Evolution question (I believe in Creation)?

Evolution of humans is not going to happen for a long time. Everything today is easily accessible and we don't really need to evolve to acquire new things. Evolution of our mind may be happening though. It's happening as you read these answers, you're becoming smarter and smarter, learning more and more. I doubt physical changes are going to start appearing unless something big happens like Global warming or an Ice age(which won't be happening anytime soon) just because you don't see something happening doesn't me it doesn't exist. Isn't that what all religion is based on, having faith in something while looking to the smaller facts that build up to it. Also why can't evolution and religion go hand in hand. What if it was humans that messed up somewhere changing the message they had been given by God. Perhaps God devised the sequence of evolution to give the world time until maybe one day the humans end themselves(global warming, Climate change). Humans have messed up trading information before so right . If you want to believe in science and religion you might come to a better state of understanding when you think about how Evolution exemplifies god's power and shows his knowledge of being able to predict our future based on little pushes of nature and development.

The last 5000 years is far two short for any significant evolution to take place.

I don't understand the point about the vestigial tail. Do you not know how long it took to lose the tail?

Modern Man didn't suddenly evolve as you infer. We have evolved from now extinct hominid species.

The route to human evolution probably started about 4 million years ago. There were between 15 and 20 hominid species that preceded ours. Modern Man and his complex symbolic expression, art, and elaborate cultural diversity dates back about 100 000 years.

There is a large corpus of evidence that supports evolution. There is not one shred of evidence for the Judeo-Christian creation myth. Who even says that we should accept that creation myth? Why don't we accept the Buddhist or Hindu creation myths?

I find it interesting that creationists are always demanding evidence for evolution. They're always trying to distort the science in a vain attempt to demonstrate it isn't true. In this they consistently fail. Is this demand for evidence in support of evolution an attempt to distract us from the fact that creationists do not, and cannot, offer a single shred of evidence to support what is only a myth?

I have to wonder if you're just ignorant of what the Christian churches teach or if you belong to a right-wing, fundamental Christian sect. Are you aware that the majority, or even all, of the mainstream Christian denominations accept evolution?

Wrong question.

Your health and future welfare depends on an understanding of biology that comes only from the insights evolution provides. What has Creation Science done that matches, say, Polio Vaccine? You are likely too young to remember what it was like before Polio Vaccine, but your grandparents should remember, ask them.

“….The concept of biological evolution is one of the most important ideas ever generated by the application of scientific methods to the natural world. The evolution of all the organisms that live on earth today from ancestors that lived in the past is at the core of genetics, biochemistry, neurobiology, physiology, ecology, and other biological disciplines. It helps to explain the emergence of new infectious diseases, the development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria, the agricultural relationships among wild and domestic plants and animals, the composition of the earth's atmosphere, the molecular machinery of the cell, the similarities between human beings and other primates, and countless other features of the biological and physical world. As the great geneticist and evolutionist Theodosius Dobzhansky wrote in 1973, quote, Nothing in biology makes sense except in light of evolution, unquote. …..” Quote from a National Academy of Sciences booklet, quoted by Ken Miller, PhD, at the Dover, PA Trial

http://www.2think.org/dobzhansky.shtml

The correct questions are: Which theory for the diversity of life on earth is the most useful? Creation Science/Intelligent Design or Evolution. Which theory leads to an understanding of how biology works and new knowledge? Where do we go after "God did it. We can never understand it."

Of what use is Creation Science? Here are a few things driven by the Theory of Evolution:

Salk Polio Vaccine 1955

Sabin Polio Vaccine 1962

Rubella Vaccine 1969 Measles, Mumps, Rubella Vaccine 1971

Genetically Engineered Insulin 1973

Small Pox eradicated 1980

What has been Creation Sciences contribution to the human race? Are any Creation Scientists working on a general cure for cancer, an Ebola Vaccine, any thing like that?

Would you really want to give up a theory that works and predicts so well and has led to so many beneficial understandings of how biology works?

There is one very important distinction between humans and, say, mice.

Humans have society.

A society is able to store knowledge. We're able to know from people who might have lived thousands of years ago what will happen if you eat this mushroom. We've bypassed the 'natural' evolution of knowledge by storing it among many different individuals. It's not just humans that have done this, other species with societies and high intelligence have too - dolphins, elephants, primates etc.

If you can show that there is no change in the frequency of any alleles in humans over the past 5000 years you have evidence for your claim.

Your question misrepresents evolution. I suggest you consult a proper biology textbook to find out how biological evolution has been defined since about 1940.

Two factors:

(i) the invention of agriculture which shifted society from hunter gatherers to those living in settlements, towns eventually cities:

(ii) exponential growth of knowledge. Effects are not large in early time frames but rapidly increase over time.

