Jerry, i am not sure what you are trying to accomplish here. If you need a primer on evolution, it might be better to look at the National Center for Science Education or something similar.
It doesn't matter what anyone "thinks" . As an "alleged" Scientific Theory, it must be defined specifically to then be Validated or Falsified.
What is your thinking about a scientific theory? Are you saying that a theory becomes fact after adequate evidence? I think you mean something else, but I want to make sure.
You have Zero "Scientific Evidence"....See: Definition Above. Unless you can show Life from Non-Life.....?? You can't even show "One" DNA/RNA/Functional Protein spontaneously form "Naturally" from the "Building Blocks".
Non life to life is outside evolutionary theory.
I don't need a primer, just trying to see if anyone here is willing to give a non-biased view on what the science says.
Reification (Fallacy)----"science" doesn't say anything, it's not alive.
The Theory of evolution is utterly bankrupt and leaves it followers with nothing more than a barrage of Logical Fallacies and enough pseudo-science to make 13th Century Alchemy and Phlogiston blush.
Oh and by the way, the Elephant is still in the Room; and he's still eating....
‘General Theory of Evolution’, defined by the evolutionist Kerkut as ‘the theory that all the living forms in the world have arisen from a single source which itself came from an inorganic form.’
Kerkut, G.A., Implications of Evolution, Pergamon, Oxford, UK, p. 157, 1960.
As for yet another ad hoc hypothesis (PE, Convergent et al)...."random mutation and natural selection"----- was put together with neolithic incompetence as an "end run" around Kerkut's definition out of sheer incoherent desperation; It's as dead as abiogenesis.
Meta Information (Instructions). This is Information about the Information. About 2% of Entire Genome consists of the Protein-Coding Genes with 98% devoted to Regulatory "Meta-Information". It's like a Recipe for a Cake: Ingredients (Protein-Coding Genes) List of Instructions (Meta Information).
DNA in humans (about 2 meters in length per Cell) is packed and coiled into 4 different levels of chromatin structure inside the nucleus. Each of these levels carry the "Meta Information". In fact, for every molecule of protein producing machinery there are 50 molecules of regulatory machinery.
evolution says that "Mutations" are the foundation mechanism to get from Bacteria to Boy Scouts. hmmm
Mutation: a spelling error or a change in the sequence of letters (deletion, inversion, swap, insertion, ect)
Question: If a Mutation occurs in the Protein Coding Region....How on GOD'S Green Earth are you getting Matching and Functional Corresponding Mutations in the Regulatory Instructions (over 50 on a Good Day!)?
Or better said: You have a List of Ingredients for a Pineapple Upside Down Cake and the Instructions for a Unicycle and your telling me that the cake turned out perfect?
It's probably the reason why Drosophila, after years of Radiation-Induced Mutations, has Non-Functional Wings/Antenna/Legs et al growing out its Eyes/Back and Tail! And it's still a fly!
Ernst Mayr Professor of Zoology at Harvard University...
The occurrence of genetic monstrosities by mutation, for instance the homeotic mutant in Drosophila, is well substantiated, but they are such evident freaks that these monsters can be designated only as 'hopeless.' They are so utterly unbalanced that they would not have the slightest chance of escaping elimination through stabilizing selection. Giving a thrush the wings of a falcon does not make it a better flier. Indeed, having all the other equipment of a thrush, it would probably hardly be able to fly at all. It is a general rule, of which every geneticist and breeder can give numerous examples, that the more drastically a mutation affects the phenotype, the more likely it is to reduce fitness. To believe that such a drastic mutation would produce a viable new type, capable of occupying a new adaptive zone, is equivalent to believing in miracles.
Ernst Mayr, Populations, Species, and Evolution, p.253
Pierre Grasse: Editor of the 28-volume "Traite de Zoologie" Chair of Evolution at Sorbonne University.......
"This logical scheme is, however, unacceptable: first, because its major premise is neither obvious nor general; second, because its conclusion does not agree with the facts. No matter how numerous they may be, mutations do not produce any kind of evolution."
Pierre Grasse PhD
'‘My recent book resulted from many years of intense study. This involved a complete re-evaluation of everything I thought I knew about evolutionary genetic theory. It systematically examines the problems underlying classic neo-Darwinian theory. The bottom line is that Darwinian theory fails on every level. It fails because: 1) mutations arise faster than selection can eliminate them; 2) mutations are overwhelmingly too subtle to be “selectable”; 3) “biological noise” and “survival of the luckiest” overwhelm selection; 4) bad mutations are physically linked to good mutations, so that they cannot be separated in inheritance (to get rid of the bad and keep the good). The result is that all higher genomes must clearly degenerate.'
John Sanford PhD Geneticist Cornell University (Inventor of the 'Gene Gun')
Epigenetics renders all of this but a laughing stalk