Show me the chemical, thermodynamic,and genetic proof that evolution exists and I will believe in evolution. Don't show me a skeleton and give me an opinion. Once in college I read about a guy that carbon dated an oyster and came up with an age of one million years. For evolution to be scientific it must be shown as a repeatable event. The simple adaptation shown in organisms is not evolution. The crucial part of the evolutionary theory is that life came from NON-LIVING things. Prove this evolutionary postulate with real verifiable science and I will give up my God.
Understanding is the wellspring of life to he that
hath it, but the instruction of fools is folly.
Many people believe in God and accept evolutionary theory.
By this reasoning....Einstein would never have come up with his theories, and I certainly could not understand how light travels from a star because I can't "make a star".
Microevolution can be demonstrated in a lab; significant variations in short-lived organisms can be induced in observable time-frames. Some of the diversity of life on this planet is certainly a result of evolution. The $64,000 question is "how much".
I don't understand why so many people seem to have a trouble with the notion that Darwinian mechanics provide a good explanation for some of the planet's biodiversity, but don't really provide a good explanation for all of it.
Also, I think it's important to note that the concept of "species" is not an equivalence relation. It is possible to have four animals, A, B, X, and Y, such that A and X can mate to produce fertile offspring, as can B and X or B and Y, but A and Y cannot mate to produce fertile offspring [note that the normal test for equivalence relations would use three items A, B, and C, but in many species animals have two sexes and two animals of the same sex cannot mate]. By the normal definition of species, A and X would be the same species, as would B and X, as would B and Y. But A and Y would be different species.
Students should be taught about how Darwinian mechanics operate, but should also be taught that there are limits as to how well one can try to ascertain the past based upon the present. That a particular theorized chain of events fits the current evidence does not imply that that chain of events actually occurred.