"Evolution correctly integrates the findings from physics, geology, and chemistry about the age of the earth. Evolution makes sense of why all us mammals share so many characteristics in common."
"How does it integrate physics, geology and chemistry? Just because mammals share characteristics (which I don't deny because it is observable and provable), doesn't mean they evolved from one another."
"Fossils in itself [sic] doesn't prove anything... I'm just searching for the concrete evidence that so many claim exist."
----
I am not sure I understand your point. Do you deny that fossils exist? Do you deny that fossils show a chronological understanding from simpler life forms to vertebrates, then to dinosaurs, then to mammals? Do you deny that fossils show a development from simpler plants to present-day angiosperms?
I can assure you that fossils exist. I have one right here on my mantlepiece. It is of a fish that lived in Devonian times.
"I am not sure I understand your point. Do you deny that fossils exist? Do you deny that fossils show a chronological understanding from simpler life forms to vertebrates, then to dinosaurs, then to mammals? Do you deny that fossils show a development from simpler plants to present-day angiosperms?
I can assure you that fossils exist. I have one right here on my mantlepiece. It is of a fish that lived in Devonian times."
Of course fossils exist. My point is that fossils give very limited, if any, information about origins.
Chronology is another problem. Carbon dating has shown inconsistencies so it has limited dependability.
Genetic studies have shown similar genetic coding between species. Great, but no factual conclusions can be drawn from this other than life is made up of common materials.
People have tried to insert these three elements, fossils, chronology, and genetic information, into a predisposed conclusion (evolution). It's like putting 3 pieces of a 1000 piece puzzle together and claiming that you know the completed look of the puzzle.
Evolution depends on mutations as the process to cause variation and eventually leading to a new species. Leaving aside the fact that most mutations die, let's look at it from a mathematicians point of view. From a probability standpoint, the odds of having both male and female mutations that are able to mate are already slim; but to have viable male and female mutations to occur to explain every species on the planet is highly improbable.
My point is that many here are poking fun at ID believers but evolutionist theory has its own flaws. Many of those flaws are large enough for me to disbelieve it altogether. Science is in a sad state when theories can not be challenged and unfortunately it seems evolution has become an 'untouchable' theory.