Did earth evolved?

[fast]

Yes.

Earth evolved.

why? what the reason? what the caused it? what the goal for evolving?

Physical processes actualized in accordance to the being-independent laws of nature inherent to our multi-verse.

 

[James Brown]

Yes or no. Or, yes and no. Depending on how you want to define your terms. There are better words for the making of planets, like "formed" for example. You probably selected "evolved" because you're fishing for a way to say that evolution is not enough to explain life and so it takes God to make it work.

why is it, in our solar system ONLY one planet where life can born out of nothingness?

Like a lot of things, it comes down to chemistry, physics, and some luck. Take the Earth, with it's current mix of chemical elements, and move it out past Jupiter, and life as we know it won't evolve--at least not to the abundance we see here on our planet--because it's too cold. Life as we know it needs liquid water, so on a world that's too hot or too cold to have abundant and stable bodies of liquid water, life can't evolve. We're lucky the Earth is located where it is, in what astronomers call the Goldilocks Zone, where water can be liquid.

Elsewhere in the solar system are some candidates for liquid water, such as under the crust of Mars and beneath the ice of Jupiter's moon Europa, and where there's liquid water there's the possibility of finding life. And there are trillions of stars elsewhere in the universe, each with their own rosette of planets, some of which are, by the laws of probability, bound to be found in their star's Goldilocks Zone.

Syed, you're welcome to join us in the search for life elsewhere in the universe. I believe it's out there waiting to be discovered. It's truly an exciting time.

 

[DBT]

why is it, in our solar system ONLY one planet where life can born out of nothingness?

It wasn't out of ''nothingness' - instead - complex chemistry fueled by a source of energy. Nor do we know that ours is the only planet in the solar system that has life. Europa is a good candidate with it's huge ocean beneath the ice. Mars may have had life in the past before it dried out, maybe still has deep underground. Even Venus shows some tentative evidence of the presence of microbes high in its atmosphere where temperature is more moderate. But as it stands, we don't have enough information to say one way or the other.

 

[Keith&Co.]

And if so, why are there still monkeys?

- - - Updated - - -



Every time a new human child is born.

but human child still human no changed occur

You're using such a slippery definition of 'evolution' then any change qualifies, so any difference between a human and their offspring qualifies as a 'evolution.'

You can't switch out your uses of 'change' when you don't like the answer.

 

[Underseer]

Syed, this is unrelated to evolution.

If you have a problem with accretion, you are welcome to contest all the scientific papers that have been thus far published on the subject, but I rather doubt you'll bother to read any of them.

I suspect that your real motive behind this is that you hope if you can somehow disprove accretion, that doing so will somehow prove that the universe was created by magic, specifically magic from your deity.

It doesn't work like that. Even if you could disprove evolution and accretion (and you can't because we have evidence for it), that still would not prove magic. If you want to prove magic, you have to prove magic. If you want to prove that your invisible friend created the universe with magic, then you're going to have to provide evidence of your invisible friend, then provide evidence of your invisible friend creating life, planets, the universe, etc.

If you have no evidence of your invisible friend creating life, planets, the universe, etc., then you have no valid reason to believe that these things were created by your invisible friend.

If you have no evidence that your invisible friend actually exists, then you have no valid reason to believe that your invisible friend exists.

Trying to disprove something else will not prove what you are trying to prove. It doesn't work like that. It never worked like that.