Darwin's Theory Of Evolution - A Theory in Crisis... Apparently

[savvy]

And which problem do you mean? Please don't say, that there aren't fossils from every year since the origin of life.

That is only one problem with it which means there isn't enough scientific evidence to support it. I've posted other problems in this thread.

 

[savvy]

Human's wisdom teeth are believed by anthropologists to be because of our early ancestor's diet of coarse, rough food. Leaves, roots and meat required more chewing power and caused excessive wear on the teeth. The modern diet is more softer foods and since we use forks, spoons and knives there really is no need for wisdom teeth. Besides 35% of people don't even develop wisdom teeth. Claiming wisdom teeth prove humans evolved from apes is quite a leap.

Nice myth busting.

 

[Pat1]

And which problem do you mean? Please don't say, that there aren't fossils from every year since the origin of life.

It's not that there aren't fossils from every year of life so much as the fossils don't support some aspects of evolution.

 

[Kyanin]

Nice myth busting.

I would call this an evidence for evolution: Wo don't need wisdom teeth anymore, so the number of people who envolves it is declining.

I already named some evidence which support Darwin. Of course, it is impossible to advance a completly correct line of evolution as long as we don`t know all extincted species who lived on the earth. We can advance a possibility. If we find new fossils, they maybe will support our theory or we will have have to advance a new. This is what I would call science.

It's not that there aren't fossils from every year of life so much as the fossils don't support some aspects of evolution.

That's the problem in the argumentation of much Anti-Darwinists: They are searching the gap and declare it the one and only evidence that Darwin is wrong. If scientists fill the gap, no problem, you will find a new. Of course, you can do this as long as we aren't able to explain everything in the universe - this means, forever. Nevertheless, from scientific view, evolution in general is the best documented theary we have.

 

[savvy]

It's not that there aren't fossils from every year of life so much as the fossils don't support some aspects of evolution.

True. Evolution is a theory. If enough of it were proven it wouldn't be.

 

[Osteve]

So true.

 

[MrHeinz]

Evolution itself is something I don't disagree with. I don't have a problem with it at all.


http://www.youtube.com/user/AlfredRWallaceID

 

[Honey Bunny]

I'm a bit of an oddball christian, I think that just because you can prove something with science doesn't mean that God didn't create it. I mean just because you can prove how it happened doesn't mean there was no divine intervention. I love science. plus most Christians seem to miss the fact that Adam and Eve were not the first people on earth, they were people god made wanting a perfect world, i mean when their son is cast out of the garden he wanders around and goes to villages and such, those people didn't just magically poof into existence. I've just never seen why Creation and Science have to be separate.

 

[MrHeinz]

I agree with you Honey Bunny. I don't see any reason a person can't believe in both evolution and the bible. I think some people just hate religion and want to create the illusion there is a big conflict between science and religion.

 

[Panacea]

I've just never seen why Creation and Science have to be separate.

Simply because of the natures of the supernatural and natural. Separate, though, doesn't mean they cannot have any relatedness. Some find relatedness in the two. That's what is open to debate.

 

[MrHeinz]

I've seen plenty of debates and they seem to come down to a philosophical discussion rather than scientific. Not enough info on the scientific side so many questions remain unanswered. Many times scientists step outside their field of study and assume the role of philosopher when they don't have a scientific answer. When that happens they lose any authority and I am just as qualified to answer the unanswered questions. That's why I don't have a problem with science or religion. No one has all the answers so it is up to me to sift through what is known and decide for myself what I believe.

 

[Stone]

EVERYONE should care.

The erroneous religious view of the world has a massively damaging effect on the world in several ways:

1) It creates the impression humans are separate from both the animal kingdom and nature. This allows for the justification of environmental destruction.

2) It creates a distrust and disbelief in science as it accepts the unproven and unprovable supernatural world as truth.

