My girlfriend doesnt believe in evolution /b/rothers. Besides a 10th grade biology textbook, whats something her simple mind might be able to understand that I can show her?
>inb4 your dick
Is it religious based?
I once attended a lecture by some guy at CWRU that was a Catholic that argued against intelligent design and held that evolution as is by scientific consensus.
If it is religious based, I would not mind trying to find the lecture one YouTube, I know it was recorded.
Explain how dogs of all different breeds have been created from a common ancestor.
>inb4 selective breeding isn't evolution.
Stop trying to shove your evolution bullshit down her throat. God damn zealous anti religious nuts. Keep believing in your fairy tales some guy in a lab coat made up, i'm sure she doesn't want a part of it.
Tell her that for you, it is the most plausible way how life we know today came into existence and that you respect her if she doesn't agree because you simply can't prove her that evolution is a thing besides pointing on fossiles that look like modern animals. Then tell her to forget the debate and to suck your cock.
>you simply can't prove her that evolution is a thing besides pointing on fossiles that look like modern animals
But that's wrong. You can also point at DNA analysis, or embryos of different animals, or drug-resistant bacteria, or different breeds of dogs/cats/whatever the fuck. The evidence that supports the Theory of Evolution is overwhelming.
Close minded? Really? Why do i have a feeling that you scoff at her when she mentions Jesus and the Bible. Look i'm not saying that you 100% do, but if you do indeed, then that's a little hypocritical to say she's "close minded". She has her own beliefs and you have yours. Respect both. And don't degrade her by calling her that. If you truly love her than none of that really matters.
A pretty solid proof is the evolution of whales from a terrestrial animal to an aquatic one. This is backed up by pretty nice finds of archaeologists and the biology of them which has features found only in terrestrial animals (bulla)
You don't have to believe in science, science proves facts, it doesn't matter if you believe in them
I don't scoff off at her, I try to talk to her, but she gets mad when I bring up the subject and she tells me she doesnt want to talk about it. Hell, I even went to church with her because she asked me to see if it opens MY mind up. And no I dont truly love her.
>My girlfriend doesnt believe in evolution /b/rothers. Besides a 10th grade biology textbook, whats something her simple mind might be able to understand that I can show her?
Why are you with someone you think is stupid? Is your self esteem so low you feel someone smart wouldn't have you? (you would be right to think that)
>Yea she's extremely religious and scoffed at me when I mentioned evolution.
Do her a favor and kill yourself now.
I've dated pretty smart girls before. I think she's stupid, I don't love her, we havent dated long enough for that, but I care about her. She isn't THAT smart, doesn't mean I don't like her?
The Bible isn't backed up by any evidence, and even the most basic critical thinking skills will bring up numerous discrepencies with the nook's supposedly real account. Evolution is backed up by tens of thousands of peer reviewed studies.
I thought love was only true in fairy tales
Meant for someone else but not for me
Love was out to get me
That's the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all of my dreams
Then I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind
I'm in love
I'm a believer, I couldn't leave her if I tried
I thought love was more or less a giving thing
Seems the more I gave the less I got
What's the use in tryin'
All you get is pain?
When I needed sunshine, I got rain
Then I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind
I'm in love
I'm a believer, I couldn't leave her if I tried
Oh, love was out to get me
Now, that's the way it seemed
Disappointment haunted all of my dreams
Then I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind
I'm in love
I'm a believer, I couldn't leave her if I tried
Yes, I saw her face, now I'm a believer
Not a trace of doubt in my mind
Said, I'm a believer, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah (I'm a believer)
Said, I'm a believer, yeah (I'm a believer)
I said, I'm a believer, yeah (I'm a believer)
Keep in mind that close minded people often simply won't accept facts that prove they're wrong or that some belief they base their ideology in is wrong, that's called cognitive dissonance
Break it into the simple steps.
Don't just be like "If you ain't belive in evolotion, you wack"
Step1: You are the result of your parents DNA, right?
Step2: You are not a perfect copy, you will have something that is different, rigt?
Step3: Certain differences can aid your survival(like thicker fur in cold parts of the world), right?
