I have heard that said. however based on the evidence (missing links and such) one has to place a lot of faith in theory.
"In answer to your question, I pose a different question: Since the USA "evolved" from Great Britain, why does Great Britain still exist"?
#1 The USA didn't "evolve" from Great Britain, we had a revolutionary war and separated. #2 Apes are still in zoos in both countries.
The model "a" ford and a modern nascar both have all the same components. Wheels, axles, transmissions,etc..Doesn't mean that cars evolved. It means they have the same "creative design"
What are you babbling about here? The evidence for what he says is massive and overwhelming. What is "the evidence" you mistakenly feel argues for the contrary?
["In answer to your question, I pose a different question: Since the USA "evolved" from Great Britain, why does Great Britain still exist"?]
#1 The USA didn't "evolve" from Great Britain, we had a revolutionary war and separated.
Yes. Exactly. Ponder that until you realize the significance of that to the current discussion.
#2 Apes are still in zoos in both countries.
Not clear on the use of analogy, I see.
The model "a" ford and a modern nascar both have all the same components. Wheels, axles, transmissions,etc..Doesn't mean that cars evolved. It means they have the same "creative design"
Just as soon as you can show that humans and apes are produced on assembly lines, and redesigned every few years, you'll have some sort of relevant point here. Until then...
But in any case, yes, car designs do evolve. They are modifications upon prior designs. That's evolution, in the more general sense of the word (as opposed to strictly biological evolution). It's not as if the 2004 Cadillacs share no subcomponents or engineering lineage or functional conception with last year's models.
My point is that a species can diverge from another species without the original species going extinct.
For example, a population of a particular species might get isolated due to the dissapearance of a land bridge. That isolated species could evolve into a new species while the original species continues on unchanged.
You could say that cars evolved (using one of the several definitions of the term, anyway):
One definition of "evolution" is:
"a process of continuous change from a lower, simpler, or worse to a higher, more complex, or better state"
Car designs over the years have been a process of continuous change from a simpler to a more complex state.
Of course nobody would say that cars evolved and mean this definition of the word:
"a theory that the various types of animals and plants have their origin in other preexisting types and that the distinguishable differences are due to modifications in successive generations"
I see no reason, by the way, that evolution and creationism couldn't both be responsible for the life on earth. Perhaps the first lifeforms on earth were indeed created, and evolution is part of the design?