Does this disprove evolution?

Question

Help! I can't fly. My head is too big, and my wings are too small.


The idea of natural selection sounds great when considering deer. The deer that can sense danger the quickest and run the fastest are able to escape the predator on a more consistent basis. However, other examples on the evolutionary tree have many laughable flaws. One of the best is the thought that a bird began to evolve a wing. Why this would occur is not answered by evolutionists. The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable in his environment. The wing was much too small for the bird to fly. Why would a bird evolve a wing that was useless? This is backwards from the evolutionary natural selection concept that birds adapt and change in order to survive better in their environment. The bird with a half-size wing is placed at a disadvantage in its environment. Why would the bird continue for millions of generations improving a wing that was useless? The theory of evolution is based on natural selection of the most adaptable member of a species. A bird with a useless wing is at a severe disadvantage and the opposite from natural selection. According to natural selection the members of the bird species with the smallest useless wing would be the most adaptable and most likely to survive in the largest numbers. According to the theory of natural selection birds could never evolve to fly. Evolution is simply nonsense. This is so funny. We are then led to believe that some birds got tired of carrying around a worthless half-size wing so they grew fingers on the end to help climb trees. The wings became arms and a new species was developed. Evolutionists actually believe this nonsense.



Scientific Fact No. 2 - Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong

The evolutionist will claim that the presence of many individual species proves evolution. This shallow statement is devoid of reason, logic and scientific proof. Evolutionists line up pictures of similar looking species and claim they evolved one to another. Humans are a great example. There are hundreds of species of extinct monkeys and apes. Petrified skulls and bones exist from these creatures. Evolutionists line up the most promising choices to present a gradual progression from monkey to modern man. They simply fill in the big gaps with make-believe creatures to fit the picture. This procedure can be done with humans only because there are many extinct monkey and ape species. They never do this with giraffes and elephants. These pictures are placed in all evolutionists' text books to teach kids this nonsense. The picture is simply a grouping of individual species that does not prove evolution.


Scientific Fact No. 3 - Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong

Scientists a century ago believed the smallest single living cell was a simple life form. The theory developed that perhaps lightning struck a pond of water causing several molecules to combine in a random way which by chance resulted in a living cell. The cell then divided and evolved into higher life forms. This view is now proven to be immature to the degree of being ridiculous. The most modern laboratory is unable to create a living cell. In fact, scientists have been unable to create a single left-hand protein molecule as found in all animals.


Scientific Fact No. 4 - Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong

The evolutionist ignores the problem surrounding the human female egg and the male sperm in the evolutionary theory. The female egg contains the X-chromosome and the male sperm contains either an X-chromosome for the reproduction of a male or a Y-chromosome for the reproduction of a female. The female eggs all develop within the ovaries while she is a baby (fetus) within her mother's womb. Evolutionists claim environmental factors cause small changes in the offspring in the evolutionary chain. However, the environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent change. Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons.

Answer 1

Why come on here to show your ignorance and make a laughingstock of yourself?



The Pope, Catholic Church, Church of England and mainstream churches all accept the big bang and evolution!



Lord Carey the former Archbishop of Canterbury put it rather well – “Creationism is the fruit of a fundamentalist approach to scripture, ignoring scholarship and critical learning, and confusing different understandings of truth”!



Nice that christians and atheists can agree and laugh together even if it is at fundie expense!



But behind the laughter is the despair at the fundamentalists striving so hard to destroy christianity by turning it from a religion to an ideology!



Surveys suggest that 29% of American christians are so extremist in their beliefs that they fall well outside of the accepted bounds of christianity!



Please state which sect you belong to so that GOOD christians can not only disassociate themselves from you but also explain why that sect is so unchristian!

Answer 2

After reading through the other responses, I am content with the answers given except in the case of "Scientific Fact No. 2", therefore, I will respond to your query.



Have you heard, perhaps, of the punctuated equilibrium model for evolution? As opposed the mostly-rejected idea of gradualism (that species constantly evolve at a very slow rate, thus leaving many transitional fossils), punctuated equilibrium states that species undergo relatively rapid change in short spurts separated by long periods of relatively little change. This method of evolution would logically leave very few (if any) transitional fossils.



