Why do people deny evolution?

And you think you have intelligence?

...Evidence No.1: Our own intelligence is so complex that there is no way for it to have appeared from green algae and cyanobacteria on casino auto-pilot. I cannot say whether it is absolutely impossible, but for sure it is extremely improbable - much beyond the absolute margin of plausible impossibility (the probability for a human to pass through a wall of reinforced concrete).

8. Mathematically, it is inconceivable that anything as complex as a protein, let alone a living cell or a human, could spring up by chance.
Chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving "desirable" (adaptive) features and eliminating "undesirable" (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.

As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence "TOBEORNOTTOBE." Those hypothetical million monkeys, each pecking out one phrase a second, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison of Glendale College wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

Ah. The ol' argument from complexity. Complexity is improbable? No. Practically inevitable given the location and composition of our little planet.

I see you couldn't respond to the substance of the post. I guess that was the indirect answer to my question about whether you thought you had intelligence.

Evidence. For your god. Got any? Scientists have tons and tons for evolution via natural selection. Your turn.

FBM wrote:

Evidence. For your god. Got any? Scientists have tons and tons for evolution via natural selection. Your turn.

     Why this 'tons and tons for evolution' reminds me to some 'millions and billions of years ... of evolution ... of the stars'. Obviously this 'scientific' method of evolutionary explanations is highly contagious ... as vicious practices.
     BTW this 'tons and tons' are not evidences for any evolution - they are simply evidences for the history record of life on earth ... and for nothing else. The correlations derived from the fossils are too superficial and too morphological to prove any processes in rapid genetic changes (more than 2% over 3 billion for the appearance of a new species) ... all of them being dominant - isn't that too much suspicious

BTW this 'tons and tons' are not evidences for any evolution - they are simply evidences for the history record of life on earth ... and for nothing else.

Summary of 100,000 Years
Over a period of 100,000 years, a great deal can occur in terms of climate change and, at least in the past 100,000 years, in human development.

As we examine in Climate Science, scientists have become increasingly aware of multi-millennial scale orbital cycles of precession, eccentricity and obliquity which can play an important role in the rise and fall of ice ages. In in Climate History we explore how during the past 100,000 years ago, human beings-- Homo sapiens - have developed from our hominid ancestors, adapting to rugged climates, such as in Europe 40,000 years ago. And in Resources, various links and inquiry ideas are offered for you to dig deeper into these topics.

Yes, it's called 'EVOLUTION.'

Well, maybe you can convince the leading scientists of your opinion by backing it up with some evidence for your explanation of how things came about.

ev·o·lu·tion
ˌevəˈlo͞oSH(ə)n/
noun
noun: evolution; plural noun: evolutions

1. the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth.
synonyms: Darwinism, natural selection
"his interest in evolution"
2 the gradual development of something, especially from a simple to a more complex form.
"the forms of written languages undergo constant evolution"
synonyms: development, advancement, growth, rise, progress, expansion, unfolding; More

Five Proofs of Evolution
In this article, we look at five simple examples which support the Theory of Evolution.
by Richard Peacock

1. The universal genetic code. All cells on Earth, from our white blood cells, to simple bacteria, to cells in the leaves of trees, are capable of reading any piece of DNA from any life form on Earth. This is very strong evidence for a common ancestor from which all life descended.



2. The fossil record. The fossil record shows that the simplest fossils will be found in the oldest rocks, and it can also show a smooth and gradual transition from one form of life to another.

Please watch this video for an excellent demonstration of fossils transitioning from simple life to complex vertebrates.



3. Genetic commonalities. Human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (source), 80% with cows (source), 75% with mice (source), and so on. This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past. And the amount of difference between our genomes corresponds to how long ago our genetic lines diverged.



4. Common traits in embryos. Humans, dogs, snakes, fish, monkeys, eels (and many more life forms) are all considered "chordates" because we belong to the phylum Chordata. One of the features of this phylum is that, as embryos, all these life forms have gill slits, tails, and specific anatomical structures involving the spine. For humans (and other non-fish) the gill slits reform into the bones of the ear and jaw at a later stage in development. But, initially, all chordate embryos strongly resemble each other.

In fact, pig embryos are often dissected in biology classes because of how similar they look to human embryos. These common characteristics could only be possible if all members of the phylum Chordata descended from a common ancestor.



5. Bacterial resistance to antibiotics. Bacteria colonies can only build up a resistance to antibiotics through evolution. It is important to note that in every colony of bacteria, there are a tiny few individuals which are naturally resistant to certain antibiotics. This is because of the random nature of mutations.

When an antibiotic is applied, the initial innoculation will kill most bacteria, leaving behind only those few cells which happen to have the mutations necessary to resist the antibiotics. In subsequent generations, the resistant bacteria reproduce, forming a new colony where every member is resistant to the antibiotic. This is natural selection in action. The antibiotic is "selecting" for organisms which are resistant, and killing any that are not.

FBM wrote:

Well, maybe you can convince the leading scientists of your opinion by backing it up with some evidence for your explanation of how things came about.

      ... or maybe I am missing key information about all that ... and unfortunately it is not only me missing the information - it might have been irreversibly lost, it might be inaccessible to us ... at this stage, but for sure there is some missing information & perhaps 'some new ideas are here needed'.

Lack of oxygen delayed the rise of animals on Earth
Date: October 31, 2014
Source: Yale University
Summary:
Scientists have long speculated as to why animal species didn't flourish sooner, once sufficient oxygen covered the Earth's surface. Animals began to prosper at the end of the Proterozoic period -- but what about the billion-year stretch before that, when most researchers think there also was plenty of oxygen? Yale University researcher Noah Planavsky and his colleagues found that oxygen levels during the 'boring billion' period were only 0.1 percent of what they are today.

contains more evidence than all your scriptues and rhetoric combined. Wake up and smell the coffee, man. You can rid yourself of your delusion through education. If you've got even this much credible, testable evidence, how about writing it up and publishing it in a peer-reviewed journal instead of trying to sell your god of the gaps to A2K people? Run it up the flagpole and let's see who salutes it.

maybe I am missing key information about all that ... and unfortunately it is not only me missing the information - it might have been irreversibly lost, it might be inaccessible to us ... at this stage, but for sure there is some missing information & perhaps 'some new ideas are here needed'