These three point are simpler to digest one at the time. And once you've done that, you combine them and add a few 1000 generations and you have have success
I get what you mean, but then again;
How much different is humans breeding the best looking dogs compared to bees choosing to pollinate the more colourful flowers?
(I don't know if that bee thing is actually a thing, but you get my drift)
No, they work exactly the same way.
There are several methods of selection in evolution; the "newest" one is selection by humans and it changes nothing about how evolution works.
"She's close minded"
"I don't love her"
This is what happens when your views/beliefs/values clash with hers. I wonder how she thinks of you and your atheisitic beliefs (Does she think you are close minded as well? Does she not love you because of this conflicting issue at hand? etc). Either the relationship is going to die from conflicting views/stubborn party members. Or you guys are going to learn to respect each other and realize that your beliefs, regardless of what it is, does not bring the other person down in any way. In any way, good luck.
How the fuck is it that some people accept 'microevolution', but absolutely deny 'macroevolutio'?
I get the faggots who is like
>"Herpderp, I never saw a dog give birth to a monkey. Evolution BTFO"
But they are just faggots.
I'm talking about the people who belives small changes in a species can happen, but that this will somehow never happen in a sort of linear evolutionary progress to make big changes.
It's like saying that walking is perfectly possibly as long as you don't walk more than 100 m away from your starting-point
She just thinks I am an atheist because I haven't found God yet. She loves me, a lot. I just don't love her. The relationship is going to die because I am going to kill it before I leave
Start by accepting the world will always be full of idiots who think they know better
No matter how much fact and reason and logic you can give there will always be people who don't believe you so just accept the way the world is and stop being a tumor
changes definitely happen, but they're really small and if not accompanied by evolutionary pressure over a really long period of time won't have any effect at all.
So in their mind they're right because they don't see a difference in humans for example over a certain period of time (like some thousand years).
Yeah, but like,,,,
if man is 100% and monkey is 0%.
You're fine with 0% evolving into 1%. And 1% into 2 %.
3-4, 4-5, 5-6.... 97-98, 98-99, 99-100.
And every one of those steps is small. But somehow, despite 1% changes being accepted, repeating it 100 times is not?
Imagine if we lived on a planet with all the different species from 1-99%. So 99 different species.
And they all evolve 1% up, so you have 2-100%.
Then you have the whole evolutionary chain shown to work and that it's possible to go from 1-100%. But again; Going from 1-100% is not belivable?
The fuck m8?
Lol i don't think it works that way. You can't put a scale on something like that in such a way. How do you know that humans adapting to the cold and growing hair isn't already at 99%? And you guys are calling the bible believers fantastical? LMAO
I know there is no "100% evolved" in nature. It's a continious thing.
I was thinking in terms of the evolution from our monkey-ish ancestors into modern humans,
Then you can put a number on it.
Not very accurate though, but you could put an estimated number of generation from 0-100%
the chances of 2 4 base pair DNA structures sharing 50 sequences of DNA, by chance, is 4^50. this is already infinitesimally small chance. Now extrapolate that to where the human genome contains 98% of the same DNA sequence of chimpanzees. total bases is something like 3.2 billion. it's statistically impossible for these two genomes to not be related to each other.
The thing you have to get across is the timescale involved. People locked into a biblical frame of reference think that the universe was created 6000 years ago. Evolution makes no sense in that timeframe, it makes much more sense that God created everything. Expand the timescale to the correct billions of years, and you'll see that evolution is the ONLY way that live on Earth could occur. Tiny changes in the DNA of organisms over billions of years.
Talk to her about other basic science. Ask her if she thinks the sun revolves around the Earth or vice versa. Obviously, she'll say that the Earth revolves around the sun, everyone knows that. Yet, in the Dark Ages, everyone knew that the Earth was the center of the solar system, if not the universe. It's a simple fact. Evolution is just as obvious to any scientist, so why would anyone believe that the Earth revolves around the sun and not believe that organisms evolve through natural selection? Religious people once thought that no species were truly extinct, because God would never let that happen to one of his creations. Yet we know that species go extinct all the time: the dodo, the passenger pigeon, etc.
tl;dr it's all speculation. No one knows the numbers, no one even knows it happened or not. So we've come full circle again: A small example of microevolution does not mean or prove anything in terms of macroevolution.
what about the monkeys right now.
