Question Simple question. Is evolution real?

Page 4 - Seeking answers about space? Join the Space community: the premier source of space exploration, innovation, and astronomy news, chronicling (and celebrating) humanity's ongoing expansion across the final frontier.
Jun 1, 2020
FYI. In posts 1-74, I found at least 5 references to *Adam*. For some, perhaps the Bible should be translated now as Ardipithecus for references to Adam or Adampithecus, the Quran too. A simple observation here by me. The evolution paradigm is qualitative (much more interpretation), not quantitative as the heliocentric solar system paradigm, e.g. predictions of Io eclipses at Jupiter or phases of Venus or the upcoming 21-Dec close conjunction of Saturn and Jupiter, about 6 arcminute angular separation in the sky. Does the evolution paradigm document quantitative calculations and predictions showing all the changes required for the body mass of an amoeba to a eventually evolve into a Brachiosaur or a mammoth? My answer is no. Another observation by me. How many living fossils from the Precambrian are documented today showing no evolutionary change, and how many examples are needed to falsify the paradigm claiming these *early Precambrian life* are common ancestors to all life found in the fossil record through the Cenozoic?
The fossil evidence was never a key element of evolutionary models. In the 19th century, very few fossils were known. Today, we have thousands of tiny fragments, like teeth, but not full skeletons that are millions of years old, not even close. [It would be interesting to know the age of the oldest full skeleton. Perhaps 100k years?]

The issue becomes what is happening in the overlap zones where paleoanthropology overlaps evolution models, or religion for that matter. The overlap is where one set of objective evidence from an allied science can either support one direction or redirect another scientific field of endeavor. Fossil evidence does influence evolution models, especially if they falsify any claims within the model. The discovery of Ardi simply moved the age back a bit for the earliest hominin and made evolutionary trees more "bushy".

Adam is a unique character. In my view, FWIW and I'm open to other views, is that our planet developed a remarkably great set of genes/DNA/RNA etc. via evolutionary processes to serve as to what the dirt ( dust and clay) of the land could produce in order to receive that special gift known as a "living soul". This could be the same method used for other evolutionary advanced and extremely fortunate other planets.
Feb 18, 2020
OK, to save you the bother:

If we can exclude extra terrestrial intervention, and independent occurrence of similar species as in monkeys, apes and humans, then is not evolution a simple YES / NO question?

Let me please remind all concerned, the above is the subject of this thread. My personal judgment is that any differentiation between "evolution" and "macroevolution" may be a semantic quibble. It is for you to decide.