I've got nothing against the theory of evolution; maybe one or two questions it seems to me that there is no magic in the word evolution change would do just as well- yes? are the any examples of marginal evolution eg a monkey that has just walked out of the woods asking for help with 9 down in the times crossword- or any species of monkey that is nearly human- actually changing? I gather humans share some genes with chimpanzees- do chimpanzees share genes with any other animal?- just some monkeys do look a little like other animals. for crying out loud don't please anyone think i'm a crazy creationist- i'm just a don't know and a pig ignorant
Evolution doesn't state that humans came from monkeys. Just that all primates share a common ancestor that wasn't anything currently living now. Also, yes, chimps share genes with other animals. So do humans. Humans and bananas share genes. Chimps and snails share genes. Just not nearly as many and humans and chimps do. They are genetically our closest relatives.
yes - but scientists will prefer to use a big fancy clever word even when a simple one will suffice well that's hardly a marginal example of evolution - its pretty spectacular - but I gather you're just trying to be humourous with your point. By "marginal evolution" I take it you mean small but observable changes within species that have actually been documented within human timescales. This is something that some people would refer to as "micro-evolution" ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microevolution ) and we have literally thousands perhaps tens of thousands of examples of this - as someone who studies marine biology, this one: http://www.springerlink.com/content/e4284017v66738u7/ is one of my favourites - but ask the folks on here for more and I'm sure you'll be furnished with them. In fact we share almost ALL of our genes with chimps - indeed we are startlingly similar genetically to fish, sea squirts, squid etc etc with those similarities increasing the closer we move towards ourselves in the nested taxonomic heirarchy (ok another collection of big words - call it "The Tree of Life" instead) that this serves as the strongest possible proof of common descent
Evolution is a subcategory of change, a small and specialized category of change we have found worth naming - it is cumulative and decreasingly reversible as it proceeds (unlike a simple physical change that cycles around or changes back and forth between a few states), and accumulates the products of locally decreasing entropy (unlike an entropic degradation). You can use "change" if you want to, just as you can use "biomass" when you mean oak trees. I've noticed that the confusion such vague vocabulary introduces comes in handy for certain folks (cough *Intelligent Design* cough).