I would certainly question your "last 1000-year time frame". The rapid rise has been going on for 1000s of years. However, in Europe it was halted by religious theocracy for over 1100 years between the 4th century and the 15th. Even then, the growth is relative. It really took off during the Industrial Revolution, but even that pales into insignificance compared to the Information Revolution. Today, we processed more information in the space of a couple of days than the whole global information content produced from the time of the Ancient Sumerians up until the turn of the millenium put together.

That's exponential growth.

I think the time frames you stated are not scientific.Modern man is approximately 10000 years old, since last ice age, not 1000. The recent 500 years of the last 1000 years, has been spent with Europe colonizing the world.

and your scale of millions of years and 100000s of generations.

Consider a flock of sheep, the farmer selects one male who doesn't have horns. in one generation's time, all surviving sheep have no horns. What makes you you, was because your ancestor mated with your ancestor, and another didn't.

I dunno, seems like with science or history, it is written by the victor, and unpalatable facts, are outright ignored and obfuscated with theories. Point is, school in N.Z and Pacific Islands teach their children of history and first migrations.

The curriculum is "migration theories: Asian migration or South American Migration". what is not taught, is the remains of south-indian boats found in NZ, coupled with the fact that pacific islanders have brown skin...

This is entrenched fascist science. where theories based on proximity or potatoes are more fantastic, than the 1500's migration of Indian fishermen into the pacific.

So given that supposed mixed-race people can be either black or white (USA president as example), i'll just ignore and leave evolution for the biologists classifying and keeping animals. and trust the http://www.biblehub.com/john/1-1.htm

http://www.biblehub.com/revelations/10.htm

The problem is that Christians assume that humans were plopped onto earth knowing everything that took thousands of years to learn.

Other than that error, it seems you're making a large number of assumptions about evolution which are based on creationist misinformation. I can't help you with those because I can't quite make out what you believe evolution says.

Your point may be your question but you took as long as evolotion to make it

.. and (sorry, but) to answer ''Believer''

1) As a species evolves of course Male and Female evolve ''at the same rate'' What is unlikely that they wouldn't .. not that they would !

2) Random chance is why most species are now extinct .. if they didn't evolve properly they died out.

3) Our growing knowledge of the world around us as we evolved developed our conscience.

4) We help people and animals because we've developed a conscience and because helping ''the few'' won't affect ''the survival of the rest'' .. Survival of the fittest is, however, still very much evident in the animal world .. Try watching a nature programme..

Blue eyes are a mutation that occurred about 9,000 years ago. Currently there appears to be a shift toward earlier onset of puberty with no good explanation as of yet. After thousands of years of separation of populations leading to different predominant traits like skin color, hair color and texture, physical stature, body proportions, eye shape, and more these populations are now remixing at an unprecedented rate. No one knows where that will lead. Evolution is happening right before your eyes and yet you deny it.

And comparing learned behavior (stacking rocks) to a biological trait (a tail) is just asinine on its face. Learned behavior, especially since the advent of writing, can be adopted and changed at a much higher rate. 100 years ago no one knew how to use a computer or watched television.

By comparing learned activity to biologically inherited traits you have shown once again it takes determined and intentional ignorance of evolutionary principles and theory to reject evolution and embrace creationism.

In answer to your comment.

You need to learn some more anthropology and history. It was not in the last few moments of our existence that we developed learned behavior. It is shown by increasing sophistication of tools and social structures. It is a matter of culture. Consider the native population of North America. They had complex societies but not technological societies. They have gone from a stone age material culture to 21st century technological one in a matter of about 500 years. People whose great, great grandparents were hunter-gatherers are now doctors, engineers, business people, and other modern professionals. Learned behavior grows exponentially. Biological traits are much more steady with occasional leaps and long periods of slow or no change. The capacity for learned behavior and sharing that learned behavior has been around since before humans were humans. It is even shown in non-ape primates (monkeys) and even some non-primates and non-mammals. It comes down to what the culture wants and needs. One big change for humans was the shift from small bands of hunter-gatherers to large agricultural populations. Writing and complex government probably grew out of that. Not much changed for about 10,000 until the Industrial Revolution started. Societies changed once again and are still changing as that revolution continues. The Industrial Revolution didn't end - it keeps picking up pace and is now progressing at amazing rates. We are not any smarter than our ancestors of 8000 years ago we just have better access to more accumulated knowledge. We may actually be getting worse at reasoning even as we have more knowledge accessible, but that is my personal observation along with some others. I don't know if anyone has quantitatively shown that to be the case.

Back to learned behavior being exponential was summed up well by Doug Adams. I am paraphrasing.

First we asked, "What can we eat?"

Then we asked "Why do we eat?"

Now we ask, "Where should we have lunch?"