Evolution is not scientific...?

Evolution is perfectly scientific, but those who rely on the creationist propaganda machine for their information won't know that. You'll never learn the real science behind evolution unless you start reading real science, not the ridiculous strawman version of evolution that the creationists put out. If you grew up in the Bible Belt or had a creationist for a science teacher, you've probably never been exposed to the scientific version.

At some point you might want to ask yourself why creationists need to lie about evolution in order to get you to reject it.

Computer simulations of evolution:

http://www.agner.org/evolution/

http://www.iephb.nw.ru/labs/lab38/levchenko/articl...

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8576964

and many more.

Why bother, you have made up your mind that it isn't a supported theory... also, it is clear from your question you haven't really read the evidence out there for evolution. You try to sound like you have, but you make mistakes or repeat agruments anyone even casually familiar with the topic could refute.

Homo Sapiens (humans) didn't evolves from Neanderthals. We are better described as cousins with a common ancestor. And yes, we have found fossil evidence of that ancestor (Lucy and others).

The inability of a computer program to replicate DNA says nothing about evolution. However, we can look at the DNA in different species and trace traits through the evolutionary record.

There has been on-going research using Ecoli where evolution has been observed. Anyone who tells you you cannot make predictions or that evolution hasn't been observed is lying. Creationists and IDers have tried to discredit this research because they know it is their downfall, but it is real and good research.

You mention religion. Where is the evidence for Creationism? And, please don't be fooled by Intelligent Design, it is not a real theory, and is only supported by people looking for a way to reconcile their personal beliefs and fails real scientific tests (unlike evolution, which is constantly being confirmed by the evidence).

Please read the following completely...

There is no such thing as "The Theory of Evolution." There isn't now and there never has been…

Evolution is a conclusion based FACTS. An individual fact of evolution is a single fossil recovered, studied and reported in detail. There are over 100,000,000 "facts" of evolution. The facts show unmistakably that life in the past was different from life today. The facts show unmistakably that life has changed (evolved) over time. Evolution is a FACT. The question is: how can these facts from the fossil record be explained?

The theory of "Decent With Modification" (first proposed by Charles Darwin and since improved) is the theory that currently best explains the mountain of FACTS showing that evolution happened. Without the theory of Decent With Modification the FACTS of evolution would still be there begging for an explanation. If a theory is proposed in the future that better explains the facts of evolution, we will discard Darwin’s theory as we have discarded Aristotle’s "Great Chain of Being" theory and the Bible’s “Creation Theory”…

Natural Selection is not a theory but is a proposed mechanism to explain how the theory of Decent With Modification would proceed. The theory of Decent With Modification does NOT need Natural Selection for the theory to be valid. If a better mechanism is found we will relegate that mechanism to the scrap heap as we have past mechanisms such as Lamarck's Inheritance of Acquired Traits...

There is a general misunderstanding about just what constitutes a “theory.” The word "theory" has several meanings. The common meaning used by the general public is that of a "guess" or "opinion." You could say, "It is my theory that the CIA ordered Kennedy's assassination." or "It is my guess/opinion that the CIA ordered Kennedy's assassination." It is important to point out here that a scientific theory is not a guess or opinion, as the word “theory” is used by the general public.

A scientific theory is an overall unifying principal that seeks to explain seemingly disconnected phenomena (facts) under a single, simple concept. As such, a theory is the highest form of knowledge about the universe because it explains not just one isolated part of the natural world but it ties together many observations (facts), that may not seem to be connected, under a single unifying principle.

Facts, on the other hand, are single pieces of information about the world that usually come from controlled experiments. Lots and lots of facts are usually unified and explained by a single theory.

You can collect facts (measurements) about the motions of the planets. You can collect facts about the movement of projectiles and falling bodies. You can study the flow of rivers. The Theory of Gravity explains all of these observations and measurements. Without the Theory of Gravity the FACTS of the movements of objects remain and beg to be explained...

Biological evolution is any change in the frequency of alleles in a population of interbreeding organisms. This definition is mathematically based and was formulated in the 1930s. Since these changes have been observed and measured, biological evolution is a fact. It is not a theory, it is not an hypothesis, it is not a guess.

