Post your links proving evolution

Sapient
High Level DonorRRS CO-FOUNDERRRS Core MemberWebsite Admin
Sapient's picture
Posts: 7523
Joined: 2006-04-18
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

HERE IS A COMPILATION OF A FEW HUMAN ANCESTOR FOSSILS

Talk Origins is an excellent source for discussion on how humans got here.

Here is an assortment of free evolution downloads from the NCSE.

The following list are individual examples of proof of evolution:

On Observed Speciation and Speciation Models:
Salamanders and Songbirds
More details on the salamanders, with additional links
London mosquitos
Another article on Himalayan song birds
Speciation by reinforcement

Lots of examples here
More examples
Speciation models
Links on examples and models
More on the London mosquitos
Ringed-speciation model and examples, plus links
In Drosophila (fruit flies)


On Behavior, Reciprocal Altruism and the Evolution of Behavior:
Behavior models (registration required)
The Origins of Right and Wrong in Humans and Other Animals
Chimps show sense of fair play
Genes, altruism and evolution (with more links)
Reciprocal altruism
Kin selection and reciprocal altruism

On the Evolution of Complexity

Biochemistry
Evolution of human intellect and diet
Evolution of language
Music and the relation to language (registration required)
Evolution of religious memes
Bacteria flagella
Avida Digital evolution
More on the evolution of religion
Complex evolution in the laboratory
The eye
The brain

Laryngeal nerve of the giraffe is proof of natural selection.

 

More from our users:

Macro Evolution proof from Talk Origins

Probability of Evolution
Common ancestry with chimps in 2 minutes (video)
Our relationship to Neanderthals
Becoming Human
Natural Selection in male butterflies
Evidence of very recent human adaptation
Chemical Evolution
Swapping genes to change species
Study at Georgia Tech
Creationist claims and responses to them
Evolution at Berkeley
Endogenous Retrovirus proves evolution
Various examples of evolution

 

- Brian Sapient


Buy popular atheist books and support the Rational Response Squad at the same time on Amazon.


Yellow_Number_Five
atheistRRS Core MemberScientist
Yellow_Number_Five's picture
Posts: 1390
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

Heh, thanks, I should start transferring the content I've written on other boards over to this one.

Time to organize the electronic library I suppose.

I am against religion because it teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world. - Richard Dawkins

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server.


Chaoslord2004
Chaoslord2004's picture
Posts: 353
Joined: 2006-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

Oh man, the Evolution of Language sounds kickass. Anything that has to do with Linguistics interests me Cool

"In the high school halls, in the shopping malls, conform or be cast out" ~ Rush, from Subdivisions


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

Chaoslord2004 wrote:
Oh man, the Evolution of Language sounds kickass. Anything that has to do with Linguistics interests me 8-)

you're scary..hahah..just kiddin'.

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Chaoslord2004
Chaoslord2004's picture
Posts: 353
Joined: 2006-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

LeftofLarry wrote:
Chaoslord2004 wrote:
Oh man, the Evolution of Language sounds kickass. Anything that has to do with Linguistics interests me 8-)

you're scary..hahah..just kiddin'.

Oh yeah? Why is that? Laughing out loud

"In the high school halls, in the shopping malls, conform or be cast out" ~ Rush, from Subdivisions


LeftofLarry
RRS local affiliateScientist
LeftofLarry's picture
Posts: 1199
Joined: 2006-02-12
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

Chaoslord2004 wrote:
LeftofLarry wrote:
Chaoslord2004 wrote:
Oh man, the Evolution of Language sounds kickass. Anything that has to do with Linguistics interests me 8-)

you're scary..hahah..just kiddin'.

Oh yeah? Why is that? :lol:

your impassioned interest in philosophy/linguistics/logic etc...it's great I think. But I humbly don't understand much of it. so you're scary..hahahah..... Laughing out loud

Atheist Books, purchases on Amazon support the Rational Response Squad server which houses Celebrity Atheists.


Chaoslord2004
Chaoslord2004's picture
Posts: 353
Joined: 2006-02-23
User is offlineOffline
Post your links proving evolution

LeftofLarry wrote:
Chaoslord2004 wrote:
LeftofLarry wrote:
Chaoslord2004 wrote:
Oh man, the Evolution of Language sounds kickass. Anything that has to do with Linguistics interests me 8-)

you're scary..hahah..just kiddin'.

