Fine. Show me how the scientific theory of evolution has been tested and confirmed then? Where is the fossil record of all the changes that supposedly have taken place for man to evolve? How about just one example of a change from one kind to another? I do not need hundreds or even thousands. I am just asking for one example? There is no fossil record showing these changes and there would have to be millions of them if evolution was true but there isn't even one.
This is a great summary:
Many scientists and philosophers of science have described evolution as fact and theory, a phrase which was used as the title of an article by Stephen Jay Gould in 1981. He describes fact in science as meaning data, not absolute certainty but "confirmed to such a degree that it would be perverse to withhold provisional assent." A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of such facts. The facts of evolution come from observational evidence of current processes, from imperfections in organisms recording historical common descent, and from transitions in the fossil record. Theories of evolution provide a provisional explanation for these facts.[1]
Each of the words 'evolution', 'fact' and 'theory' has several meanings in different contexts. Evolution means change over time, as in stellar evolution. In biology it refers to observed changes in organisms, to their descent from a common ancestor, and at a technical level to a change in gene frequency over time; it can also refer to explanatory theories such as Darwin's theory of natural selection which explain the mechanisms of evolution. Fact can mean to a scientist a repeatable observation that all can agree on; it can mean something that is so well established that nobody in a community disagrees with it; it can also refer to the truth or falsity of a proposition. To the public, theory can mean an opinion or conjecture ("it's only a theory"), but in the scientific world it has a much stronger connotation of "well-substantiated explanation". With this number of choices, people often end up talking past each other, and meanings become the subject of linguistic analysis.
Evidence for evolution continues to be accumulated and tested. The scientific literature includes statements by evolutionary biologists and philosophers of science demonstrating some of the different perspectives on evolution as fact and theory.
The point remains that there is no evidence Evolution is not true. Everything we can objectively know about it points to it being true. The notion "everything is so complex it just
must have been intelligently designed" offers no basis to test it. There is no evidence pointing to this. Your belief is not evidence.
As for the specific points you're asking for, speak to a geneticist or a scientist. I am neither. I can't spell out all the specific examples of how evolution proves true you're looking for. But because I understand how the scientific process and peer review works, I know that when they settle on a scientific fact, it means there is no evidence that challenges the fact, so no reason to doubt it.
Your doubt is the same as your faith. You just feel it, so you believe it to be true. That's not how science works.
And I still don't understand how you can say that observable science does not confirm intelligent design. Even the smallest of atoms is so complex that it had to be designed intelligently.
Again, this notion is not based on anything but your feeling. The Universe just is. It didn't have to be crafted and intentionally designed. It just exists, and we study it to find out how it works.
Also, if a small "bug" is introduced into our DNA we get mutations. Mutations always remove information, and never add to the information hence there is no "good" mutations (sometimes they can be beneficial depending on the circumstance) but nevertheless, if evolution was true we would see mutations as all being great and improvements but that is not that case. Order does not come from chaos.
I don't know where you're getting your ideas about mutations, but they're not accurate. They don't "remove information." If you're referring to the genetic code of a species, then yes, mutations "add" information. Mutations come from transcription errors in DNA during the replication process. When cells divide, the DNA instructions are replicated, but sometimes random errors in the code occur. This process, happening trillions upon trillions upon trillions of times causes changes in the gene pool. The surrounding environment sometimes provides a benefit to some of these changes, such that the likelihood of passing them on increases. Over thousands of generations, these beneficial traits help a species survive. The mutations that are not beneficial are less likely to survive. But the mutations are not intentional, they are random. There is no way to control them. And further, they don't happen fast (one generation to the next). They happen over very, very long periods of time, over thousands and millions of generations. The conclusion "evolution is false because mutations are not always beneficial" is not logically sound.
