What proof is there that there is evolution.?

“….but I am a strait A student.”
I doubt that. Most straight A students can spell ‘straight’ for example, and write in sentences which don’t read as if the words were picked out of a hat.

“2) How do all of the 92 elements evolve from hydrogen?”
Leaving aside that this is a very loose way of using the word ‘evolve’, the short answer is nuclear fusion. Atoms are made up of protons, neutrons and electrons. The number of these present (especially protons) is what fixes the elements as what they are. To make other elements from hydrogen requires a lot of energy (though you get more out) but is conceptually simple.

Nuclear fusion is what powers the sun and other stars (and not, as you may have thought ‘a big pile of magic wood’). I did not realise that there were creationists so keen to set themselves against not only key concepts in biology but also the whole of modern physics and chemistry. This is pre-quantum theory stuff.

“4) Did we all come from a soup? or a rock? do you think we have a common ancestor? If you do you are also related to a potato. Do we look like a plant?”
I have never been more convinced than when reading your question that people are related to vegetables.

“5) Have you seen a horse give birth to a dog?”
No. Have you? Because if you have, that would be really excellent evidence against evolution and in favour of magic.

“If you still don’t believe me watch this the source of most of my info.”
Well I was doubtful, but now I know that your views come from a YouTube video made by a convict who has been criticised by other creationists, (who in turn are not taken seriously by any established scientific journals) and who believes that “Satan has been using the great pyramid as his symbol for the New World Order” (link) I feel silly. How dumb am I?

“in Africa dinosaurs apparently still do exist. Look it up.”
Well duh. In his youth, Nelson Mandela was known to ride around on a T-Rex. Robert Mugabe can’t sleep without his pet diplodocus yodelling at the window. Also, in Kenya they use veloceraptor skins to wipe their bottoms. This is all 100% true. Look it up.

“How do you know the earth is 4.6 billion years old there is no proof.
You can say oh carbon dating and all that however using carbon dating it has been found that living animals are over a million years old. Do you think a penguin at the zoo is a million years old?”

I’m pretty sure that no penguins are a million years old. I’m equally sure that no one ever used carbon dating to yield that result, never mind measure how many billions of years old the Earth is. Carbon dating is only treated as accurate up to around 60,000 years. Might be worth carbon dating that YT vid though, it looks pretty old.

OK, that’s enough. This has to be up there with the stupidest questions I’ve seen on here in five years and that’s saying something. I’m still sort of hoping that this is trolling but trolls are usually either funnier or more concise, and have better spelling and grammar.

I’ve only responded to the claims that I’ve found most painful. There is much, much more wrong with your question than any sane person would take the time to deal with. Your ignorance is matched only be your breathtaking arrogance which will probably prevent you from ever having a clue how the world actually works.

I pity you.

“Dinosaurs”

I’m a straight A student too. And I have a 103 average in my chemistry class and a 101.4 average in my earth science class. First, this isn’t even about having proof or evidence about the theory of evolution, nobody really knows that exactly happened 4.6 billion years ago. And it’s a theory for christ’s sake. And by the way for the big bang, how did you know that it ever happened? You were never there little guy so don’t act like you did. You act like u were alive billions of years ago but you weren’t. Of course theories are theoretical, that’s why we call it a theory. It’s all a theory and what matters is what you wanna believe in. Trust me nobody alive today was here on earth 4.6 billion years ago and that includes you too and you act like you were there and you saw everything happened. Yes we came from a rock, and that’s what I believe, what do you believe in?

If by proof you mean Bible passage, then no, we can’t show you proof.

Oh, wait, yea I can.

The book of Genesis says that God made the universe out of nothing, so your cosmic big bang is supported by it. It then gives an account of a GRADUAL development of life on Earth. It leaves out the specifics of HOW. Your argument against stellar/planetary development is also contradicted by the book.

You show you don’t understand the word “theory” in #3.

4 is also supported by the Bible if you consider if from that perspective. We would all have a common creator. Ignoring religion, vast amounts of science support the common ancestor theory.

5 shows you don’t understand evolution. No evolutionist claims that any organism TURNS into another. This only happens in mythology. No one expects a horse to give birth to a dog. Changes are gradual. Small change here, small change there, and eventually, enough pop up with enough frequency that you have a new species.

We actually have more in common with plants than you think.

6, micro evolution is what leads to macro evolution.

But I know that this is pointless because no amount of proof will ever be enough once someone like you has made up their minds.

Source(s):
Proof: Evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement.

For evolution there are mountains of it. Against it, an ant hill. For creationism, a few thousand year old books and some weak circular arguments. Against it, the shear volume of creationist stories that don’t agree.

Ugh. Where to start. When people talk about the theory of evolution, they’re talking about #5 and 6 on your list. The other types have similar names, but they’re entirely unrelated.

1) The “nothing exploded into everything” model of the big bang is so divorced from reality, that it’s not even wrong. No scientist anywhere say that that’s what happened. The big bang explains the first few instants of the universe – not it’s origin, and not what came before.

2) Have you ever taken a basic physics or chemistry class? Fusion packs lighter elements into heavier elements. For elements lighter than iron, the process releases energy, which is how our sun works. For elements heavier than that, the process *requires* energy, which is why heavier elements are only produced in supernovas.

3) What are you talking about? There are lots of regions of space where we’re actively observing the formation of stars.

4) This is abiogenesis. It’s unrelated to evolution, which explains how *existing* life changes over time. It doesn’t matter how much you conflate the two, it’s still a completely separate question – evolution would have proceeded exactly the same if the first life had come about chemically, had been engineered by aliens, or had been created by God. As for abiogenesis itself: life is chemistry, which arose from simpler chemistry. If you haven’t taken a biochem course, you won’t understand a more in-depth answer than that.

5&6) These are the same thing, just different in scale. There’s no plausible mechanism by which small changes could be prevented from adding up to larger changes.

>>Have you seen a horse give birth to a dog?<<
This one is slam-dunk proof that you have no idea what evolution is or isn’t. If a horse gave birth to a dog, it would utterly destroy the theory of evolution in one fell swoop. Species change gradually over time, at a rate slow enough that each new generation is the same species as the one before. It’s also why two examples of the same new species don’t have to evolve at the same time in order to reproduce.

>>Fossils found are dated based on the geometric column. The geometric column is based on the fossils found in it.<<
Wrong. They were determined by independent means. They agree with each other, which is further evidence that they’re accurate. Now that they’ve been thoroughly established, they can be used to confirm each other, but they were NOT originally discovered through circular means.

>> In the 1950’s a guy named Miller did an experiment to create life in a lab<<
No, he didn’t. The experiment was never intended to create life. It was done to demonstrate that the basic CHEMICAL COMPONENTS of life could form spontaneously from simpler chemicals on the early earth. The experiment was a success.

This has to be the most scientifically illiterate screed I’ve read in a while… and for someone who deals with creationists on a daily basis, that’s really saying something. I’m not saying that you’re stupid, or disputing that you get straight A’s. You’re probably just woefully uninformed. The arguments that you’re making demonstrate that you don’t even have the most basic understanding of scientific concepts. You don’t even understand what it is that you’re arguing against… it’s the equivalent of trying to claim that gravity isn’t real because airplanes can fly.