Oh yeah? Why is that? :lol:

your impassioned interest in philosophy/linguistics/logic etc...it's great I think. But I humbly don't understand much of it. so you're scary..hahahah..... :D

Fair enough Cool

"In the high school halls, in the shopping malls, conform or be cast out" ~ Rush, from Subdivisions


ATOMIC SKUNK
ATOMIC SKUNK's picture
Posts: 128
Joined: 2007-03-16
User is offlineOffline
If you want empirical

If you want empirical evidence of evolution, just check out Monsanto's research, or any bioengineering institution, in regards to new species and genus.

Evolution is any new life form(species,genus), that did not previously exist, arising from the genetic pool of other like forms(not a special individual creation by an act of a god), or the process of this occuring, is evolution.

Since humans are natural biological creatures, this is evolution as well(not created by a supernatural being), as we become similar to other animals and plants that influence and effect the evolution and change, of even other plants and animals by their selective interaction, or parasitic, or symbiotic relationship. Since a human can create new species, and or causing the conditions for them to occur suddenly, this could be "artificial" evolution, but evolution none the less, since these life forms arose genetically from previously existing life forms, and were not the spontanious result of an act of a god. This would be certain proof of evolution.

"Show no mercy; have no pity! Kill them all – old and young, girls and women and little children." (Jesus triad)

"So the donkey said to Balaam, "Am I not your donkey" (The Donkey) Numbers Chapter 22:30


Anonymous 456654 (not verified)
Posts: 4294964979
Joined: 1969-12-31
User is offlineOffline
Interview on Evolution

This comment has been moved here.


AnarchyMell
Superfan
AnarchyMell's picture
Posts: 48
Joined: 2009-09-23
User is offlineOffline
http://www.probe.org/site/c.f

http://www.probe.org/site/c.fdKEIMNsEoG/b.4218209/k.1176/The_Five_Crises_in_Evolutionary_Theory.htm

 

The above is an article my husbands friend keep throwing at me saying how evolution is wrong and in crisis!  The problem I find with evolution within species is that xians say that is just mico-evolution or adaptation.

 

Here is an awesome link to evidence for macro-evolution.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

 

Anarchism is the only philosophy which brings to man the consciousness of himself; which maintains that God, the State, and society are non-existent, that their promises are null and void, since they can be fulfilled only through man's subordination. Anarchism is therefore the teacher of the unity of life; not merely in nature, but in man.

Emma Goldman


slim7slider
Posts: 1
Joined: 2013-12-09
User is offlineOffline
On proving evolution

  Not to be too persnickedy about proper protocol, I just have to admit that when I see the word "prove," it gives me a rash that almost always has to be scratched. My statistics professors at the University of Oklahoma drilled into my head the immuttable fact that one should never use the word "prove, in science.  They claimed that one can never actually prove anything scientifically. In all scientific endedavors one opts to provide strong evidence for a hypothesis.  Stronger and stronger evidence makes it seem that something is "proved," but in fact science never admits that something has indeed been proved. Through his work with gravity and time dimensions Einstein (almost said proved) illustrated clearly that even natural law was not immutable. But that is the beauty of scince, we are not arrogant with our beliefs and findings. We produce the latest discoveries and put them to the test by which we determine its validity, and if sufficiently shown to be valid and relavant to known science we properly place it in the correct lineage. Then, in doing so we try to determine how this finding affects all surrounding elements. On a persoan note, the long lineage of mankind has been changed many times, and indeed it will change many times more in the future. And that is just fine. We admit we don't know it all, we are open to all new theories and opinions. Is this not light years better than being forced into an ideology and then all your life having to believe the most  proposterous explanations for everything concerning our species?  When new findings are produced, those functioning in a shut ideology have to make up the most fantastic theories to cover their untenable beliefs. But, I regress.  We do not "prove" anything. A devout Christian might say that such and such "proves" a point in the bible (no matter what it is, it surely does not "prove" any point), but in doing so he or she illustrates a lack of scientific knowledge about how truth is verified.

   The closest I ever came to "proving" the existence of evolution occured in my own classrooms at the University of Oklahoma. On occasion while teaching the elements of species modification thorughout eons of time a student would fervently deny the instruction and claim his or her proof of species existence came from the bible. They would adamantly deny the Theory of Evolution (it's actually recognized as the Law of Evolution). So I ask the recalcitrant student to come up and help me illstrate some things for the class. From that point on I totally ignored the student and only interacted with the class.  First, I would ask the students to look at the hair on my "associate's" arm. 

"Now why would a creater god produce a species of people that had such a useless feature? Obviously that god would not do such a thing. But our ancestors for hundreds of thousands of years did indeed have the need for body hair during all those ice ages. We still have hair on our bodies today because hair is a vestigial organ, one that had a use at one time, but through evolution started to go away through disuse."