Are they evolving into humans at a slower rate?
Are gorrillas going to evolve into a genetically stronger human?
Are spider monkey's going to be parkour master humans?
Are howler monkeys going to be opera singers when they evolve into humans?
Why are they evolving into humans slower?
but you're talking about improbabilities with hundreds if not thousands of decimal places. once you go past like .0000000000001, it's so statistically insignificant you throw out the possibility of it being random chance. plus that's only between two discrete species, how do you explain shared DNA, repeated DNA, mitochondrial DNA, SSRs shared between all living species, not to mention the fact that the codon code is discrete and shared between ALL living species with very very few ancient examples, and even those are so minor like stop codons being 1 base pair different.
just saying, statistically its improbable, but then when you account other similarities it's more than improbable, it's just impossible to think these things independently formed the exact same mechanism. at around the same time. in different environments/conditions.
They are not, every species is continuously evolving at a very very slow rate, if you could live for a billion years you would see the progress. The reason you don't see monkeys evolving into humans is because are life spans are but a blimp in the cosmic timeline
Every species of monkey isn't evolving toward humans. They're each evolving to become better suited to their environments. Our ancestors happened to need large brains. Other monkeys, not necessarily.
That doesn't make any sense.
Why did humans evolve faster if we at one point were fellow apes as well.
I can't live for a billion years so how is it logical and even possible for me to see the evolution of species with my own eyes. That defys all logic and reasoning.
Your answer is not valid whatsoever.
^this guy gets it
I hate when there's religious people who think they are right and all atheists are dumb stupid cancers in life just as much as i hate atheists who think they are right and all religious people are dumb stupid cancers in life. The thing is. NOBODY REALLY KNOWS. Just believe what you want and move along [get along]... FFS.
That is simply not possible.
If that method worked there would be no wars
No murder, rape, genocide.
We are all doomed.
>I can't live for a billion years so how is it logical and even possible for me to see the evolution of species with my own eyes. That defys all logic and reasoning
the thing is you dont have to see it in action. you cant in fact, ever. you have to see it by relating genomes of related species to each other. well actually you have to relate species to each other based on genome. the closer a species genome is to another, the closer genetically an organism is to another, and the higher probability that one evolved into another.
this guy is right. the monkey who were in environments which required intellect in order to survive became humans. those were a very special unique group which eventually began to diverge further and further until "humans" reached where we are now. all other monkeys are fairly well suited for their environments and therefor either are not evolving fast enough to be seen, or just dont require evolution to proliferate.
you want to see evolution, or at least natural selection in action? look up speckled moths and the EPA clean air act, before the clean air act was passed something like 90% of all of a specific type of moths were speckled due to high pollution staining trees and giving speckled moths an advantage against predators. After the EPA clean air act was passed, this trend reversed, with the white moths being the majority in just a few decades, while the speckled moths died out due to being picked off by predators
You're an idiot and so is the person you're referencing.
Evolution is proven by hundreds of thousands of pieces of evidence which all happen to hold up throughout nearly EVERY field of science independently, and when making predictions across different branches of science.
Oh you mean those fossil records that show a billion dead apes and then a billion dead humans? You'd think somewhere in that vast sea of fossils you'd also have a billion half ape/half human fossils of all varying changes to go along.
Why would monkeys evolve into humans? And if they somehow did wouldn't the original humans call them something other than human? They are supposedly relatives, not ancestors. According to the theory they've been evolving in a different direction than humans, in ways conducive to surviving in their natural habitats, it isn't like they'd be becoming more like humans by evolutionary processes.
Theyre evolving from a different branch.
They'll never become humans (unless something happens in their evolutionary process or whatever) because they came from a different species that never became more intelligent, etc. etc.
So basically evolution is proven from a man made science book. Cool. Thanks for wrapping that up. You've now turned me into a believer. Does this sound familiar to you guys? Oh the irony.
