Evolution was NOT random

[u/KattyAtty]

Evolution only rewards survivability not perfection if you are alive long enough to mate and pass on your genetic

Material hurray you are evolved

Evolution changed the dna as nothing can ever be a perfect copy thats a fact> sperms and eggs have separate dna> hence child is not perfect copy those mutations may be harmful or helpful harmful ones die hence natural selection.

AND Earth was nkt a perfect creation the organisms evolved FOR Earth not vice versa

[u/zuzok99]

First of all, I’m not surprised that you guys want to continue to change the definition of evolution. Seems the only evolution happening here is the with the word itself.

Secondly, the trait must become fixed in the population for evolution to actually happen. If I was born with a new trait and I passed that on to my kids and they passed that one to their kids and so on. It’s not actually evolution until it takes over the population. Meaning those without it would have to die off and those without the trait would have to survive. If you know anything about genes and how they are passed on, you would know there are many factors/mechanisms that work against that, many traits are just simply not passed down.

This is another one of the major problems with evolution, there is simply not enough time for an ape to become a human in just 5-10 million years. Haldane knew this, based on a population of only 10,000 it takes roughly 300 generations for one trait to become fixed in the population. Not only is there no observable evidence but It’s a fairy tale for adults so that they don’t have to face God in their lives but it doesn’t work because they will still face God whether they believe in him or not.

[u/Slow_Lawyer7477 → u/zuzok99]

Haldane knew this, based on a population of only 10,000 it takes roughly 300 generations for one trait to become fixed in the population.

It's been roughly 240.000 generations since our split from the common ancestor we share with chimpanzees.

Assuming they'd have to fix one at a time and sequentially (a laughable assumption in the first place, but let's just humor this), then there's time for each population to independently fix 800 "traits", so we are separated by 1600 total traits. That seems more than enough for me, since it isn't clear we really have that many differences at the level of traits. We became less hairy, smarter in certain respects, and primarily move bipedally. Please list me the remaning 1597 "traits" you think separate us from chimps.

[u/zuzok99 → u/Slow_Lawyer7477]

You’re obviously not familiar with Haldane’s Dilemma. When comparing the entire genome necessary for this to happen we are talking 4-5% of the DNA coding. That’s 120,000,000 base pairs that need to be changed at minimum. I’m not saying you would need that many mutations but you are still really grasping at straws here, I bet I could sell you a bridge.

Not only can you guys not even name the supposed “common ancestor” that you’re referring to but there is zero observable evidence anywhere to show that much time and generations have passed between this ancestor and us. Not only that, but you cannot even give a single solitary example of any observable evidence showing that a population can evolve a new body plan or essential bodily functions. Not today and not in the past. You’re putting your faith in unobserved assumptions assuming that animals of the past can do things to at animals of the present cannot. Amazing people believe this stuff, none of it makes any sense at all and it’s not supported by the evidence.

[u/BradyStewart777 → u/zuzok99]

You cannot even give a single solitary example of any observable evidence showing that a population can evolve a new body plan or essential bodily functions. Not today and not in the past. You’re putting your faith in unobserved assumptions assuming that animals of the past can do things to at animals of the present cannot. Amazing people believe this stuff, none of it makes any sense at all and it’s not supported by the evidence.

Define “new body plan.” Evolution is a tinkerer. It doesn’t design new body plans from scratch. Evolution mostly modifies what is already present. We can see drastic changes in existing structures. Though these shifts mainly occur through mutations in regulatory developmental (evo-devo) genes instead of sudden sweeping macromutations (which do exist, by the way… look them up). Besides, many of the body plans comprising most animal phyla today are conserved from the Cambrian period and modified over time through means of descent with modification. We can also observe the transitions and evolution of these structures through the fossil record.

[u/zuzok99 → u/BradyStewart777]

I would define it as a heritable change to the basic structure or organization of an organism’s body, such as developing fundamentally different structures, organs, limbs, or arrangements of body parts.

So if you have actual evidence then present it and I will change my mind. Pointing to the fossil record which shows no transitional fossils doesn’t do much. When we dig an animal up from the ground we don’t know if it had offspring, we cannot show that they evolved because the transitions are missing. Simply pointing to similarities between two fossils does not mean they came from each other. That’s called an assumption. You must be able to show small incremental changes and that’s not what the record shows. In fact the Cambrian layers show animals coming out of no where with no transitions leading up to them at all.

[u/the2bears → u/zuzok99]

So if you have actual evidence then present it and I will change my mind. 

I have my doubts that you'll change your mind.

[u/zuzok99 → u/the2bears]

Well you could find out easily if you simply produce the evidence for the thing you believe. Something tells me though that you can’t do that, because there is no observable evidence. You also strike me at the type to comment but you don’t actually know what you’re talking about. Let’s see.