I didn`t ask for your theological explanation , it seems you evolutionist nimbwits
That's rude, and uncalled for. I thought we were having a conversation, but why insult each other?
avoid to give a decessive answer , and try to explain all vaguely , but than jump on the troat of true believers . Does the evolutionist theory claim , that all animals evolved from something . I`m speaking about the maine species , fish , reptiles , birds . Does it say that at least one of this tree is a consequence of the evolution
Well, the evolutionary tree is one of the logical conclusions made from the original Darwinian postulate that life is being diversified by the biological evolution. So, yes, the tree, or the lines of descent, is (are) a part of the theory of biological evolution. Species, genera, orders, phyla etc. can be placed into this tree, and there are, of course, scientific grounds for doing that (the degree of similarity in the sequence of nucleotides in the DNA, etc.).
of a specie and transformation from fish to reptile and from reptile to birds.
Fishes are placed "higher" than reptiles because of several reasons: their fossils are older; they are morphologically and genetically closer to more primitive Chordata. Reptile fossils are less ancient, and the reptiles are farther, morphologically and genetically (DNA-wise), from the primitive Chordata, but closer to birds (for example, some reptiles have a heart that consists of four chambers, like in birds). There are fossils of Archeopterix that look like a form that is intermediate between reptile and birds. Also, there are fishes that resemble Amphibians in that they have gills and lungs (Latimeria or Coelacanth). Therefore, we have evidence strongly suggesting that Amphibia evolved from fishes, then Reptilia from amphibians, and then birds from reptiles.
How did the evolutionist idea that people came from apes , or are evolved apes come to be?
The sequence of nucleotides in the DNA of Homo sapiens is 97% identical with chimpanzees. There exist multiple fossils that allow us to suggest the existence of forms of life that were intemediate between Homo sapiens and non-human primates.
Are this claims of evolution yes or no.
The theory of biological evolution is a scientific theory. Like any other scientific theory, it is never a revelation given to us once and for all ages. It exists because it has never been scientifically disproved, and there is an overwhelming evidence supporting it. Sort of like before Einstein, there existed this Newtonian mechanics, which stated that any object, unless affected by a force, will keep moving in a straight line at a constant speed without acceleration, etc. That was not any kind of revelation - that was simply a set of statements that, taken together, explain the natural world to the best of the scientists' capacity. Before Newton, there was a different mechanics (Aristotelian), which claimed that without a "cause," there is no movement but rest. Newton's theory dismissed it though, and became accepted because it fit better with the newly acquired evidence. Similarly, before Darwin, there was a special creation theory of Linnaeus. Darwin's evolutionary theory replaced it though - and again, simply because Darwin's theory explains the natural world better, fits with the evidence we have now better than Linnaeus's theory would.
Be honest , again I`m not asking for your theological belief but about the theory of evolution , and evolutionist claims.
There are no "beliefs" in science. We use this term, but it is not, strictly speaking, correct when applied to scientific hypotheses and theories. We (scientists) do not, in fact, "believe" any hypothesis or theory. Science exists and develops because scientists keep proposing various guess-like, tentative explanations of the physical reality.
Another question to wich I don`t ask response right now is this : Do you evolutionist are of the opinion that Adam and Eve were in fact many humans and people , and that God created more than two persons in the beggining.
According to the evolutionary theory, the thing that evolves is a biological POPULATION. So, no, according to the evolutionary theory, it cannot be that from a population of apes, suddenly, in one instant, two "definitely-no-longer-apes-but-most-certainly-humans" appear. The evolutionary theory sees the emergence of new species as a very slow, inconspicuous process that may take millions of years, without strict borders between the ancestor species and the new species.
I request urgent answer to the evolutionist question.Stop running away from question.
Nobody is running anywhere. I am always happy to explain biology to any student who wants to listen.