I urge you to read the source material and then reconsider your second point.



Live long and prosper.

Answer 3

"Why would a bird evolve a wing that was useless?"

They didn't. Models of wing evolution tend to go from creatures capable of gliding, to those with more control, and eventually flight. Wings weren't useless.



"Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong"

I don't know how you can conclude this. Even if there were no fossils, genetic evidence alone would be enough.



"Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong"

Modern cells are the result of evolution, just as we are. The first cells were nowhere near as complex as modern cells.



"environmental experience of the female cannot change the chromosomes within her eggs and cannot have any effect upon her offspring. Her body cannot go into the eggs contained within her ovaries at her birth to make an intelligent change. Females cannot be a part of the evolutionary theory for these reasons."

I don't think you understand how gametes/reproduction works



"DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong"

This doesn't happen for gametes, champ.



"Chaos From Organization Proves Evolution is Wrong"

The Earth is an open system due to that big ball of fire in the sky, giving the planet energy. The second law of thermodynamics does not apply.



"Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong"

Not really sure what you're going for here. Chromosomes can fuse, and in fact, our second chromosome is a prime example of this. It has two deactivated telomeres (the bits at the end of chromosomes) in the middle of it.

Answer 4

Others have refuted your so-called "scientific facts," which aren't facts at all, just grossly false statements, so I will provide some correct information about your Polonium argument.



That argument has been refuted numerous times. Here are some examples.



http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/po-halos/gentry.html

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/baillieul.pdf

http://www.csun.edu/~vcgeo005/gentry/tiny.htm

http://ncse.com/rncse/30/5/origin-polonium-halos



You are going to have to do better than you have if you are going to refute evolution.



The first thing you should do is to get your "facts" straight.





Added



@Marcia, contrary to what you said, it is quite obvious that most of the responders did read his so-called arguments, and they provided good responses. It is YOU who are too lazy to read those responses. They show quite well that Oscar doesn't know what he is talking about and that he just copied and pasted his stuff from creationist sources.



You creationists are all out in La La Land, and have no concept of the real world.

Answer 5

Copy/paste

Copy/paste

Copy/paste



...yet I can debunk all of these unoriginal ideas with my high school education. The Theory of Evolution does have some unexplained mysteries, but overall, IT WORKS. Tell me why insects become resistant to pesticide, or why certain antibiotics don't work anymore, or why humans are taller and bulkier than we were 50,000 years ago (not 6,000)



E V O L U T I O N.



If you are genuinely interested, email me, or do some more research. Don't just look for semi-reliable websites that fit your preconceived bias.

Answer 6

1) Strawman. Not a real scenario to explain the evolutionary development of a bird's wing.

2) Lies. Not only do fossil similarities exist for numerous other species than H. Sapiens (and related apes), scientists have actively gone to find predicted transitional fossils in specified strata - and found just what was predicted.

3) Strawmen. Not a real scenario to explain the origin of life.

4) Strawman. That boils down to Lamarkian genetics - and Lamark was discarded long ago by real scientists.

5) Lie. Flat out bald-faced ******* lie.

6) Stupid understanding of thermodynamics. One might ask them what that bright thing in the sky which hurts them to gaze upon is.

7) Stupidity. Complete misunderstanding of population genetics. Refuted by evidence of chromosomal merger in the Human genome.

Answer 7

Yes, of course, it disproves evolution and many other things like this also disprove it. Those who won't accept that are too lazy to read it and consider the truth or just too stubborn and full of pride to admit they were wrong. I believe in facing the truth, in knowing the truth, and acting on the truth. Jesus is truth and he created everything. John 1:1-3, Colossians 1:16.

Answer 8

You have an abysmal ignorance of evolution and even of basic science.



I don't have enough permitted space to refute all of your idiocies (which you have obviously copied from a lying creationist web site), so I will just take a few.



>>"The wing stub did not make the bird more adaptable in his environment. The wing was much too small for the bird to fly."



WHAT WING STUB?? The ancestors of birds did not have wing stubs. Only an ignoramus would make that kind of argument. The wings evolved from functional forelimbs. The evolution of birds is quite well shown in the fossil record.