>Explain how dogs of all different breeds have been created from a common ancestor.
There is a difference between evolution and natural selection. The different dogs developed from wolves via breeding ( natural selection ). Evolution is developing a mammal from a fish, reptile, or fowl.
How does that happen?
>A pretty solid proof is the evolution of whales from a terrestrial animal to an aquatic one. This is backed up by pretty nice finds of archaeologists and the biology of them which has features found only in terrestrial animals (bulla)
Where is this 'pretty solid' proof? Source please!
Make her read "The Greatest Show on Earth" by Richard Dawkins.
It's literally a book he wrote to be easily read by science-challenged people to help them come to the conclusion that Evolution is irrefutable.
Oh im sorry, please show me the part in the post I replied to where you said you were basing it on other information.
Pro-tip: you cant
Looks like reading comprehension is not something you can do.
>Then you have the whole evolutionary chain shown to work and that it's possible to go from 1-100%. But again; Going from 1-100% is not belivable?
That is believable, but.... Homo sapiens sapiens are so vastly different from what is supposed to be our ancestors from just 2 million years ago. These ancestors are not remotely human -- there just isn't enough time between us and them for the evolutionary chain to be completed.
Not sure why that got truncated. My bad.
Dawkins mentions it in the book but it a fucking FASCINATING experiment to read about and it makes evolution 100% factual to anyone who isn't utterly retarded.
>People locked into a biblical frame of reference think that the universe was created 6000 years ago.
No one but a fringe group of people believe this. Its like saying that because one Liberal believes that there are more than two genders, all Liberals believe in that nonsense.
That's fine and all i'm not judging. Hell i cracked open science books and some of the fantastical stuff (stuff that even get's corrected out later on) in their got me questioning why we look at it as a end-all, be-all book of absolute facts. So don't worry i'm no hypocrite. it's all relative.
Pretty decent evidence of evolution would be vestigial organs still present in many animals. I mean shit, humans have an appendix but it serves practically no purpose anymore as we developed passed it's uses.
There is nothing you can do. She has been traumatized into believing what she does by her parents and minister. This is a childhood memory that will be with her all her life.
Seriously - get a new girlfriend. You are dating someone hopeless lost to dogma.
Faggots and Autists alike, you might want to know that evolution is a theory. Meaning it is a logical guess that has not conflicted with any factual knowledge. Religion cannot disprove a theory because religion's foundation rests upon faith which is in essence not proof of evolution being false. Saying you don't believe in evolution is like taking a single cubic foot of water from the ocean and concluding that there are no whales in the ocean because you don't want to believe it. Before you say, "But if evolution is real, explain..." There is nothing to explain, nothing thus far has conflicted with the theory except personal belief, which can never disprove it.
>The fact that you separated evolution and natural selection into two things that cant work together already shows you have no understanding of the topic whatsoever.
With your superior understanding you should be able to explain how we get mammals from reptiles.
Natural selection is different from evolving. Evolving is from one form to another. Natural selection is just minor modifications to the same unchanging form.
The taxonomic categories we place animals in are helpful to us but there are gray areas even today. As you go farther back in time to the common ancestors of today's animals our modern day categories become more and more blurred. Every terrestrial animal evolved from aquatic animals in the past, but those weren't the fish that are around today. Similarly humans didn't evolve from any of the monkeys or apes existing today but from an ancestor we share in common.
>calls science "fairy tales"
>is probably a Christfag who prays to his imaginary friend every night knowing somewhere inside that no one is listening
>Really thinks some jew crawled out of a cave 2000 years ago as a zombie
The difference is that natural selection favors a species based on its ability to survive and reproduce while humans have favored dogs based on certain traits like cuteness or being able to assist with hunting etc.
>Holy shit you are one dense mother fucker
>Go read a book.
>Natural selection is the active process by which evolution occurs.
>They go hand in hand.
Fish to mammal, motherfucker! How does it happen? How does one evolve into an entirely different animal class?
If you can't answer a simple question without key phrases like "Go read a book" then you don't have any understanding about what you are talking about. So please shut the fuck up if you have no idea what you are talking about.
