Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true


Techno. You will only get one type of answer here forever. As in, forever. A few people, like buffalo, will provide you with other information.


Respectfully you just keep misunderstanding it. It didn’t work out perfectly. The road of evolution is paved in dead Critters. It only looks like it worked perfectly because the only specimens you see alive today we’re the ones that obviously succeeded. All the ones that didn’t succeed are dead. And they represent the majority of species that have ever lived.


Then that means the Earth should be littered with the evidence of this …right ?


Yes there are volumes written, but they avoid answering the questions you ask. If you ask how did the vertebrate evolve? You get descriptions of vertebrate in various species and a timeline, but there are no satisfactory answers as to how it happened.


Imagine a device that keeps upgrading itself or a computer program that keeps adding function. We’re being asked to believe that biological life upgraded itself. That a system that requires internal function of a high order was upgraded so gradually that we can’t see it, resulting in man.


Mutations can cause “upgrades” or “downgrades”, and then natural selection and random genetic drift can kick in.


See above.


And just as vague from them is exactly what kind of environmental change cause all this " die out " of animals and plants, were doing just fine until some mysterious climatic change came along.


Mutations are random, and more are deleterious than beneficial. Natural selection selects the beneficial ones, eliminating the deleterious ones from the population genome.

The overall outcome is almost certainly not “best”, but it will be better than before. An eagle has better eyesight than we do, so our eyesight cannot be “best”. It is sufficient for our needs; unlike an eagle we do not need to spot a rabbit in undergrowth from 200 metres in the air.



Chicxulub is not “mysterious”.



Right, all you get is some stupid lines drawn on some graph pointing to some animal.



Science can say very little about events that happened millions of years. Also, the dynamic, sometimes changing, environment that a life form is born into adds complexity and uncertainty to any scenario. Looking at it without precision means a small error in interpretation may associate itself and increase as attempts are made to explain this or that change in the organism over time.

Imagine using a rifle that can hit a target one mile away. The user has many factors to take into account. Without sufficient knowledge, it is likely the target will not be hit or another, unintended target is hit. Wind speed, the drop in height in a given caliber of bullet as it travels to the target and so on. Living things are far more complex and yes, they must be able to survive in their environment.


So, Chicxulub is the explanation for the 10 million diverse species of plant and animals we have today?


No it is not. It is part of the explanation for some of them, as you would know if you had read more about the subject. For someone who is so interested in asking questions about evolution you do not appear to have done much background reading. You will learn more if you find the answer for yourself then if you are continually handed answers on a plate.



Absolutely. Large-scale occurrences of this are evidenced by something we call fossils.

The majority of the dinosaurs that lived didn’t evolve into something still alive today. They’re dead and their evolutionary tree ended.


The “stupid lines” Indicate the morphology.

Bones and fossils indicate a common ancestor that evolved 2-3 million years ago which is connected by a stupid line to and ancestor that lived 500k years ago which is connected by another stupid line to you.


Yeah, except we now know it doesn’t.


Your “we” is incorrect. Better to replace it with “I personally”.



The intimate role of human beings has been integral to how they have developed. As the Inuit use more snow mobiles, the husky which was bred to be a work dog, is gradually reverting back to one less powerful and dedicated to pulling as a team.

I haven’t heard anyone here arguing the reality of what is termed micro-evolution. People breed fruit, vegetables, fowl, cattle, horses and themselves, having done so since prehistory; that is not the issue. The fundamental disagreement has to do with the nature of creation.

I believe we were created genetically, psychologically and spiritually perfect. Since we are the crown of all these structural dimensions of existence, all of it fell in us with original sin. This hit at the ontological origin of everything that exists and corrupted everything, brining death into the world. There was an Eden at the beginning of all this in other words, and time, created cyclical, procedes to a New Jerusalem. It is understandable that those who think this world is the true ground of our being, would fill in the blanks with something like evolution. But that’s not what happened as far as I can see given what has been revealed to us through not only scripture, but science itself.


So the belief goes, unconvincing to anyone with a modicum of skepticism and experience at the work and effort, the control necessary to produce even the simplest chemical effect, or pretty much getting anything to work. Hopefully you use gloves in a ventilated area when handling toxic substances, put on sun screen on sunny days and a full apron when getting X-rays at the dentist, who turns on the switch from behind a leaded wall, tell your pregnant daughter to avoid travel to Brazil, and somehow have learned how to avoid simply getting old. But hey, who knows, maybe the next random mutation will make you healthier. Good luck with that.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.