Aeacb_7221 wrote:
Can anyone give me a good definition of "evolution"?
You need to research that yourself...if you'd like to comment here and be taken seriously, anyway.
The Science of Biological Evolution (no politics or religion)
Sort:
Aeacb_7221 wrote:
The thread didn't evolve, it grew in size. Is that really what you call evolution?
A river ... the course of a river evolves. The shape of land evolves. It's all a reaction to change of some kind. A star evolves during its lifetime. But these aren't biological evolution. That implies genetic change. The old genes are still there but with every generation they become less and less likely to be reverted to but it's always possible that it can happen. It's probably a matter of chance.
So you believe in evolution, but you're not sure what it is?
A river doesn't evolve, is eats away at the land, taking its place.
evolution is when genes evole to fit further adaptaions of the enviorment
So evolution is when cells change due to it's surroundings?
May 26, 2023
0
#43348
DiogenesDue wrote:
Aeacb_7221 wrote:
Can anyone give me a good definition of "evolution"?
You need to research that yourself...if you'd like to comment here and be taken seriously, anyway.
Yet.. your asking for us for proof that we are right?
How could an ape evolve into a human, when humans have an intellect and free will, and apes do not?
Evolution implies change often due to outside influences but biological evolution is what we're supposed to be concerning ourselves with. I was tall for my generation. My mother and father were on the short side and my brother and I were both tall. My mother's dad was short and his wife was very tall and quite beautiful. Now I have a grandchild, 10 months old. His mother is a Swedish speaking Finn. Finns are related to Turks and to Koreans but my daughter-in-law is a Svenska Finn and very blonde. Most Finns have dark hair, being related to Turks. Her parents are short. He'll probably grow up to be about five foot five inches.
FluffyTiger23 wrote:
Has it happened? Why on earth do you think they could?
Logical deduction and historical precedent. Try them out for yourself sometime.
What exactly do you think would happen to dog s and cats if you removed humans from the planet tomorrow? They would start evolving towards their non-domesticated traits/characteristics, as well as in new directions.
FluffyTiger23 wrote:
DiogenesDue wrote:
Aeacb_7221 wrote:
Can anyone give me a good definition of "evolution"?
You need to research that yourself...if you'd like to comment here and be taken seriously, anyway.
Yet.. your asking for us for proof that we are right?
These "adults" you're talking to are very keen on proof for everything. Personally, I just prefer ordinary conversation and a couple of jokes, if possible.
omg this has gone on long enough
Nice, but how is that evolution? Evolution as you said is "change often due to outside influences". He gets his features from his parents and ancestors, not from his surroundings.
And opinion is what is interesting. Definitely not proof. That's for amateurs. 
Optimissed wrote:
And opinion is what is interesting. Definitely not proof. That's for amateurs.
S T F U
Willow_668 wrote:
omg this has gone on long enough
Calm down pls 
everyone S T F U
😈🤬🔪🙃💀🩸
FluffyTiger23 wrote:
Yet.. your asking for us for proof that we are right?
Yes. It's this weird concept society has that says that established science > some kid's simple musings. The burden of proof is on you.
So called "evolution". Like when wolves became dogs, that's adaptation to they're environment over time, encouraged eventually by purposful breeding. You can't turn dogs back into wolves, you can't turn house cats back into big wild cats. though it would seem that if 'evolution' worked the way it supposedly does, shouldn't that happen?
Why on Earth would you think that dogs and cats could not be purposefully bred back into wolves and big cats over time?
Has it happened? Why on earth do you think they could?