Good job doing what anon said not too do
You're gonna get OP dumped when he keeps badgering her over theories, she's hopefully a grown adult who graduated from school a long time ago and the last thing she wants is too be "educated"
>The taxonomic categories we place animals in are helpful to us but there are gray areas even today. As you go farther back in time to the common ancestors of today's animals our modern day categories become more and more blurred. Every terrestrial animal evolved from aquatic animals in the past, but those weren't the fish that are around today. Similarly humans didn't evolve from any of the monkeys or apes existing today but from an ancestor we share in common.
Best answer yet.
The ancestors we share in common, 'Lucy', doesn't really have any anything in common with us. Certainly natural evolution is a slow, slow process. I doubt that the several million years between us would have been long enough to develop enough changes to develop 'Lucy' into you or me.
You need to think about it in terms of small incremental changes and iterations.
We are not responsible for your education. If you are legitimately interested in the subject then go educate yourself.
Alternatively you can stay here insisting that your opinion is correct without providing any cogent argument for it.
Most people dont know that mankind is actively doing evolution. Science is growing outstanding produce. We even evolved apples into the type not turning brown in contact with air. We have pufferfish that is not toxic anymore. We have all sorts of grain, resistant to pest. Even private persons do pedigree reproduction, ask anyone who deals with horses or dogs.
I always wonder how people deny proof at hands. Evolution is not some fairy tale about monkeys turning into humans. It's right besides us.
Point is, if someone is intelligent enough you shouldn't have to explain evolution to them, they would already get it. Any person who argues against evolution is by default a fucking moron and needs to be purged from the planet. We need to kill all the religious fags, autists, SJW, trap and trans "people" and the sick fucks who keep posting them on /b/, and establish a society based on rational scientific thought. A society where a girl who is of biological breeding age can be fucked and bred without her older mate being made a criminal. A society with no religious "morality" being worked into legislation. A society where women accept their natural place as submissive sexual servants to men and stay in the house cooking and cleaning where they belong. It's nature which is science. There is no scientific reason I shouldn't be able to dominate and enslave a 13 year old girl as my mate.
Corn was just a grass that grew little grains when the Mayans started growing it.
>But the banana, that's the amazing atheists nightmare
>Certainly natural evolution is a slow, slow process
Many changes can seem gradual, but in cataclysmic circumstances, very rapid. You can have a mutation in a cat that produces long fangs ten times in a year and they all die out because long fangs don't help you kill medium size rodents, and then, three million years later you get one mutation that again produces long fangs, and this time, the climate has enabled large mammals to wander into their area, and all of the sudden those fangs have big kills to make, and you've got saber toothed tigers kicking ass all over the place and getting to bang all the babes.
Fast or slow is a matter of our subjective opinion anyway. Mutations happen constantly. They don't get adopted with any rate of normality.
Dump her. Christians can't be good partners because they believe in living for the afterlife. Everything they do has to be run through the WWJD filter. I used to think it was okay to date Catholics but after I started finding other atheists to date I never looked back. If I had settled for a theist girl I never would have been as happy as I am now.
Two videos explaining evolution and natural selection quite clearly. They're both about 10 minutes long.
If your girlfriend can't accept evidence, nor understand evolution, break up with her. Don't reproduce with dumbasses.
Why is there varieties of life that can't mate and breed with each other if evolution says we came from one thing of life?
Why do trees exist if they had potential to be apes as much as we had potential to become horses if evolution is real?
He is an obviously slightly retarded instead of talking about science and religion taking her out to the movies he probably bores the shit out of her.
Would not be surprised if she dumps him.
that's microevolution. Microevolution is proven and observable. I doubt op's gf denies microevolution.
it is theorized to be the same process as macroevolution, but not proven to be
There's a threshold where, if there is enough evidence of a thing, then said evidence is proof.
Abiogenesis doesn't have to be true for evolution via natural selection to be true. Evolution describes how organisms change over time and diversify, it is not a description of how life started (abiogenesis).
