On evolution

I wish to refute a few myths that exist about biological evolution. One is that the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics disapproves evolution because we (the earth) are a closed system without external energy and so that disorder will increase over time disallowing the complexity of evolution, But, the earth isn’t an isolated system or closed system. It receives energy through the sun. For example, if it was a closed system then plants wouldn’t grow but they do so because of energy from the sun. Then there are arguments that there are no intermediate” fossils between species. Well, there is Haasiophis terrasanctus, which is a primitive marine snake with well-developed hind limbs. Australopithecus afarensis, a very early homind and transitional form/intermediate species. This species has a humerofemoral ratio, or length of humerus divided by length of femur, of 84.6 compared to 71.8 for humans, and 97.8 and 101.6 for two species of chimpanzee. Indeed, since that the ratio is about halfway between that of chimps and humans is evidence (among other evidence) of it being much closer evolution wise to us then chimps are and that it is an early transitional form among hominds. Other transititional forms are Pelycodus frugivorus, an early lemur type primate. Then there are the supposed human footprints in the middle of dinosaur footprints or the so called Paluxy man tracks. Analyses of these tracks indicate that the alleged human tracks are elongate, metatarsal dinosaur tracks--made by dinosaurs that, at least at times, impressed their soles and heels as they walked. When the digit marks of such tracks (which are common in the Paluxy Riverbed) are subdued by one or more factors (erosion, sediment infilling, or mud-collapse), they often resemble giant human prints. On another point, not all mutations are harmful as some allege as a problem with evolution, indeed most mutations don’t get noticed since they have no noticed effect on survivability. Negative mutations usually don’t survive that long and have limited impact on the genetic pool. Lastly, to examine the common argument that evolution is dangerous. Well, that evolution is dangerous or not has ABSOLUTELY nothing to do if it is true or not. This is logic 101. Even if you believe that evolution is absolutely horrible for society, for our survival etc then that isn’t an argument that it is true or not. At best it is an argument should people or society should not believe it is true. Was evolution used as an excuse by the Nazis to promote their cause? Yes, but so was belief in God. Unfortunately many Nazis also justified their actions by saying they were fulfilling the will of God. Al Qaida commits violence in the name of God, does that committing violence prove God isn’t true? Frankly, the Nazis knowledge of evolution was limited at best Although the products of evolution, cheetah kills zebra, can be very violent that is though not the whole story. Indeed, in evolution cooperation is often rewarded. Members of a tribe cooperate and thereby increases the odds of members of the group to survive along with the group as a whole. This is the roots of primitive morality. Evolution is not prescriptive but it is descriptive. It describes facts. It does not say why something should be true or happen but explains/states how it happens. It describes processes. It is fine to argue against evolution based on science but to argue against it based on not wanting to believe it so it must not be true is a misunderstanding of science and logic 101