planet but there isnt any for human beings. Experiments involving fruit flies proves evolution for fruit flies. What we know is that cro-magnons appeared very suddenly and that they lived at the same time as neanderthals which means of course that they did not evolve through that line. To be truly scientific it is important to maintain an open mind. The only truth we have is that we as yet have no idea how we got to be here. Those that desperately want to believe in evolution should find themselves a religion and stop pretending to be scientifically minded. It may turn out to be that we evolved but it is not looking likely so far. We all need to maintain an open mind and maybe one day we will find out the truth but not if we stop looking because we mistakenly think we have the answer.

Evolutionist will try and prove a point with nothing more than fancy words and bold "it's fact" statements, but in reality, there is no true, indisputable evidence that evolution can give that has not already been refuted by Intelligent Design, and even turned to Aid in Proving Intelligent Design. In FACT, Evolution is a corrupt and fallen theory that has fallen to the facts. Any evidence that has been given to "support" evolution has been utterly dismantled and reversed to inevitably disprove evolution itself. In response to the common "Fruit Fly" and "Finch" routine. The mutation in case of the Fruit Fly, actually led to the weakening and destruction of the test flies. The mutated Flies, NONE of THE MUTATED FLIES, could survive outside of the laboratory environment. They became limited weak and they could not reproduce and were actually rejected by other deathlier, non mutated fruit flies. The finches were a simple answer, micro evolution, which is not the same as Darwinist evolution. Please learn the difference. Darwin focused on Macro evolution. A change in a group to create a new species that CAN SURVIVE. What he looked at was a simple change in length and density of the finch beak. The finches however were still just finches. NO NEW SPECIES. If you want to learn about some of what i have mentioned, SWALLOW YOUR PRIDE and check out Sean Mcdowell's Book. "Understanding Intelligent Design." Some of the Greatest Evolutionary Scientists, honored by the evolutionary community, after observing such facts as the complexity of the human cell alone, have become to believe in an intelligent designer. A main reason for evolution was man's desire to be his own "god" which originates and is well shown through the egyptian Pharaoh's, and the roman Emperor.

Truth Seeker, You are a bright light in the dim future of the human race that there is still some genius in the World. Watch what usually happens to a post or comment like this i will usually get low ratings or a lot of reports for bashing a cause or belief, but i am not. I just state the facts. And another refuting fact about universal age, If the evolutionists were correct, man could not have landed safely on the moon for the moon would be, also the earth. a big ball of dust that would swallow them up like quicksand. I am Christian, and i put this because the majority of proof against evolution is refuted just because of the fact for religion. Dinosaurs and man existed at the same time. Evolutionary scientists have actually been recorded destroying such proof for it would destroy their cause. And hears another crazy thing. Every species in the universe would die near instantaneously if even a small part of any micro-structure of the ir genetic makeup were even slightly altered or removed. Evolution is like the mule. HORSE + DONKEY. It can not reproduce and is only useful till death, because without children, a new one must be Forcibly Born, Not by accident. and the flies disprove Evolution because it was a forced mutation tha could not happen through nature or any such Natural Means. The only thing that gives the answer to the questions that man truly needs is God+Bible. It explains the complexity, variety, similarity, universal perfection and corruption. And it explains the very meaning of life itself.

I don't think anyone will be able to provide you what you are looking for.

As far as human evolution (or the evolution of any organism and/or species), here's what we have... we have long standing hypotheses about the diversity of species through descent with modification and common ancestry. We have overwhelming paleontological, biogeographical, developmental, and comparative phylogenetic research that supports these hypotheses, and we have evolutionary theory which is comprised of a variety of research (that is observable, duplicatable, well-documented, and easily available) that explains the mechanisms to support the aforementioned (for example, selection, genetic drift, mutation, and so on.)

If you have studied evolutionary science for 50 years, and are a scientist yourself, and do not accept available research as supporting data that comprises evolutionary theory, I am not sure what else is left.

It is acknowledged within the scientific community, and especially within the academic scientific community, that it is hard to communicate the complexity of evolutionary science considering all of the necessary connections (between the aforementioned) that make up the body of evolutionary biology. In part, the failings of the general public's understanding of evolutionary science is due to the sub-par science education standards - which leads to a lack of understanding of scientific terms, like theory and fact (and in part due to the complexity of the topic which when reduced for general consumption CAN sound like speculation). However, again due to your scientific credentials/50 years of study, this problem shouldn't afflict you... and yet, it seems to.

Science is not a collection of facts, as you must know, though I suspect the assertion by some that evolution is fact regards the overwhelming supporting data that leaves the underlying principles of evolutionary theory well-settled. At any rate, you aren't going to find any evolutionary biologist telling you that evolution is a proven, undeniable fact. You will find evolutionary biologists who will conclude that evolution is accepted as a scientific fact - a hypothesis that has become so well supported by the evidence that it is treated as though it is true (sort of like in court where things are proven beyond a -reasonable- doubt, though certainly not beyond any -conceivable- doubt).

In most cases, what devout evolution-deniers require before they will attempt to understand evolutionary science (not that they will actually attempt any such thing) are the sort of phenotypic changes that diagnose higher taxa; they want to see Ambulocetus tuck in his little feet and turn into a humpback. And that's just not going to happen. It is not possible for any one researcher to witness that sort of change (in a lab or a field or anywhere for that matter).