A fact to a Christian is not the same as a scientific fact. Christians start with the conclusion then adjust the evidence to fit their resuld. Science looks at the evidence and forms it's conclusion from what has been observed. OP, you will never convince your girlfriend because Christians are not capable of objectively analyzing information presented to them. If the evidence does not agree with their preconcieved notion, they reject the evidence as non (Christian) factual.
The entire book of genesis in the bible is about evolution. Read it. It's in the fucking bible. You can use the bible to prove science to religious people, most of it is in there. I'm not saying any of this to discredit the bible either, idc what people believe as long as it doesn't affect me negatively.
Well if you sit back and read your evolution book. Then read a biology book. You realize that they don't say the same shit. So in schools there are to subjects that doesn't coincidence with each other. The terms of classifications and species state certain things, animal,plants,whatever. They are just certain things. Now according to evolution. We started from a cell. Oldest known single cell organisms are plant cells. So we go from plant to some kind of single celled animal. Then plankton, fish,tadpole,amphibian ,etc. Until we get even up the monkey part. Which drastically goes against the biology books. And if you look at the circle of life once a process starts it continues. Evolution should be continuously at work. Now before you state the process takes millions of years. Just note that it should be still going on everything at different stages. We should be able to study this process. But we can't. And all of this based on a guy named Charles Darwin. Who was quoted as saying "I don't know why everyone jumped on this. I had no proof. " and still to this day. Evolution has only one thing certain about it. It is a THEORY. It has never been proven. Unless you have a time machine it never will be. But one last thought if it is true. What ever is evolving. It seems to destroy what it evolves from.
Dude, you're trolling, there's no way you are this dumb. Especially with Google at your fingertips and being able to research something extensively.
Your logic is poor
In 1 billion years, when your descendants aren't even the same species as you anymore--and are more "evolved" than you--why wouldn't they be the goal instead of you? Or your descendants descendants 2 billion years from now?
this times 10 are you a biology professor, i´ve never understand this whole biology stuff, now i do, thank you kind sure, you should be awarded a medal of exeptional gratitude
>How the fuck is it that some people accept 'microevolution'
bird --> develops a slightly different beak better suited to its environment
>but absolutely deny 'macroevolution'
bird --> monkey --> you
>tfw the question answers itself
>because it's a stupid fucking question
Do the world a favor and Darwin Award yourself.
>US education at its finest
A theory is a framework that is hypothesized, tested, and either acvoeted, rejected, or adjusted according to observable evidence.
hey cool a definition, now all you have to do is go back to the post that started this conversation and see that I was correct all along. Theories and proof are not the same thing.
Nah, your lack of education is just blatant. There is no point in trying to argue anymore. You simply don't get it. That's ok. People like you won't ever commit science anyway, which is kinda why it works to begin with
There is no proof in science, just theories that have not been falsified. It is not about maintaining a rigid belief system but discovering the real facts if they do objectively exist.
Things like gravity are not proven, gravity is a theory of science and physics and will remain a theory unless it's somehow found to be false.
>so if i have a theory, that means its true?
You're confusing hypothesis and theory. You don't have a theory, you have a hypothesis, unless you can show all of us your evidence, then it's an established theory.
White girls used to have no asses. Now they do. Evolution!
A "scientific theory" is different from a "theory" in the common vernacular.
A scientific theory is a yet to be falsified concept supported by observed truths.
A common English theory is closer to an educated idea to explain something without evidence.
Hope that clears up the confusion for you.
Do you get to fuck her ass because she's saving it for jebus. Also she is a dumb cunt.
Its not about belief save that for the religious. Evidence, and we have a shit load of it. The stupids will say something along the lines of "i believe in micro evolution but not macro" all the while not realizing that macro evolution is just a cornucopia of micro evolutions by factors of millions of years.
No, a hypothesis is an "educated guess" which is what you think a scientific theory is
People use commonly use the word theory to denote an idea they have, for which therequires is no evidence (said theory still requires testing, in scientific terms, this theory would actually be a hypothesis).
