NOTE: This is a repost of an article I wrote. I originally wrote in back around 2004 or so. I'm transferring it here to keep it together with my recent writings.
Before we begin, let's get one thing clear. This is not about the source of evolution. This isn't about whether evolution proves or disproves the existence of Gods. This isn't about what the source of evolution is or is not. This article is simply about basic evidence that evolution is a reality.
People have disagreed about the truth or falsehood of evolution ever since the topic became famous due to Charles Darwin's research and writings. Please note that I do not claim that Mr. Darwin created the concept of evolution. I said he merely made it famous.
So how can I possibly shed any more light on this topic? What possible point of view could I come up with to add to this long argued topic instead of just adding to the white noise?
First, let's start with a slight change in verbiage. So many people get hung up on the word "evolution" that their mind is shut the moment the word is used. To avoid this problem we'll use the word "change" instead of evolution. Anti-abortion advocates promote the use of the word "murder" instead of "abortion" in order to convey the true meaning of the topic. So too we'll throw away the word "evolution" and use the term "change" to make the topic clearer.
But first, let's make sure we can even agree on this change of phrasing. What are we discussing when we use the word evolution? At dictionary.com the first definition of evolution is worded as such:
"A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form."
The word "change" is a very central word in the definition. Almost every other word can be tossed out but the word "change" must remain to convey the same meaning. So since that word is so important to the central issue of evolution, let's discuss change.
Do things change? The answer seems to be an obvious "Yes". Ancient Rome has changed. The land where the USA resides now has changed, mostly by our own hands. Overall views toward slavery have changed. (Again I said overall. Slavery isn't nearly as accepted as it used to be hundreds and thousands of years ago.) The basic concept of change doesn't seem to be in question. What seems to bring debate is what changes, how much and when.
Let's start with the "how much" debate. If we can agree that things change then they can only change in two ways. They can change a little or a lot. At least it appears to be the only two ways something can change. The truth is that, overall, things can only change a lot. here's what I mean.
Imagine an item, any material item you want. Got one? Good, now make a slight change in it. Make a minor change to height, color, texture, shape, purpose, whatever, just make a small change. Now make a new different change to it in addition to the original change. Now make a third small change and a fourth. Make 20 small changes and now compare your final product to the one you started from. To make this fair, make no changes that push the item back toward its original form. In other words don't make 10 changes from blue to green and back to blue and call these different changes. That's cheating. Also don't just make 20 dents. Make real but minor changes.
So we see that many small minor changes compounded together make a large change. The human body doesn't change in any perceptible way from day to day, however as any of your relatives can tell you, "you've changed so much since you were a baby". Changes may be so small that we miss them, but eventually they do add up and the result is a creature or item that is quite different from how it "started" long ago. But even then, more changes are yet to occur.
Look at the pizza restaurant industry. It seems to have started in the ancient times of Babylonia, Greece, etc. Hundreds of years later we now have pizza delivery and pizza recipes that look nothing like the original pizza baked on un-leaven bread.
But is it possible for enough minor changes to occur for something to be given another name? Can a fly turn into a tiger? Let's look at another example.
The teacup of olden times has made changes until we now have the plastic-lined/paper cups that hold our fast food drinks. Also the cup itself was an eventual creation that came from the bowl.
"Ah-ha", you might say. "So far you've only given examples that show changes which came from Man's conscious mind. You've only shown that evolution can only occur through a conscious effort. You haven't proven that change can occur without intent."
These might be the words I'd hear if I left it alone here. But I have one more example to discuss. I could ask about the dinosaurs and why they aren't around, but maybe you don't believe they really existed. Maybe the fossils and dating techniques are flawed and you don't believe their findings. Here, however is something that you can see with your own eyes this very day.
Whether you believe that Man came from Adam and Eve (meaning a single couple from a single God) or whether you believe that Man came from a single cell life form, here's one thing you must consider:
Look at the differences between Africans and Eskimos. Africans, who live in a hot dry climate, have long thin bodies, dark skin, broad noses, and other features that are perfectly suited toward living comfortably in that type of climate. Eskimos on the other hand are shorter, fatter, and more appropriate toward cold, wet climates.
So if change were not possible, and we all came from one single source how could we explain such a difference. Based on those rules, there are only two possible explanations.
Survival Of The Fittest?