There are theories about how it leads to the diversity or organisms we see today. The best known, originally proposed by Alfred Russel Wallace and Charles Darwin in 1859 was not that evolution existed since that was already known, it was about how it worked.

That theory was based on existing organisms, not on fossils.

There has been no Nobel Prize for the theory of evolution because the Nobel Prize did not exist until almost 41 years after the theory was proposed. Further, there is no Nobel Prize in biology, only Chemistry and Medicine or Physiology as the closest things to it.

Frederick Sanger and Kary Mullis have been awarded Nobel Prizes in chemistry for the analysis of proteins, DNA and the polymerase chain reaction. Sanger twice, Mullis once. It also went to Francis Crick, James D. Watson and Maurice Wilkins for elucidation of the structure of DNA. All of these are closely related to evolution.

You might also look into the career of JBS Haldane, the geneticist and statistician who was partly responsible for the modern definition of evolution.

There is no truth on the young Earth creationist side, they are either deluded or deliberate frauds for money. I have been aware of their rubbish a dozen years and I have yet to see any of their "facts" about evolution turning out to be true. They are known for scientific fraud, deliberate and persistent lying, fake theological and scientific qualifications and financial jiggery-pokery leading to court cases, such as the Kitzmiller case and the Wieland-Ham case. Young Earth creationism is the product of a series of fraudulent businesses hiding under tax free laws as religious organisations and it makes some people a lot of money.

They have no peer-reviewed science, they have no patents, their "biologists" are unemployable in the real world and so are their "geologists". They are mere parasites on religion.

Evolution, the notion that there are alterations within the frequency of inheritable tendencies in populations is an oberserved reality. Species evolve and will end up new species, evolution has been tested within the lab and found in nature. The speculation of normal respectable for all lifestyles is supported by means of such a lot proof from the fossil list and genetic evaluation that has been tested past fair doubt. The conception of evolution explains those details. It is clinical considering that it coherently explains ALL the details, has made predictions that may, and feature, been tested and it may be falsified (despite the fact that the advantage falsifications that we have got been in a position to compare have all rather tested the idea). Evolution is a reality, the Theory of Evolution is clinical.

"I put this here because there are religious consequences."

Ok lets talk about double speak.

So you believe everything told to you in your religion because of "consequences", oh sorry "religious consequences".

What you are saying is believe or else.. burn in eternity for all time?

You show me proof, you show me a God(s); show me a God(s) that condemned a person after they die.

You know a person with cancer that called Dr. Kevorkian, because even if they would go to hell, they couldn't possibly imagine hell being much worse.. what happened to their faith in your religion when there's "religious consequences".

Now I see evolution in everything, physically and philosophically.

You know even your religion went through evolution to be what it is today, and you know what?

It's not done; it's still changing.

My God you now have us women becoming preachers and priest, who can now marry people; soon homosexuals will be married in the eyes of your god!

Are there religious consequences for changing the Bible every 100 years or so?

Now you do know that inherited traits are in FACT evolution at work.

Animal hybrids are undisputed fact that evolution still works today, though some of these animals can't reproduce, doesn't mean they won't be able to some time in the future.

If these animals were able to cross breed in large numbers, there will be an anomaly, a viable offspring.

It may take a million years, but it does and will happen again.

First of all, mankind is still in its infancy regarding knowledge, but unlike religion, . it will admit it when it makes a mistake. Both science or religion are wrong when you consider that no Black family over the generations has become Chinese. No race has ever changed into another one. It will take more knowledge to discover the correct answer as to where the various races came from.

The beauty of science is that it is ever growing, things get discovered every day. Many things we know today, we didn't know yesturday. Changes happen cause we can make them happen.

What scientific FACTS has your religion come up with lately? Nothing

You're another lazy brainwashed fool.

Evolution is a theory, like the Big Bang.

When it can be proven, through controlled replication, it will become a scientific fact.

But at the moment, it is still a theory - and it is largely accepted as the most likely theory to be true.

There is no step from Neanderthal to human, because humans didn't evolve "from" neanderthals (although recent DNA evidence suggests that they often mated with them).

There's no step from ape to human because that would be like demanded someone show you the steps from car to corvette stingray. Humans ARE apes.