Well b is extra retarded today so imma go to bed
I understand that perfectly. If you click the post-links back to the beginning of this conversation you'll see that it began with an anon claiming that theories are the same thing as proven facts, which is incorrect
ITT: Bunch of Christfags trying to debunk a PROVEN AND REAL thing like evolution. There are ZERO CREDIBLE SCIENTISTS who doubt the theory of evolution. There is no evidence to disprove it. All found evidence and examination supports it. It's real. It's a fact. That's how living things work, there is no denying it.
Evolution is a tree, not a ladder.
Humans aren't the final result of evolution, just a spot on one of the branches that will eventually either disappear or transform into something else.
Evolution is bullshit pushed by the mainstream
>Why do white fair skinned still get sunburnt
>if we evolved from primates why are primates eyes totally different
>they have much bigger darker eyes with much better night vision
>primates more hairy on the back than the front
>primates much more powerful than us
>Why did and has not been shown to the public the genealogy experiment
>concluded in 1999
>when someone announced startling results publicly
>they've been silenced
The public funded the experiments as well as government
Why are apes still apes
Why are crocodiles still the same
Why are nigga countries backward
Why do niggas not invent anything
If niggas were the first humans how are they still retarded
Small incremental mutations. The basic premise you can give your gf is that the DNA is pretty well maintained, but faults occur every now and then, which is what we call mutations. You can point at many cases of medical cases of weird mutations and genetic defects to push the concept of mutations.
Now you say, mutations are random as fuck. You can have mutations that are beneficial, and mutations that are harmful. A mutation could be a slightly different composition of the bone, changing the calcium storage. That's where natural selection comes along with statistics. In the passage of large-scale time, these random mutations show up all over the place, and they either benefit the mutated specimen, or hinder them. Beneficial mutation would statistically make the specimen more likely to reproduce and pass on this mutation to its offsprings. A bad mutation would lower the specimen's chances of reproduction. Such basic example would be an animal with a slightly lower muscle mass being less able to hunt for food or run away from predators, compared to its competing group, resulting in either malnutrition or death, which won't help it getting laid, because it won't reach that point in life... alive. On the other hand, a specimen with better muscles would be more proficient at keeping itself alive and fed, enough to do the sex and make more swole babbys.
These small mutations add up over time, to form large changes in the span of millions and millions of years.
Heck, you can tell her about light and black skin among humans. Dark skinned humans used to live in Africa, in warm weather. Some migrated up north, into the cold, where there was less direct sunlight. With random mutations, those whose skins had less eumelanin in them were statistically better at absorbing vitamin D, which meant they were, statistically, more healthy and more likely to reach puberty and reproduce.
Those who had darker skin were low on vitamin D, which is bad, meaning they were less likely to reproduce and push on their genes down the pipe. This went on for probably thousands of years, all the while the eumelanin-reducing genes were becoming more spread and mainstream, and being joined by further mutations with similar effects, resulting in a brighter skin tone in cold climates.
That's a rudimentary example, which she might understand.
Examples for bad genetic mutations are easy to make. Cancer would be my go-to, but I'm sure you can be creative by looking for genetic diseases online. "In a species with no medicine, an individual with that deformity wouldn't make it to the sex stage."
While telling my family about arguments regarding evolution with a religious guy at work, my dad handed me a book called The Blind Watchmaker. It focuses on explaining the religious misconceptions regarding evolution and natural selection, and how things actually worked in a way that makes logical sense.
One example the author gave was the human eye. "There's no way that such a complicated mechanism was formed in stages, because you gotta have the lens to work with the retina and the bla bla bla". He then continues to show several modern day animals with different stages of the evolution of the formation of eyes, starting with light sensitive cells, on with fish with very simple light sensitive organs, the formation of the eye socket with the retina in the back, how it closes up front, not unlike old pinhole cameras to form a sharp image on the retina, and so forth.
He also lists cases where evolution reached the same results from several directions, such as flight at birds and bats, or swimming at fish and dolphins.
I should put a disclaimer: I never finished reading the book. I read it during breaks, and I finished working in that place before I finished the book.
Omg stop fucking up my /b/ee you newfag. Charles Darlin's theory of evolution. Just tell her to look it up.