That evolution-deniers will not accept the published research on the mechanisms for evolutionary change in combination with the paleontological, biogeographical, developmental, and comparative phylogenetic evidence that supports the hypotheses of common ancestry and descent with modification is not a failing on the part of evolutionary science to prove itself, it is a failing on the part of evolution-deniers to understand what evolutionary science actually is (and what proving itself actually means in a scientific context).

If you have studied evolutionary science for 50 years and are a scientist yourself, I am at a loss as to how you have formulated the questions you pose here.

EDIT : The available research that you claim to accept demonstrates the principles of evolution. The abundant evidence supports the hypotheses in light of the research regarding the principles (that make up the statements that explain the process - this is called scientific theory). People aren't just making assumptions or speculating about how they think stuff happened. Evolutionary science is perfectly valid. When you claim there is no evidence, that claim is patently false. And if you are looking for *irrefutable* evidence, then you are going about this all wrong and don't understand the nature of science. I hate to beat a dead horse here, but that research you claim to support that demonstrates the principles that make up the statements that are evolutionary theory is clear. However, this is science, not mathematics. Scientists will never find absolute, guaranteed proofs. That isn't how science works. Based on your need for these sorts of absolutes, I can't imagine there is much science you actually accept as valid.

And, if I may be frank, I think you are going after the wrong people and not actually looking to resolve this issue in your mind. You are looking for a fight with lay people who argue evolution from a certain perspective and who use a particular language, and are trying to catch them on technicalities. It's intellectually dishonest, in my opinion.

Read Paleontologist Richard Fortey's "Life, An Unauthorized Biography". He explains evolution far more articulately than I possibly could in a YA answer.

Unfortunately, despite your contention that you are a "scientist", the tone of your rant suggests that you are a rather closed minded ideologue, and one who feels unaccountably threatened by the quite obvious and well-substantiated continuity of evolution including vertebrate to primate to hominin.

You clearly get off on being self-righteously indignant. The millions of pages of research on the subject speak for themselves. You choose to ignore them. Sounds like a personal problem, not a scientific one.

By close and precise inspection, fossil evidence (preserved bones of a dead animal), archaeologists (those that study fossils) can tell the size (length and height) and whether the animal was carnivore (meat-eater), herbivore ( plant-eater) or omnivore (meat and plant-eater) and by comparing the various fossils of animals, they can deduce and tell whether the fossils are related to each other, and from that,archaeologists would observe and compare each fossil (bone) and from its length and width, and from that they could tell the specific evolution pattern of the animal and how it had evolved.

you do a fine job of making sure that there is no possible answer to your question...

PRESENT ONLY PROOF, though science itself is based on the idea that no theory is complete and may always be improved as new facts become evident...

PRESENT ONLY FACTS, but not if they can be backed by a website or laboratory evidence...

you don't want an answer... you want some idiot to tell you you are right...

just responding to your idiocy...

1) i'm not your pal

2) i'm not exactly being hotheaded by pointing out the inability to answer your question given the restrictions you have placed upon it... take your own advice twit...

3) no one is advancing evolution as a fact... it is still a theory, albeit one with overwhelming evidence in its favor...

4) you were very clear in stating that you are opposed to the theory of evolution... that is what i expect you want some idiot to tell you you are right about...

5) just wondering what you think of the self replicating synthetic DNA produced by jcvi scientists... does it prove aliens?

6) given your idioic leanings toward extraterrestrial origins of life on earth, how do you think those extraterrestrial lives developed? were they created by other aliens? did they evolve? was it the intervention of that which is outside the universe? you can't even see your own hypocritical idiocy through the fog of your psuedointellectual crap.. go back to grade school and actually learn something this time...

7) have you actually read anything relating to evolution? austrolopithicus africanus (you know eve, whose dna we all carry), homo erectus, homo habilis, etc... do you in fact have any idea what you are talking about?

my bet is no...

agnostic... right--lmao...

you made a choice to believe in a higher power... that you call it aliens is no less a choice to believe than that of a bible thumping christian or a jihadist muslim...

shut up...

yeah, just a stupid question, where on our planet is there evidence of that which outstrips evidence of natural selection?

how sad that you can't address your own preposterous claims, while simultaneously claiming that literally millions of pages of research are completely false...

there you go... just what i said in the first place, you want someone to agree with you... and now that someone has, you pat him on the back and tell him how enlightened he is while simultaneously claiming to retain some sort of superiortity because your completely unsupported theory which--sorry to be the one to point this out to you brother--would still require either evolution or creation is better than his...

fool...

provide PROOF of your beliefs... nothing through any websites or any laboratory (given those are the restriction you placed on the rest of humanity in answering your question), ONLY FACTS please... see twit, anything you intend to advance is automatically under scrutiny--which is actually the way science works...

after that rant, you ask for no nastiness? good luck.

almost nothing in this life is indisputable. but if you want the closest thing to. i suggest you do some study in to experiments on fruit flies. these experiments have actually SHOWN evoloution in action.

not evidence of it. but the actual occurance of it.

how's that?

"evidence that the Theory of Evolution is now the FACT of Evolution"

You've demonstrated that you have no idea what a scientific theory even means, why would we further endulge your supposed 'Truth Seeking'?

Are you saying you don't want anything religious? that part was a bit confusing.

look around watch yu tube everywhere