Is evolution a big fat lie?

Question

Is evolution a big fat lie?
If we evolved from apes and were not created like the bible says. What did the apes evolve from. What about chickens? Cows? Trees? Why have we stopped evolving, if the evolution theory was correct we should be having super humans by now.

Answer

Philosophically speaking... its impossible to know anything for certain, and thus impossible to answer the question. brbrIf you are asking whether it is rational for a person to believe that evolution does occur, then the principle of belief conservation says that it can be rational for a person who believes in evolution to continue to do so because it is an arguably plausible answer to our origin, and there isnt any conclusive evidence to disprove evolution. brbrIt appears from your question that you have a procreation bias and the rest of the questions you ask are rhetorical in nature however an evolutionist could and likely would simply argue that apes, chickens, cows, and trees evolved from protoapes, chickens, cows, and trees. Thus we would be back to square one. brbrAs far as why have we stopped evolving, an evolutionist would likely retort that we havent and that evolution occurs at such a slow pace that it is almost imperceptible within the span of our lifetime. As far as being super human... well we are remarkable in many ways for good or ill... the answer would depend on how we define quotsuperquot. brbrThat being said, I personally find it hard to believe in evolution. At least in as much as an explanation of our origin. In the discussion of evolution I find it important to distinguish between micro evolution also known as natural selection and macro evolution. brbrMicro evolution is an observable fact, one of the most famous examples of this that evolutionist like to cite is the peppered moth. However what I feel evolutionist fail to recognize in this example is the possibility that both variety of peppered moth or at least the genetic possibility already existed and that one was observed more often over the other simply because conditions favored one over the other. When conditions changed, natural selection allowed the previously obscure moth to become the norm. brbrWhat evolutionist tend to do is take natural selection and extrapolate backwards from it that all species have a common ancestor a single celled organism. This is the theory of macro evolution. brbrThere are two reason that I personally favor creationism over evolution. The first is that it seems that there is a natural limit to natural selection. If we breed rats and only allow the largest rats from each litter to produce offspring we would never end up with a rat the size of an elephant no matter how many generations we breed. Secondly I feel that evolutionist fail to adequately explain how life sprang forth from inorganic material. Why cant we replicate this in a lab setting? Its still a long way from creating some proteins in a lab to creating life. brbrBut as I said from the start.. Its impossible to disprove either way and thus comes down to a matter of faith. Its all in how one chooses to interpret the evidence.