"Hypothesis, scientific theory, blah blah blah" science says it's true because they use a fancy term so it must be true. hur dur. at the end of the day it's some guys in a labcoat theorizing and saying "it is our educated guess that this is true/we've come to the conclusion/etc" Don't get me wrong i'm not saying all science is wrong but what i'm saying is be mindful of what you believe in. Stuff like gravity is immediate and all around us. That shouldn't be a concern. But when science tries to make sense out of stuff that is long gone like the origins of mankind then take it with a grain of salt. Don't be sheep and don't be an easily manipulated tool.
Seeing other replies, I remembered your gf must be stupid enough to propose humans came from monkeys. For that you need to answer that humans AND monkeys came from a shared monkey-looking ancestor, not one from the other. You then need to compare it to saying you descended from your brother, and not both of you descending from your parent, or grandparent. Humans and monkeys are cousins to a shared grandfather, you tell her. You tell her good.
Shut your mouth or you're not going to have a girlfriend much longer. Pick your battles, idiot. Learning to let shit go is part of growing up. It's not a big deal. Her belief isn't hurting anyone. Just smile and nod and change the subject. This is from an atheist with a christian wife. We are together because we avoid petty shit like religion and politics.
You sound like you were there
>fucking smartass sheep
>just repeating from a mainstream book
>how do you explain some of the architecture all over the world
>clearly much older than 10,000 years
>clearly very complicated building work
According to evolutionists 10,000 yrs ago we were cavemen.please explain wise one.
Look up articles on antibiotic resistant bacteria. For animals and plants evolution takes a while. But this is litterally an instance of a living thing evolving in a very short amount of time. There is no denying it. Its real.
Excellent answer. And yes. We don't 'descend from monkeys' if anything, we evolved together.
The fact that we evolved a superior intelect first just means that the rest of the animals are objectively fucked. If humans had not shown up, fucking dolphins would have become the dominant species eventually. Hell, any 'smart' animal by todays standard would have become the dominant species given enough time.
>According to evolutionists 10,000 yrs ago we were cavemen. please explain wise one.
Not everyone was equal. Some people are still cavemen. Also there was supposed to be an ice age 10,000 years ago that fucked the planet up.
exactly, ask that slag why she thinks we need a new flu vaccine every fucking year. but seriously OP ask yourself while you're at it: is this really the mother of your children? really?
I tried having a relationship with a woman who had radically different religious views as I did.
It didn't work. I tried being open-minded...
For your own good and happiness, break up and look for someone else.
Did you know? That a theory is as 'true' as something gets?
Yeah, it goes: Hypothesis (when you have no proof) and when you have proof, it becomes a theory.
How can you objectively prove anything?
both of these posts contain errors, but it's really just nitpicking about semantics
I was using the word proof incorrectly earlier too, so I'm not pointing it out to be smarmy
Does she believe in dogs?
Its walking proof.
They were wolves once.
We just fed the wolves scraps and killed the wolves fighting over them and let the nice ones live, after a couple hundred years they got domesticated and now its just a shitfest with breeds that shouldnt have evolved in the first place. Its unnatural to have a dog who has trouble breathing because its nose is fucked from birth.
Well the whole point of science is to observe and predict, based on your observations.
A 'law' of the universe is only so because of what we have observed and calculated.
hypothesis --->[testing]---> data/evidence=Theory
I like the cut of your jib, anon
humans arent the perfect lifeform idiot,biologically speaking,the purpose of living is to exist and reproduce.monkeys have been succesfull in this for ages,they dont need to evolve into humans,just something that doesnt die right away
If you throw 100 dogs into a fenced in area, and hang their food just slightly higher than they can jump, eventually, the ones that don't learn to jump to get the food die, and the ones that can, live on.
Repeat this process again with the survivors offspring.
Repeat AGAIN with THEIR offspring....eventually you end up with dogs that can jump really high because THEY HAD TO TO SURVIVE.
According to religion, the world was created less than 6000 years ago. Explain that, wise one.
Salt aside, I would like to know which buildings and architecture you're referring to. Are we talking about evolution arguments, it ancient aliens?