ITT:

I think you meant to say "isn't" observable

Lit average IQ is 95. Yea Forums average is probably around 55

>missing link
m.youtube.com/watch?v=ICv6GLwt1gM

nevermind

you can induce speciation by splitting a population of drosophilia in like 20 generations, man. takes about two weeks.

>something that is observable in real time
You are aware there has never been an experiment ran which has been able to unequivocally prove macro-evolution exists, right?

As in, small changes over only a dozen to a couple hundred generations, which is what evolutionary biologist accredit as being necessary for adaption to new environments upon ecological disaster or migration, but has never been able to be replicated in a scientific setting?

I am aware what you just said is wrong :)

it's pointless arguing with people like you though, I left that behavior twenty years in the past.

BTW-- no experiment in science unequovocally proves anything. The fact that you went straight to that language shows that you probably don't even have a basic understanding of the scientific method (what a HuUuUuUuUuge surprise)

Well, I hope you're willing to capitulate that if macro-evolution is provable by inducing speciation through cross-generational environmental conditioning on fruit flies, then the same metrics of geno/pheno/typic analysis used to discern a difference enough to prove such a phenomena has occurred, are also equally applicable to humans - be it by genetic clusters, or old-time anthropology.

Attached: 1552200549638.png (1600x1200, 340K)

I wasn't arguing. I am highly sympathetic to evolution, I just saw that there may have been a typo there.

They don't become new creatures. Adaptation is real. Evolution is fiction. Only high school teacher tier "scientists" believe in that bologna. It's just a religion for the atheist. Lol at ur whole life if you believe in molecules to man

Prove that the human eye evolved from a sea of amino acids. Can't do it? Then fuck off, evolutiontards. I'm tired of you skirting around the issue. ("Well, rats grow a third nipple if you selectively breed them." Fuck off!) Put up or shut up, you miserable cretinous spastics.

Absolute retard above.

Wasn't a typo at all.

@12747644
Another evolutionist who resorts to throwing insults because he's unable to justify his secular religion. Absolutely pathetic. Hope one day you grow up, get over your cognitive dissonance and start thinking for yourself, buddy.

0/10. This isn't the board for that. Please go to /pol/, Yea Forums, Yea Forums, etc i know you have the tabs open already.

@12747767
Called you a retard because you have no idea what you're talking about. And your question was completely retarded
>le science is a religion meme
Yikes. Go back to christcucking it, puppet.

@12747784
@12747797
Still throwing insults. Yawn. How's that cogdis treating you? Imagine believing in something so much that you cannot question it, yet being completely unable to justify it. What sad, sad lives you lead.
>Implying I'm a Christcuck

@12747797
His point is that science isn’t infallible, and it’s not. The process is not foolproof, since we won’t always have the best resources at our disposal.
@12747831
You should at least believe in God

>Only high school teacher tier "scientists" believe in that bologna

you and me both know that is not true

>Adaptation is real. Evolution is fiction.
so if you continiously adapt over generations and generations, what do you think happens?