You still maintain that Macro doesn't have enough proof but it certainly does. Evolutionary biologists have been able to see the transitions through not only individual species but entire classes tell a pretty big story.
If you have the genetic data presented in the right environment then it is quite simple to see the transition between fish, amphibians, reptiles, mammals. You see not only inter-special changes but entire class changes.
So either you truly are not convinced or are fearful but adequate evidence has been presented. You have to remember that unless you believe in a conspiracy which is fear related, the research has been done. It isn't intellectual BS, it is empirically tested and has been debated for over a century in our proudest era of scientific achievement and capability. There is no question whether or not Macro evolution is a reality, there is only accepting it at this point and remembering it does not effect your religion.
The rise of life from matter, accurately said that there is no such thing as "Dead Matter" unless you are referring to an organic life that is made up of matter dying and thus being a dead being made up of matter. The Abiogenesis of life is simply that the conditions were correct and just a single simple life form was formed from it which split asexually, recombined and adapted, and eventually we had offspring branching in every which direction which in billions of years led to us.
When I refer to "fear" I mean it in the sense that "Shaking one's faith" tends to make them feel uneasy about life or the after life.
The beauty of evolution is that one day I can expect our descendent species to even be able to create an afterlife if they choose using the patterns we leave during our time here. It is astounding what -MIGHT- happen as a result.
I wouldn't let Look at Stupid get to you Bojoulay we are having an intellectual debate not a battle of ego. Although I can certainly see how abusive behavior would make you finally want to open up a can of whoop ass. At least some of us have evolved beyond meaningless shit flinging.
Also internet tough guys, seriously, do we really need to resort to that?
Oh well, if so, I suppose we have a nice show to watch!
Originally Posted by exoticdanceweardealer
Get to me, no one gets to Bojulay, I find him just slightly amusing.
And no Macro evolution hasn't been proven, many have given up
on finding the literally thousands of missing link fossils that just
aren't there, and have come up with a new theory that they aren't
needed. They have had to since none have been found.
Their explanation for the Cambrian Explosion is very weak
at best. Their explanation-- "The other fossils just weren't
preserved" excuse me, just weren't preserved, what a
convenient little answer that is. Why weren't they preserved?
We don't know they just weren't. Nothing proven again,
just assumed.
To say that they just weren't preserved is to say that they
are necessary but not found. Goes back to what I said earlier,
leaves the theory unproven, requires faith to believe.
That claim about matter goes back to semantics again.
Merely semantics, matter that is without life, yes to call it
dead matter might imply that at one time it had life
and now no longer dose, but that is just semantics,
really has no implication on the idea that life somehow
spontaneously generated from matter that had no life.
They don't even want to touch that one, even gave
it a new name (Abiogenesis) to try and distance themselves
from it. But they still believe in that newly named theory
(Abiogenesis)
Naturalist evolutionist--We believe in Abiogenesis because it
is all we have but totally unprovable, so we have tried to
distance ourselves from it and call it something else, even
though it is the starting point of our theory and we have
nowhere to go without it, maybe no one will notice how
ridiculous that is and at least it will give us a point to argue
from and so on and so on.