Evolution is true

Evolution is a contentious issue amongst many people, and I doubt there is anyone who doesn't have a firmly held opinion on the matter, and no amount of debating on here will change their mind. With that in mind, I'd ask those who are judging this debate to examine the argument with an objective and open mind, and make their decisions based solely on the arguments presented here. Before I examine the argument Pro has made, I feel it is vitally important to establish what exactly we are discussing, by clarifying certain terms, such as 'Evolution' to avoid fallacies of equivocation. Noted British zoologist and physiologist Dr G Kerkut defines and delineates two separate theories of evolution thus: "There is a theory which states that many living animals can be observed over the course of time to undergo changes so that new species are formed. This can be called the "Special Theory of Evolution" and can be demonstrated in certain cases by experiments. On the other hand there is the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form. This theory can be called the "General Theory of Evolution" and the evidence that supports it is not sufficiently strong to allow us to consider it as anything more than a working hypothesis. It is not clear whether the changes that bring about speciation are of the same nature as those that brought about the development of new phyla. The answer will be found in future experimental work and not by the dogmatic assertions that the General Theory of Evolution must be correct because there is nothing else that will satisfactorily take its place. " "Kerkut, G. A. Secondly, we need to establish, who in this debate carries the burden of proof. I would submit that as Pro has affirmed that evolution, as a theory is true, he has the burden to prove it so. Semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit Let me then examine the argument Pro has put forward. We observe variation, mutation and natural selection in living things. Evolutionists call this "evolution", and this is why they claim that evolution is true. We see how the environment affects the survival of these different animals. We even see new species arising as a result of these processes. These phenomena are observed and documented scientifically. I can't think of an opponent of evolution who wouldn't agree with all these observations. In fact, these sorts of changes happen very quickly. Speciation can occur within a few generations. But, dogs remain dogs, frogs remain frogs, and horses remain horses. We don"t see fish changing into frogs, or lizards into birds. What we see is consistent with the biblical account of a recent creation. God created different kinds of animals at the beginning. These different kinds were capable of adapting to different environments. Evolutionists will state that these changes are prime examples of evolution, although Dawkins goes on to contradict this when he states that 'We can observe evolution, just not while it's happening. Instead we should call these changes "adaptation". It doesn't really matter what word you use, but it is important to know what you are talking about. Evolution is a term reserved for something entirely different from what we see here, adaptation. Con has argued for evolution, but has only provided evidence of adaptation, and uses the examples of Giraffes. Con has provided no evidence to support his view that Giraffes have developed from any other species, and merely assumes this to be so, and then uses this assumption to prove his argument for evolution, which a belief in, is the very basis for said assumption. If we are all descended from a common ancestor, as Darwinian Evolution postulates, we have increased in complexity and information since our alleged single celled ancestors. What I would like to see from Con, if he wants me to take an argument for evolution seriously, is an example of a mutation resulting in increasing complexity and adding information. I look forward to seeing Con's response. References : Kerkut, G. A. (1927"2004), Implications of Evolution, Pergamon, Oxford, UK, p. 157, 1960 Britton-Davidian, J. et al. , Rapid chromosomal evolution in island mice, Nature 403(6766):158, 2000