  "Oh look right over here in this area (pointing to the associate's mid-section). "Do you know anything about the little organ that is found right here? It is the varicose appendix and you might have known relatives or friends who have had a great deal of grief because of the appendix. I had an uncle who died of an appendix attack many years ago.  Why do we have such a worthless organ that produces no good, only the potential for bad? Well, of course at one time it very much had a purpose, filtering some of the roughage our ancestors included in their diet. Again, something that is going away, but we at present still have one of the things inside us."

  "So (pointing to the associate's rear jaw area), have any of you had your molars removed? A lot of you have I see. Again, why would a god put something in our mouths that doesn't fit and served no purpose, only caused us pain and made oral surgeon's rich? Of course no god would have done us such a favor. But our ancestors needed those big rear teech badly! They were used to grind some really rough produce (we probably don't want to know what all the stuff they ate). So, here we are again stuck with a remnant from a past life."

  "If you are ever in a car crash you really hope that this organ down deep in here is not injured (pointing to the associate's side). Down there is the spleen and it holds a lot of blood that, if it losses too quickly, can be devastating.  Why do we have such a large reservoir in our body? We rarely need such a thing in modern times, with perhaps the exception of combat soldiers and athletes. It was designed to push a vast amount of blood into circulation in order to boost the energy of our ancient ancestors. You see, they needed to engage in flight or fight encounters all too often. Now the spleen is generally just a dangerous organ to have in our bodies."

  "Oh, look at this thing back here! (pointing to the associate's spinal column).  Have any of you had or know of someone who has had problems with their backs? Ah, see everyone has had or known of someone who has had back problems.  Why in the world is that?  The answer is simple, as any orthopedic surgeon will tell you. Our spine was really designed for a four-legged animal. Our primal ancestors learned to stand on two feet, and then learned to become ambulatory in that fashion.  But evolution could not account for such a drastic change so quickly, and thus we are stuck with a spine that suited our very ancient ancestors, but certainly not us."

  At that time I would thank the "helper" student for helping me and ask them to return to their seat. Some say that this technique is almost an ambush practice that wasn't fair to a religious student. My conention is that when a student enters a modern university it is to learn what is known in the world. Maybe I should be sorry (I guess) to drive in the Law of Evolution by way of illustrating that we carry in our own bodies all the evidence one would ever need. But when the evidence is so clearly in evidence, I believe I would be totally remiss to solf pedal my way around the topic. Maybe I didn't "prove" the Law of Evolution to all students, but every time they have a pain in their molars, a twinge in their appendix area, notice the hair on their arms, or buckle their seat belts tightly around their spleen area, they might just be a little more amenable to a more scientific world view.


Vastet
atheistBloggerHigh Level ModeratorSuperfan
Vastet's picture
Posts: 10687
Joined: 2006-12-25
User is offlineOffline
That works great when you

That works great when you are talking with other scientists, but when speaking with creationists who are amazing at manipulating language it merely comes off as a very weak argument and you are unlikely to get anywhere in a discussion, or win supporters from your audience.

Their arguments are strong and aggressive, and arguments that hold their ground must be equally strong and aggressive. The average individual is not particularly well schooled in logic, and emotional pleas can have great power.

It is bending the truth to say evolution is a proven fact, but until it is disproved it is a more accurate than inaccurate statement.

Proud Canadian, Enlightened Atheist, Gaming God.


digitalbeachbum
atheistRational VIP!
digitalbeachbum's picture
Posts: 3207
Joined: 2007-10-15
User is onlineOnline
Vastet wrote:That works

Vastet wrote:
That works great when you are talking with other scientists, but when speaking with creationists who are amazing at manipulating language it merely comes off as a very weak argument and you are unlikely to get anywhere in a discussion, or win supporters from your audience. Their arguments are strong and aggressive, and arguments that hold their ground must be equally strong and aggressive. The average individual is not particularly well schooled in logic, and emotional pleas can have great power. It is bending the truth to say evolution is a proven fact, but until it is disproved it is a more accurate than inaccurate statement.

I agree.

You can say there is a force called "gravity", but has it been proved? Well, a simple test shows you throw an apple up and it lands back down on the ground. What pulls it down? Strong evidence leads to a strong argument.

Then you have "gods" and a person may say, "my god is real", ok? prove it? Well I have a book written many hundreds of years ago, which is based on stories passed along the generations which say there is a "god" who created us, the earth and the universe. "Do you have any other evidence?"... "No?" Weak evidence leads to a weak argument.

Free will is an illusion. People always choose the perceived path of greatest pleasure.

-Scott Adams


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3392
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
i agree with the above post


i agree with the above post about the word "proved" being used in science. that's one of the reasons why karl popper emphasized falsifiability when talking about science, not verifiability.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen