"Since you have dismissed my examples of "so called" evolution and asked for "proof" I have to assume that your real agenda is anti-science, and as I have never met anyone who is anti-science for no reason, I assume again that you are religious and attacking science because you think it conflicts with the bible."
Thanks for the reply Zippelk, finally... It's been a great discussion.
Firstly, I want to point out that I am not anti-science at all, nor am I attacking science. I have worked as a scientist for many years. The theory of evolution is just that, a theory. If you're willing to take a look, there is more and more scientific evidence that disproves the theory of evolution.
Secondly, if I have an 'agenda', it is to seek out the truth.
The reason I dismissed your examples is because they're not examples of evolution in the true sense of the word. They are all examples of natural selection. Whilst I agree that they lead to change in gene frequency and expression (which many claim evolution to be), evolution is more than that. Evolution is the theory used to describe the development of humankind from molecules. For this to occur, new information needs to be added to the genome. Natural selection is the process where organisms with certain characteristics are better able to survive under certain selection pressure and this process does not drive the molecules to humankind evolution. It does not have that power since it cannot add new information to the genome.
To make the point clearer of how your examples do not support the theory of evolution, I will go through them one by one.
1. Varroa in bees. In this example, in the presence of varroa, varroa resistant individuals are able to survive and breed whilst those susceptible are not. In this classic example of natural selection, the bees have not evolved at all since varroa resistant bees were present in the first place. All that happens is that varroa susceptible ones are wiped out. In so doing, the genetic diversity contained within the varroa susceptible bees is lost and consequently, from a population perspective, leads to a loss of information in the gene pool, which is the opposite to evolution. The bees started out as bees, still are bees and will continue to be bees. If you could provide evidence that they had evolved into some other kind of creature, a bird or something, then I might believe the theory.
2. Breeds of dogs. There is no doubt that breeds of dogs found today are derived from common ancestry (wild dogs). Again, this is an example of natural selection rather than evolution. Certain traits in dogs are selected against and I agree that it doesn't take a lot of time to create a new breed. In this process, breeders eliminate certain genes and consequently, pure breeds do not have the genetic diversity that the original wild dogs (wolves if you like) had. This also is the exact opposite of evolution.
3. Herbicide resistant crops. Ditto. Plants that are able to withstand herbicide application survive and are used in future breeding. Others that are susceptible die. Obviously, the genetic diversity contained within the herbicide sensitive individuals is lost.
4. Flu mutation. I agree that the flu mutates however this is not an example of evolution either. Mutations never produce new information and only operate on the information that's there. Mutations in viruses result in either horizontal change where the virus changes but has the same amount of genetic information as before or destructive change where the virus has less genetic information. Either way, the result doesn't show how one kind of organism could change into another kind.
5. Peppered moths. This is a great story about a moth that turned into a moth. The original data used to provide evidence for change in the population of the two different moth types was manipulated and is nothing but a fraud. The moths didn't even rest on the bark of trees during the day. Never the less, recent evidence has confirmed changes in the population of the two different colour types since industrialisation which represents natural selection. These moths are still moths and will continue to be moths.