Fish finger fossils show the beginnings of hands

[pitabread]

First you called evolution a fact then a theory, and one wonders why it is touted so highly.

Evolution is both. It's a fact that evolution occurs in populations of biological organisms. The theory is the explanation for how it occurs.

 

[pitabread]

The theory of evolution founders on the rock of origin of life. If life did not arise spontaneously then evolution cannot happen.

...

That's not how that works.

 

[Speedwell]

First you called evolution a fact then a theory, and one wonders why it is touted so highly.

Evolution is a fact. Living forms have changed and diversified since life began; they have evolved.. The theory of evolution is a scientific explanation for that fact.

 

[pitabread]

It is of zero benefit to mankind.

This is just factually incorrect, and I'm pretty sure I've given you examples to the contrary in prior discussions. Heck, I even recently posted how evolution is used in understanding the origins of the current coronavirus.

However, it seems all creationists have left these days is just denialism.

Oh well. Ce la vie.

 

[crossnote]

Evolution is a fact. Living forms have changed and diversified since life began; they have evolved.. The theory of evolution is a scientific explanation for that fact.

Thanks for your opinion on the theory of evolution.

 

[crossnote]

Evolution is both. It's a fact that evolution occurs in populations of biological organisms. The theory is the explanation for how it occurs.

Has there been repeated observable events to establish it as a fact?

 

[pitabread]

Has there been repeated observable events to establish it as a fact?

Evolution at its core is the process by which gene frequencies change in populations over time. This is continuously observed and studied in populations.

As long as you have populations of biological organisms that are reproducing, you will have evolution.

 

[crossnote]

Evolution at its core is the process by which gene frequencies change in populations over time. This is continuously observed and studied in populations.

As long as you have populations of biological organisms that are reproducing, you will have evolution.

I would ask 'from what had genes evolved'?

 

[Subduction Zone]

First you called evolution a fact then a theory, and one wonders why it is touted so highly.

It is both. But then I doubt if you know what a theory is.

Is gravity a fact? It is also a theory.

 

[Shemjaza]

I would ask 'from what had genes evolved'?

It's a consequence of how the chemical DNA reacts.

We don't know how the original DNA formed, but it really isn't relevant to how it behaves now, or for the last 3 and a half billion years.

 

[essentialsaltes]

First you called evolution a fact then a theory, and one wonders why it is touted so highly.

Gravity is a fact. And there are theories of gravity developed to explain this fact. Newton developed one. Einstein developed another. It is no different with evolution. We observe the fact, and scientists have developed an extremely successful theory to explain it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I would ask 'from what had genes evolved'?

Moving the goal posts is a way of admitting that you lost the argument. You have now moved the goalposts to abiogenesis. As has been pointed out by several the theory of evolution tells us what happened after abiogenesis.

Are you sure that you want to admit that evolution is a fact? You might want to rethink your question.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Has there been repeated observable events to establish it as a fact?

Yes.

 

[SkyWriting]

Researchers have discovered the fossil of a fish with finger-like digits in its fin that lived 380 million years ago, according to a new study. And they believe it bridges the evolutionary gap between marine and land vertebrates as one of the oldest examples of a skeletal pattern resembling a hand.

The study published Wednesday in the journal Nature.

"Today we announce in the journal Nature our discovery of a complete specimen of a tetrapod-like fish, called Elpistostege, which reveals extraordinary new information about the evolution of the vertebrate hand," said John Long, study author and Strategic Professor in Palaeontology at Flinders University in Australia.

"This is the first time that we have unequivocally discovered fingers locked in a fin with fin-rays in any known fish. The articulating digits in the fin are like the finger bones found in the hands of most animals."

In the phylogenetic tree, this species is near the justly-famous Tiktaalik.

Everyone creates their own set of beliefs by sifting through facts that match previous beliefs they wish to establish. This is well documented.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Everyone creates their own set of beliefs by sifting through facts that match previous beliefs they wish to establish. This is well documented.

Yes, but some beliefs are confirmed by observation and testing and some are not. Creationist sites go so far as to have their workers swear not to use the scientific method. To date the scientific method supports only evolution. Creation "scientists" are too afraid to even form a properly testable hypothesis. As a result they no longer can claim to be scientists, at least when dealing with evolution.

 

[essentialsaltes]

I know enough to know that evolution is a con. For start, evolutionists found way too many flaws in the theory- including Darwin.

That's quite an essay you've written that goes on a few more paragraphs, and yet you neglected to point out any flaws, much less any supporting evidence. Just a lot of emotive text:

"So some genius decided to change the ground rules."
"Garbage."
"You don't find rocks evolving."
"The scientific community is bullied, bribed and blackmailed into silence."
"I rarely see anyone argue the facts that anti evolutionists raise."
[followed by no facts]

"If evolution is so beyond doubt, what is there to fear?"

Nothing. I quite fearlessly reported an interesting development in paleontology that bears on the evolution of tetrapods from fish. The histrionic response from some posters, utterly divorced from the details of the linked story, has been quite illuminating.

 

[essentialsaltes]

Everyone creates their own set of beliefs by sifting through facts that match previous beliefs they wish to establish. This is well documented.

It's a good thing that Nature uses peer reviewers and editors to hold authors to all the relevant facts in the discipline, and not to some cherry-picked subset that supports a pet theory. And that the scientific community at large does the same on a larger scale.

 

[crossnote]

It's a consequence of how the chemical DNA reacts.

We don't know how the original DNA formed, but it really isn't relevant to how it behaves now, or for the last 3 and a half billion years.

According to the so-called fact of evolution, it must have evolved otherwise did it just come spontaneously from nothing?

 

[crossnote]

Gravity is a fact. And there are theories of gravity developed to explain this fact. Newton developed one. Einstein developed another. It is no different with evolution. We observe the fact, and scientists have developed an extremely successful theory to explain it.

I didn't realize gravity was the topic, or are you claiming gravity also evolved?

 

[crossnote]

Moving the goal posts is a way of admitting that you lost the argument. You have now moved the goalposts to abiogenesis. As has been pointed out by several the theory of evolution tells us what happened after abiogenesis.

Are you sure that you want to admit that evolution is a fact? You might want to rethink your question.

Where did I admit evolution as a fact. I may have used the term facetiously.