Are you seriously going to question evolution? This is established science.

I believe you don't know anything about evolution. I don't believe you are serious in your desire to learn . IF I'm mistaken go read some Darwin .All of his books are in the public domain .They can be obtained usually in pdf form, free, from The Internet Archive,;

https://archive.org/index.php

If you want to quick version:

Wikipedia : read the whole article.

"Evolution is change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.[1][2] These characteristics are the expressions of genes that are passed on from parent to offspring during reproduction. Different characteristics tend to exist within any given population as a result of mutation, genetic recombination and other sources of genetic variation.[3] Evolution occurs when evolutionary processes such as natural selection (including sexual selection) and genetic drift act on this variation, resulting in certain characteristics becoming more common or rare within a population.[4] It is this process of evolution that has given rise to biodiversity at every level of biological organisation, including the levels of species, individual organisms and molecules.[5][6]

The scientific theory of evolution by natural selection was proposed independently by Charles Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace in the mid-19th century and was set out in detail in Darwin's book On the Origin of Species (1859).[7] Evolution by natural selection was first demonstrated by the observation that more offspring are often produced than can possibly survive. This is followed by three observable facts about living organisms: 1.) traits vary among individuals with respect to their morphology, physiology and behaviour (phenotypic variation), 2.) different traits confer different rates of survival and reproduction (differential fitness) and 3.) traits can be passed from generation to generation (heritability of fitness).[8] Thus, in successive generations members of a population are more likely to be replaced by the progenies of parents with favourable characteristics that have enabled them to survive and reproduce in their respective environments. In the early 20th century, other competing ideas of evolution such as mutationism and orthogenesis were refuted as the modern synthesis reconciled Darwinian evolution with classical genetics, which established adaptive evolution as being caused by natural selection acting on Mendelian genetic variation.[9] "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

. I'm not qualified to teach and have no patience with the disingenuous. Perhaps some of our members may be able and willing to teach you.

@Josh So, if God did not create life, where did life come from?

Even if we never discover the origin of life, and all the discoveries and theories about abiogenesis are found to be wrong, you'd still not be one step closer to proving that life was magically zapped into existence by an invisible sky-fairy. It's not a binary question between evolution and god. And by the way, evolution has nothing to do with abiogenesis.

Why ignore biology, genetics, and geology and look instead to the superstitious scribblings of a mob of bronze age bumpkins who thought the Earth was flat and the sky was a crystal dome?

Kids who might have grown up to discover the real source of life are instead being mentally crippled by idiots sneaking so-called "creation science" and anti-evolutionary horseshit into school science classes.

@Josh: Evolution / Abiogenisis.

Right off the bat you are confusing two concepts. The origin of life with evolution. They are different.

We currently do not have a good idea of how life began on this planet. Abiogenisis is the top theory right now. Scientists have been able to form the elements of life, organic materials, from inorganic materials, in a lab. This, thus far, is the greatest clue we have for the origins of life. There are other competing theories; Transpermia - life on asteroids throughout the universe landed on our planet. Deep sea volcanic vents. Electric Spark, and more. The short answer is "NO ONE KNOWS" The best answer, where the evidence leads is Abiogenisis. The answer that does not answer anything is "Magical Flying God."

Evolution is what happens after life forms on the planet. In every step of the evolutionary process the offspring of the original living creature is a near replica of the parent. Evolutionary changes are extremely slow. A group of species that become isolated from one another can evolve into entirely different species. "Ring Species." A species is identified by their ability to procreate with one another. Evolution is the process by which different kinds of living organisms are thought to have developed and diversified from earlier forms during the history of the earth. Evolution is not goal directed. Evolution is not a process of development from simple to complex. It is a process of natural selection and survival of the fittest.

Survival of the fittest does not mean strongest. It means, those with the ability to adapt. It means those lucky enough not to be wiped out in a pandemic like the black plague. It could mean those who are quick enough to avoid being eaten as prey. There are two theories on why humans walk on two legs. One was to look out above the reeds and the other to keep their heads above the water while digging for clams. We have species of apes that engage in both of these behaviors today. Survival of the fittest means those who are best at surviving.

Natural selection has to do with changes in the genes over time. Giraffes with the longest necks could reach the food and survive. As a result, the breeding pairs had longer necks. Giraffes with shorter necks did not survive and the trait of having a longer neck perpetuated itself. Survival traits are enhanced through natural selection.

Josh - Is there any evidence that we came from apes?

You mean besides the fact that humans ARE apes?

@Josh

1. Evolution evidences and explains the origin of species, it has nothing to do with the origin of life.
2. No one can demonstrate any objective evidence for any deity, thus I disbelieve the claim.
3. Biblical creationism is risible fantasy, that gets the most basic scientific facts wrong, demonstrates no evidence whatsoever, and offers no explanatory power, thus I disbelieve it.
4 argumentum ad ignorantiam is a known common logical fallacy, you are using here by suggesting having no explanation for the origin of life validates your completely unevidenced belief it was created by a deity using unexplained magic.
5. You're also using a false dichotomy fallacy, as we're not limited to two choices, though of course one of the choices you offer is nothing to do with the origins of life, and simply indicates a shocking ignorance of the most basic understanding of evolution. A cliched creationist argument that is frankly embarrassing.

Evolution is a scientific fact evidenced by the scientific theory of evolution, which has been evidenced beyond any reasonable doubt, all the global scientific evidence from over 160 years of scientific study supports it. It's not a question of believing it, it would be comparable to denying the rotundity of the earth to deny it.

Lastly, my atheism has nothing to do with evolution, even though it drives a bus through creationist myths. The simple fact there is no objective evidence for any deity is sufficient reason for me to withhold belief. Now of course, in the incredibly unlikely event evolution were entirely falsified tomorrow, it would NOT evidence creationism at all, or any deity and I would remain an atheist.

@ David Killens

"Yea Cognostic and chimp, I see you sitting over there gloating"

They are not 'gloating' mate....they are engaged in mutual "admiration" the sort of thing English public (i.e Private) schools excel at.... the end product of that evolutionary dead end is Boris Johnson...

So we have so far...

1. Evolution wrongly conflated with abiogenesis.
2. Humans can't have evolved from apes, even though we are apes.
3. An invisible unevidenced and unexplained barrier between micro and macro evolution, that defies all the scientific evidence.

So 3 creationist howlers on the first page, and we can still look forward to "it's not a law, just a theory" and "how come only beneficial mutations survive".

@Josh

"Ok I'll ask another question;

Where did humans come from? Is there any evidence that we came from apes?"

We ARE STILL apes.

And let me add, we did not come from modern apes, we and other modern apes, descended from an earlier ape (or ape like) common ancestor.

But, yes, there is massive evidence that humans evolved from earlier species of apes.

Chromosome 2 in humans, which is a head to head fusion of 2 chromosomes in other apes, on its own, is enough to confirm common ancestry.

Vitamin C pseudogene deactivation in humans is yet another piece of evidence. All other primates have the ability to create their own vitamin C, but humans do not. Yet, we have the identical chromosomal structure for vitamin C production as all the other apes, but part of the process has been interrupted by the deactivation of the GULO gene in humans.

I can list so much more evidence for evolution.

By the way, Francis Collins PHd, an Evangelical Christian, and ex head of the Human Genome Project, says there is enough evidence to confirm common ancestry between humans and other apes using genetica alone, without even needing all the other evidence in other fields.

But what does evolution have to do with atheism? Even if evolution was proven wrong tomorrow, that would NOT provide one shred of evidence that a god exists.