I've posted this in other threads before, but nobody ever seems to answer it. Scientists found a fossil of a fish called a Coelcanth that was 360 million years old. Scientists said that fish died out about 65 million years ago(same time as the dinosaurs.) Then suddenly a fisherman caught a Coelcanth and the fish had not changed in 360 million years. So if we are all constantly evolving...why didnt this fish evolve into something else? Why is it still here exactly the same. I mean 360 million years ago we humans supposedly evolved from Tetrapods. (coincidently a Coelcanth is a tetrapod) so why didnt the coelcanth evolve? I mean, if every living thing started 2 billion years ago as a cell with a nucleus, and everything evolved into what it is today suggests that we are always constantly in a state of evolution...so why didnt this fish evolve? I can only think of 2 answers. 1. The theory of Evolution isn't correct 2. The methods currently used to date ancient fossils do not work correctly. If you have any other theories, I'm open to listening.
There is a lot of stuff that evolutionists have not really answered. The shape of the Grand Canyon for one of them. They will say that they have covered it in detail, and they believe that it can't be otherwise but the truth is they own the venue for the debate! They can't be wrong! They can say things without references, etc... because they brainwash people as kids and then they don't really stand for any dissenting opinions!!
You have to die to find out. OASN: How did people evolve to be taller than we were 2000 years ago? Did we all decide not to sleep with shorter people? Or did taller people murder the short people? "Survival of The Fittest" doesn't solve the riddle.
Once a species is perfectly adapted to its niche and the niche/environment stays the same, the impetus to change is gone. There is no more possible selective pressure to allow the favoring of new evolutionary adaptations. Another example of this is the alligator, which hasn't changed at all in 60 million years and only a little since they evolved around 150 million years ago. The horseshoe crab has stayed very nearly the same for 250 million years.
The shape of the grand canyon is the least mysterious question of current science. Yes every last detail of it we don't know, but the geologic processes that formed it are very basic and very well understood. The only problem with the GC is that it causes cognitve dissonance in early-earth nitwits, thus the facts on the ground are rejected by them.
Good answer, but wait...I thought evolutionists believed its all random and by chance. Now you are implying that DNA can understand its environment and feel stress to adapt when its in less than perfect conditions or stay the same if it feels its environment is satisfactory? You are dangerously treading on the grounds of intelligent design, my friend. I'd also like to touch on the subject of the alligator. The alligator lives in two places in the world. The yangtze river in china and the southeastern united states. Two places pretty far apart. Even if you believe the theory that the continents split (pangea) the part of china that alligators live, never came close to south east united states. If the alligators migrated, they would've likely traveled very slowly through different environments that would've affected their evolution(the impetus to change would've come back since their niche in the environment changed) Also many scientists agree that the climate of the earth constantly changed over millions of years from ice ages to very warm periods. This would also cause "pressure to change" if cells/dna are aware of their environment. So although it was a good answer, when looking deep into it, there would HAVE to have been a pressure to change, and if that pressure existed, it still implies some kind of intelligence would have had to be there for it to adapt itself.
A simple google search should clear your doubts regarding the Coelacanth. It's rather unfortunate that you cannot be bothered to actually do something so trivial to obtain a very simple explanation of why the living genus Latimeria spp. doesn't actually disprove evolution. As to the alligator issue, again, Google is your friend in this. Analysis of mitochondrial DNA of A. Mississippiensis and A. Sinensis suggests that the split of the Alligatoridae occurred arnd the same period (late Paleocene) as the final phase of the breakup of Pangaea. Incidentally, that involved the division of the supercontinent of Laurasia into what we know today as North America and Eurasia.
What is today the southeastern US and east china was still approximately 6,000-8,000 miles away from each other. Could an alligator migrate that far? And if so, why isnt there alligators in africa which was connected to the south eastern united states and only a few miles away? There are so many holes in evolutionary theory and so many discoveries happening every day that continue to disprove it. For instance...a 300 million year old human skull cap was found indicating that humans roamed with dinosaurs. http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-539313 There is alot of contradicting evidence out there. Here is a site that has a bunch of random unexplained things (only 2 of them relate to evolution) http://www.zmescience.com/other/most-amazing-unexplained-artifacts/ First one is a hammer that is encased in 400 million year old rock(and the team of archaeologists dated the hammer as 500 million years old) The next one is a fossil of a human handprint was found in limestone estimated to be more than 110 million years, a fossilized human finger with just as much, and the aparent discovery of a human footprint that possibly sported a sandal which dates to more than 300 million years ago.
Why couldn't an alligator migrate that far? The study of the fossil record suggests that Triassic reptiles spread over much larger distances than our Alligatoridae. Moreover, why would it have to be a single alligator ancestor? Don't you think it's possible that, over millions of years, the particular alligator ancestors in question gradually moved into a new habitat? And maybe this optimal habitat just wasn't to be found in Africa? This is all reasonably basic stuff. Please, peil, don't be so naive. Don't you find it at least a little strange that this "study" is published on CNN, rather than a proper academic source? Why isn't it properly peer-reviewed? Again, I highly recommend Google, as well as a healthy dose of skepticism, when looking at these supposed "revolutionary" findings. peil, again... You're a trader, right? If I tell you that I have found a magical way to make $1bn in 2 days, what would your reaction be? You would probably say that I am full of shit, unless I demonstrate to you that my claim has any substance. So how is it that you read random sh1t online and straight out believe that every word of it is true?
in the bible myth of noahs flood didnt every living animal on earth march to the ark? are you sure you want to claim alligators couldnt go 6000 miles?