I'm gonna make a new term for people who use Google too much- Google bots. I guess since I'm older I like to read regular books more often, but to each his own.
Evolution or not?

Elroch would make a great teacher in Russia Optimissed. If you disagree wirh him it's off to the gulag. It gives him a sense of power. Some sort of Freudian compensation going on I would guess. 😉

That's where I believe a distinction should be made Optimissed. Is RANDOM evolution( mutations and selection)a term I coined, the force between these adaptive changes due to environmental stimuli or should we look for other types of mechanisms, perhaps, phenotypic plasticity(epigenetic changes by various allelic expression)
cryptic genes( genes expressed by DNA rearangements) or even acquired characteristics from somatic cells( non reproductive cells) being expressed in the germline( reproductive cells).
These are examples of NON RANDOM evolution, and from what the evidence shows, the preferred method for the evolutionary adaptive changes due to environmental stimuli.

You must read their books Einstein.
That's how they enlist new fanatics. They live in hope of converting the planet.
That was tried numerous times before under various guises, but now they call it science.

Don't worry Alex.
Even though evolution is only a bunch of concocted pseudo facts, at least Chelsea will win the premiership this year!

Alex Rodriguez: I saw you mentioning the so called Islamic State before. Remember, that state is not Islamic at all. So ISIL or Daesh would be better suited.
Above all, I'm just a preteen so please avoid lashing out on me. To start with, I want to get some basic knowledge of what evolution is. I'm neither a denier, nor a supporter of the theory of evolution. I'd be grateful if someone helped me grasp what this fuss is all about.

'DNA sequencing has repeatedly shown all life on earth is related'. After about 50,000 years DNA is too degraded for sequencing. Its been pushed back a little farther with extraction and laboratory techniques. but direct evidence doesn't show or prove that all of the life on our planet is related, at least not as common descent would theorize.
This conjecture would have to either be speculated upon or guessed at.

I find that the ivory tower elitists tend to be the most set in their ways Optimissed. They also tend to be more biased than us ordinary people. As for concerning the social sciences, not really sciences, they are bent on a certain worldview which I won't mention because of constraints to our freedom of speech on this thread( no politics or religion).
We're all prejudiced by various parameters, be it our social and cultural upbringing, religious environment, personal beliefs etc. That's why discussion groups can get a little shall we say *exciting* at times.

Please refrain from religious discussion Rich or I will have to ban you. Thanks for your cooperation.

A funny thing anti-evolution people never consider is this: Why does the fossil record show that species appear and dissappear if there is no evolution? You've got dinosaur fossils from a centain period (can' be bothered to google when.) Evoluton says this is because dinosaur evolved from something else (can't be bothered to google that up either), flourised for some time, and then went extinct due to natural causes.
Non-evolution people denies this. So I guess would claim that humans, sabre-tooth tigers, trilobites, dinosaurs and so on were there from the beginning of the creation of the earth. Since they dont think any new species can appear the option left is that T-Rex and humans were there together from day one.
The thing is, there just isnt space enough on earth for all the known extncts species in the fossil record plus the living. T-Rexes and all the other known enormous predators take up lotsa plase. And the theory seems silly as well.
So I guess you would want a model in which species appear and disappear in some way that isn't evolution - maybe aliens dropping by earth and putting down new species each 100.000 years - and then disappearing because of something that isnt extinction because they dont believe in that either.
Just wondering what anti-evolution people think of this? Do they think ALL species including the fossil ones were there alltogether from day one, or do they think the species showed up and left during earth's time as the fossil record shows?

it's not easy to convert the ignoramus', try as hard as they do.
So the old tried and failed 'woe to the deniers' fiddle is being played again :-)
A lot of people need theories to cling to, but it never seems to cover over their insecurity at facing life.
How great it would be if the whole world fell for the same mental pills. You could pretend you were secure in your science books.
I understand rich, but remember every person alive has biases and prejudices which influence and color their world. I've seen evidence that suggests man did evolve from an MRCA(Most recent common ancestor) with chimps. I just let my faith take over in a situation like that. Its hard for some people to do that so be patient with others. 😉
Personaly i believe in evolution.As for man evolved from chimps,i don't fully agree.My hypothesis is some Adam's offspring have mixed marriage with original earth inhabitant(neanderthal,etc).Thus it made our bones evidence to be overlapping.Firstly Adam is the extraterrestrial here on arth.After giving birth of many couples of child with eve,their childs have multiplied.And it is inevitable the mixed marriage have happened.This why genetic research find similarity between man and chimps.As my evidence of Adam existence is some holly grave scattered along middle east have the giant size in which consistent with religion story(Adam is a giant).And after some millennias the giants were rarely exist and earth was inhabited with small people.Thus modern human is Adam's offspring.