Here is one of the many fossils of archaeopteryx. There are distinct impressions of flight feathers.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Archaeopteryx_lithographica_%28Berlin_specimen%29.jpg



Compare the reconstruction of the archaeopteryx skeleton in the first link with the skeleton of a modern bird in the next.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Archaeopterix_IRSNB.JPG

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.photobirds.com/templates/default/images_pubs/bird_skeleton.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.photobirds.com/pub_8_Avian_skeleton.html&h=520&w=350&sz=26&tbnid=5Qu_deVHKR2XJM:&tbnh=274&tbnw=184&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dbird%2Bskeleton&zoom=1&q=bird+skeleton&hl=en&usg=__uIO2Pn8BP4kXFPBsgjNyfC8ghek=&sa=X&ei=Aah_TNrJKYL6lwec47Ui&sqi=2&ved=0CB4Q9QEwAA



And this.



http://www.geologyrocks.co.uk/tutorials/origin_and_early_evolution_birds



Birds evolved from small, feathered dinosaurs, many fossils of which have been found. There is evidence that many species of dinosaurs, particularly the small ones, were warm-blooded, or at least had a higher metabolism than cold-blooded animals. Feathers were likely originally used for insulation. From that origin, they could well have evolved into different forms for several different functions, such as sexual display, or making the creature appear larger than it is in order to appear more threatening to predators.



From these varied uses other uses could develop. Elongated feathers on the arms could be used in running to help change direction or to help slow the fall when jumping from a tree branch. Eventually the feathers would become more wing like and were initially used for gliding, and eventually for true flight.



There are a great many fossils of small dinosaurs with feather impressions showing a wide variety of forms. See the Sources below for links.



There is evidence that the dinosaurs had a breathing system similar to that of birds. So, naturally, the dinosaurs that birds evolved from would have had that breathing system.



http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2007/11/071108-dinosaurs.html

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/09/080929212931.htm



>>"The second law of thermodynamics proves that organization cannot flow from chaos."



BULLSHIT!!! It says no such thing. Another piece of idiotic nonsense you got from a lying creationist web site. See my answer here for a refutation.



https://answersrip.com/question/index?qid=20101228053144AAKUnUU





The only thing you have proved is that you are abysmally ignorant about evolution and that you mindlessly believe what you find in lying creationist web sites.

Answer 9

NO



It takes over 1 million + years for the creature to even remotely evolve and adapt to its habitat.



How about this, there were people long before "jesus" and there were people long before the bible was even written.



It's the wonders of the human race, that is why both sides are called "theory's" Both sides have not been proved. I've seen more proof with evolution, but not being created as our current beings

Answer 10

So, where did you copy and paste this from? Honestly a scientifically literate person could tear you apart in seconds. But you must know this as you don't want them to see it. You asked it here so that fellow creationists would give you kudos and you could earn brownie points with your vapid little friends.

Answer 11

Nothing so far from any atheist to disprove those claims, so it must be true. Atheist, sorry your theory didn't work out, so whats next?

Answer 12

Well at least you gave it some thought, way more than what I can say about the average creationist.

Answer 13

"Scientific Fact No. 7 - Chromosome Count Proves Evolution is Wrong"



Incorrect. there is scientific proof. look it up.



"Scientific Fact No. 5 - DNA Error Checking Proves Evolution is Wrong "



You have no idea what you are talking about.



"Scientific Fact No. 4 - Human Egg and Sperm Proves Evolution is Wrong "



Holy **** you are an idiot.



"Scientific Fact No. 3 - Single Cell Complexity Proves Evolution is Wrong"

"Scientific Fact No. 2 - Species Without a Link Proves Evolution is Wrong"



Incorrect.

Answer 14

You seriously need to learn a smidgeon about evolution before you go posting ridiculous claims as these.

Answer 15

Biology is that way ---->



Feel free to repost your copypasta over there, that they may spank you.

Answer 16

Nope. None of this gibberish proves evolution wrong.

Answer 17

Evolutionists understand a lot of fiction.

Answer 18

Thanks for providing all of this information Oscar! Wonderful FACTS to have when we talk with those who don't know the Lord yet.

Answer 19

-That which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.-

Answer 20

No.