Because people in schools keep learning about the things that 'may' prove evolution, but they dont hear about all the facts that disprove it too. There are 2 sides to the story.
Like: some sort of shrew/rat creature was 'supposed' to evole into a bat, but it would have to slowly grow wings over a long period of time. These wings in the development stage wouldn't allow the creature to fly, but it also wouldn't let the creature walk or grab things, so it would have just died out before it evolved.
There should be billions of fossils of creatures in transitional form between 2 different species around the world, but not a single one has ever been found.
There's way more things that have been discovered to disprove evolution, so that's why alot of people dont believe in it
OliveMaster
Please, I've yet to hear a creationist "argument" that couldn't be completely torn apart by science. The fact of the matter is that our schools don't do a good enough job when it comes to teaching evolutionary theory and/or logic seeing as how we have creationists. Its a sad irony that creationists think they know all there is to know about evolution when the reality is that they know absolutely nothing about evolution much less biology or any science for that matter.
For example, let's take the above poster as an example of a creationist who has no idea what they're talking about:
"No transitional fossils have ever been found"
Say hello to Onychonycteris finneyi, the earliest known ancestor to the bat and widely considered to be the "link" between terrestial mammals and bats:
"The clawed bat part refers to one of the many intermediate features that make Onychonycteris the most primitive bat species ever described. In all current and prior fossil species of bats, most of the digits in the wing lack the claws typical of mammalian digits. That's not the case here: all Onychonycteris digits end in claws. The hind limbs are also unusually long, as is the tail, but the limb contains a feature that suggests the presence of a skin flap between the hind limbs and the body.
The relatively short wings and long hindlimbs place Onychonycteris outside of all previous bat species in terms of the ratio between its limbs. In fact, a plot of this ratio puts the fossil species neatly between bats and long-armed creatures like sloths—exactly what would be expected from a species at the base of the bat lineage. The authors argue that the configuration of its limbs, combined with the claws, suggests that it would be powerful climber, able to easily scramble around trees when not flying."
But hey, maybe that's not enough. Well, then how about the horse?
Or maybe that still isn't enough. Well, here's a web page that lists many transitional fossils for all types of veterbrates: link
But the whole idea that creationists have of a "missing link" is rather misguided. While we can find transitional forms its not like we can ever find every single one since evolution is so gradual. For example, here's a picture of a person:
And here's another picture of that same person:
Now, we can find various intermediate steps between this picture and the first one:
But we're never going to find the precise moment where the baby turns into the current, present day form. Same thing with fossils. Its absurd to say that we can find the exact instant that an ape turned into a human. Especially considering that fossilization is an extremely rare phenomena, so rare in fact that we almost never find a complete skeleton of any organism.
Log in to comment