3) This disbelief hinders the progression of technology as new scientific discoveries aren't believed (global warming, for example) and new technologies aren't adopted.

4) The belief in God creates a view that God will save us, not ourselves. It separates us from our own actions.

Add advancement of medicine to this list.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolutionary_medicine

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852567/

http://stanmed.stanford.edu/2006summer/evolutionary-medicine.html

http://myweb.lmu.edu/tshanahan/DarMed.html

 

[Stone]

I love how atheists cling to the theory of evolution like it was their bible. I have read this thread and haven't seen the first post concerning anything about evolution, only the bashing of religion. No one has mentioned that the theory of evolution is actually made up of theories and sub-theories. No one has mentioned them and which particular one they believe. The reason: when the lay person talks about science they are usually talking out their ass. Which is what is going on here.

That being said let me clue the Einsteins in on something they must be unaware of and that is Evolution does not deal with the origin of life. Evolution only deals with how life changes over time,once life already exists. Yet atheists clammer on about "science."
Give me a break. Most scientists are mostly concerned with what they are researching. Not every scientific discipline has to do with the origins of life or trying to prove religion wrong. Many scientists aren't that concerned with it. Only scam artists atheists trying to sell books go on about this nonsense to make money off the rubes who buy their books.

I love how atheists cling to the theory of evolution like it was their bible.

It's an element of science, not a religion.
And many Christians do accept science as a study of reality.

I have read this thread and haven't seen the first post concerning anything about evolution, only the bashing of religion.

Let's be specific......the bashing of the fundamentalist mentality that rejects reality and the damage it can cause when embraced in education.

No one has mentioned that the theory of evolution is actually made up of theories and sub-theories.

Indeed.....but that's rather obvious.

The reason: when the lay person talks about science they are usually talking out their ass. Which is what is going on here.

And you're here for what purpose?

That being said let me clue the Einsteins in on something they must be unaware of and that is Evolution does not deal with the origin of life.

That's 100% correct.
The concept of evolution begins with first life.

Yet atheists clammer on about "science."

So?
Want to hear from someone not an atheist?
Let me help you

Give me a break.

Well....that wouldn't be very scientific, would it, now?

Most scientists are mostly concerned with what they are researching.

It has to do with their profession and how they get paid for the jobs they hold, yes...so?

Not every scientific discipline has to do with the origins of life or trying to prove religion wrong.

Indeed....so?

Many scientists aren't that concerned with it.

Most are, though.
Some of that indirectly as the scientific laws that apply to most fields of research also apply to the field of evolution. But even that picture isn't as clear as possible. Elements of evolution also include the geology of the Earth and it's geography.
Once denial sets in on one factor of reality, it impacts the understanding of other elements.
Denial is the enemy of truth.
Creation science and intelligent design parade as 'truths' but are lies in the scientific sense and destructive to the health and welfare of civilizations...especially those of a technological nature, such as the US because they misrepresent reality and limit our success in technological advancement.
Creation science and intelligent design could almost be considered potential paths leading to an extinction event.....if not of man....at least modern civilization.

Only scam artists atheists trying to sell books go on about this nonsense to make money off the rubes who buy their books.

What 'books' do you mean?

 

[Stone]

I am a Christian and don't have a problem with evolution. I think atheists like to imagine Christians don't believe at all in evolution but like it was mentioned earlier it has little if nothing to do with the origins of life. Evolution doesn't really explain alot about what causes evolution. Something from nothing is pretty much all it claims. Sounds like magic to me but then even magic requires a magician.

Your post is what is called a non sequitur.
Your logic doesn't follow.
You claim what you deny.

it has little if nothing to do with the origins of life

Evolution doesn't really explain alot about what causes evolution. Something from nothing is pretty much all it claims.

