Evolution? How?

Evolution as a way of origins, has no proof at all, as far as fossils go. To my knowledge, they still have not found one fossil from a species that was a cross of two different species, or between evolutionary stages.

Toumaï displays a unique combination of facial, dental (canine) and basicranial characters that clearly supports closer relationships with the human lineage than with Chimpanzees or Gorillas.

His great antiquity (around 7 Myrs) and all his anatomic characters together suggest a close relationship to the last common ancestor between Humans and Chimpanzees. This implies a probable earlier chimpanzee-human divergence (at least as early as 7 millions years ago) than previously indicated by most of the molecular studies.

I think the number one rule in science is that just because we cannot see it it does not mean that it does not exist...
If that were the case we would never have looked for bacteria and atoms.

People though that mold spontaneously grew out of food... They did not believe there could be life forms, i.e. diatoms, that tiny and unique. Life forms that were "invisible" to the eye but we could see the effects of them when people would contact with these life forms and plague would result. Yes, some thought these were sent by God... Well what is God? Another thing you cannot see?

RexRed wrote:

I think the number one rule in science is that just because we cannot see it it does not mean that it does not exist...
If that were the case we would never have looked for bacteria and atoms.

People though that mold spontaneously grew out of food... They did not believe there could be life forms, i.e. diatoms, that tiny and unique. Life forms that were "invisible" to the eye but we could see the effects of them when people would contact with these life forms and plague would result. Yes, some thought these were sent by God... Well what is God? Another thing you cannot see?

It is true that scientists sometimes deal with phenomena that can not be seen by the naked eye. In my opinion, the conflict between religion and science may come from the fact that scientists, in formulating explanations, use human reason rather than divine revelation.

Evolution as a way of origins, has no proof at all, as far as fossils go. To my knowledge, they still have not found one fossil from a species that was a cross of two different species, or between evolutionary stages.

Quote:

Evolution as a way of origins, has no proof at all, as far as fossils go. To my knowledge, they still have not found one fossil from a species that was a cross of two different species, or between evolutionary stages.

I believe this will be the fourth time I am p[osting this but its a real help to those who dont think that intermediates in the fossil record exist.



EDIT: HA! Take that 56k'ers

It is equally as futile to refute evolution as it is to refute creation... How can we decide one or the other when they appear to have both played a part in our humble beginning... If the big bang was an explosion of immense proportions then what created this imperceptible energy supply in the first place? Though a Christen is truly foolish to deny evolution the scientist is also foolish to refute creation...

or they are all different creations, with similar attributes.