Evolution is true

Thank you, KingDebater. I am very happy you took this debate seriously. It has come to my attention that I have only made this three rounds, so you may refute and conclude in the same round. I will have my rebuttals in the same way I usually do. However, I would like to point out that I can't access three of the oppositions sources, making them unreliable. His sixth link is merely a bunch of pictures of fossils, making me search for a specific one in general. A few of the pictures from his link SUPPORT Evolution.--Rebuttal I: C1--In the opposition's first contention, he says Evolution is self-refuting. First off, your link supports Evolution... again. The title says "Everything Evolves, even Creationism." Second off, your statement is not true... at all. No two animals can ever be the exact same, as you stated. They would need to have same height/weight, same type of blood, same red blood cell count, same bones, etc. Each animal is different. Over tens of millions of years, it would make sense that an animal has made so many little changes in appearance that it becomes a different animal with different looks, habits, etc. In conclusion, you grossly missed the point of Evolution in this statement. Your second statement, "If Evolution is false, Evolution is false," can go either way. It can also mean "If Evolution is true, then Evolution is true." On your second argument, you say that Evolution false without ANY easily refutable arguments to back your side. --Rebuttal II: C2--Your second point probably even pissed off a few Creationists. First off, we do not have a lack of evidence, just that some missing links need to be filled. Second off, we do not have indisputable evidence for God, but it is justified to believe in Him. We do not have indisputable evidence for Creationism, but it is still justified to believe in it. Your second point is heavily flawed, as it affects a lot of things in the universe.Your second point, gaps in the fossil record, is a common Creationist argument and any Evolutionist knows how to refute it easily. The picture also had me laughing. There are MANY animals that have since been found to fill that in. For example, various species of Homos (such as Homo Sapiens) have been found to correct the latter link.As for the gaps in the fossil record, it is easily refutable. Not every single animal can fossilize, and few fossilize very well at that. Also, things happen over billions of years that can wipe away fossils. Evolutionary biologists predict that many transitional links will not be found, and a few animals don't fossilize at ALL. Therefore, science predicts that there will be some missing links in the chain of Evolution. Second, we have found many traditional links. Such as the missing link that connects birds to dinosaurs, or whales to their ancient terrestrial ancestors. Thanks to the help from [1] to strengthen this rebuttal.As for your last statement, same goes for almost any other theory. Gravity, the Earth revolves around the Sun, Creationism, how the Earth was formed, God, etc. It is not "unjustified" to believe in those things. --Rebuttal III: C3--Another misconception. We didn't evolve from just bones. Animals evolve from another animal with tissue, blood cells, Hereditary Material, and the things that one has to have to be classified as "living." You also have no source for your information, which lessens my understanding....Bones have genetic material and DNA. If you have ever heard of a bone cell, you would know this. In fact, we have enough genetic material in the bones that scientists are using them as a stroke help [2]. This is actually common knowledge, as the average person on the web knows it [3]. Inside the bone, there is also bone marrow, which contains the cells needed. Therefore, your point is invalid.--Rebuttal IV: C4--Your fourth point does not make any sense. You are either trolling me or do not know the full system of fossilization. When an organism dies, it still has tissue, the body, the brain (etc.) and stays in one spot. It is buried rapidly and put under a ton of pressure so it can't move, erosion can't take place, and predators can't get it [4]. Second, a coincidence of this size is simply astronomical, and to the furthest extent of implausible. For thousands, if not millions, of fossils to "randomly" line up in a shape of an animal that they once were, would be impossible. Also, I don't see where you got the "fall" thing from... most animals (land animals) die on the ground.--Rebuttal V: C5--The last rebuttal of mine goes for your contention #5. I have already shown that bones do, in fact, have genetic material. A sample of bone DNA has a half-life of 521 years [5]. The picture even SHOWS A SCIENTIST drilling into a bone to try to EXTRACT DNA. So bones have DNA, can mutate, and we didn't evolve from just bones.The resolution is negated. Please go to round 2 to see my arguments. I thank con for the debate, and I urge a pro vote.Sources:[1] http://evolution.berkeley.edu...[2] http://www.sciencedaily.com...[3] http://wiki.answers.com...[4] http://www.acad.carleton.edu...[5] http://www.nature.com...