Is evolution true?

And he could have stuck their remains precisely in the correct spot of the geologic ladder, so they merely appear to have existed right before the intorduction of birds into the biosphere.

But that is a little too coincidental for my tastes.

I suppose you do have a point there @varelse1 ...

So where are the other THOUSANDS of needed missing links?

Well, the last 150 years have turned up the fossils of  over 400 transitional species so far. A few per year.

Which I admit arent much. But, (barring a zombie apocolypse or anything dramatic like that,) we can assume the pattern will hold for the next few hundred years, and those fossils will keep popping up. Giving us another thousand.

As far as feathered dinosaurs go, the most exciting action has happened in the last 25 years. Where over 200 fossils have been found. (Comprising about 20 different species.) Most of them in the Liaoning province of China. Where they more or less hit a gold mine of fossil discoveries.

Then I suppose we will have to continue our debate in 1000 years (assuming we are still alive then because we evolved into immortal beings)

lol yes!

I am kinda booked that century. But I will try to pencil you in.

The operative word “needed” is dubious. We already have MORE than enough links for confirmation based on fossil evidence alone. We also have other forms of science-based confirmation, such as DNA and direct observation. 

 “Missing links” aren’t really troubling because the fossilization process is extremely rare.

There 16 million species of life in the world. Creationists: “OMG why don’t we have all the links???”

And bear in mind, not olny was Darwin able to predict the discovery of all these transitional fossils, long before they were actually discovered, but he was also able to predict what layer in the geologic record they would be found.

Now, unless Doctor Brown dropped by in his Delorean time machine, how am I to dismiss this as coincidence?

You need to show both sides of the debate, Vladimir. It's only fair.

Yes.

Speaking of which, whatis this other side?

What reason, after all the evidnce we have found to support Evolution, should I still reject it?

Because so far, i have gotten nothing, to demonstrate that Evolution may be false.

Had one guy tell me, Evolution is wrong, because Neptune spins the wrong way.

??

Yeah.

Another told me, Evolution was false, because theres not enough dust on the moon.

WTH??

Is there some sort of evidence out there, that actually relates to the development of life, on Earth. (Not life on Neptune. Not on the Moon.)

Evidence that might convince a person, not to believe in Evolution?

Now now, there ARE two sides here.

Side 1: Scientists who say one thing about science. 

Side 2: Creationists who disagree with scientists about science. 

Decent people all understand the truth of evolution.

Decent people are sociopathic government elites who control media, the press and transnational corporations.

Anything you say can and will be used against you. Decency is relative, and also subjective.

The root of all money is evil.

No it's objective. It's an objective truth that all good people understand the evolution is true.

How do scientists quantify "evil"? Does evil even exist, and if so then what?