 

[Stone]

The theory of evolution does have its problems. In recent years computers have been used to test theories including ones in evolutionary biology. What computers have basically shown is the neat evolutionary trees that get drawn up are based on imaginary relations of similarity and difference that have more to do with the human mind's tendency to perceive patterns than with the raw biological data. When the characteristics of different living things are put in numerical form and the computer is asked to sort them based on their similarities and differences, the computer can find any number of ways of sorting that have just as much support in the data as those drawn up by humans to fit an evolutionary tree. The information is against evolution just as much as it is for it. The theory of evolution seems to be the result of the pattern-craving human mind. When the data is looked at objectively the result looks more like a shrub instead of a tree.

The theory of evolution does have its problems

No, not problems....corrections as new information is learned.
Since science isn't a religion, it's not rigidly structured as a belief system and can be corrected as needed.

The information is against evolution just as much as it is for it.

Unknown information/knowledge isn't a proof of anything other than the element of being unknown.
You are talking nonsense.

When the data is looked at objectively the result looks more like a shrub instead of a tree.

That doesn't infer anything other than evolution is more complex than once thought.

 

[Stone]

Good post. Very informative.

Obviously not

 

[Stone]

That isn't the only problem the theory of evolution has. It was once thought evolution happened gradually but the fossil record doesn't support this idea. If this had been the case there would be plenty of "in between" species that show this but there isn't. Of course this was reconciled by claiming that evolution happened in bursts not gradually. This reminds me of the about face that was done when evidence shown the universe had a beginning instead of being eternal like science taught for many years.

It was once thought evolution happened gradually but the fossil record doesn't support this idea.

In geological terms, some evolution events happen faster than others.
This is where geology and environmental conditions come into play.
The Earth does not change geologically at a given rate. And evolution is driven by environmental change and life's response to the challenges from both that change and the competition within that changing environment.

If this had been the case there would be plenty of "in between" species that show this but there isn't.

As more and more fossil finds accumulate, not only do gaps get filled, more gaps become apparent waiting to be filled and likely will if the fossil record in question has been preserved or preserved and not destroyed because of geological activity.
That's a process of continually providing proof.
Of course, a fossil record that's over 3 billion years old is likely to be missing specimens due to geological activity. Missing sections only proves sections are missing, not that they didn't exist.

Of course this was reconciled by claiming that evolution happened in bursts not gradually.

Geological activity, extinction events and an imperfect fossil record led some paleontologists to believe that.
There is some thought that the Cambrian 'Explosion' wasn't as rapid as once thought.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambrian_explosion
excerpt:

Other analyses, some more recent and some dating back to the 1970s, argue that complex animals similar to modern types evolved well before the start of the Cambrian.[SUP][16][/SUP][SUP][17][/SUP][SUP][18][/SUP] There has also been intense debate whether there was a genuine "explosion" of modern forms in the Cambrian and, to the extent that there was, how it happened and why it happened then.[SUP][19][/SUP]

You probably won't read the link. It's for the benefit of those actually interested in the issue.

This reminds me of the about face that was done when evidence shown the universe had a beginning instead of being eternal like science taught for many years.

That's why the Scientific Method is important......to correct mistakes.

Likely, your problem is that you can't justify your religious position on Genesis, in a scientific manner, and have to deny reality in order to keep your faith.

 

[Stone]

Yes, but this isn't the first time the theory of evolution has been hijacked. Darwin's idea that evolution means: the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life eventually led to Nazism and the Jewish holocaust - even though Darwin himself would have been appalled at the thought.

. Darwin's idea that evolution means: the preservation of favored races in the struggle for life

As proven in your thread in the Religion thread, that's not true at all.

 

[Stone]

I think it is a game people are playing to search out these religious threads and then enter the fray

Definitely is a pattern

Indeed.


But it's just as much crap there as it is here.
Same old....'repeat a lie often enough and it will be accepted as truth' argument.

 

[Stone]

I think they're all the same person.

I'm still relatively new here at OTZ, but the same gang pops up with group comments supporting each other in the same manner.
Couldn't they at least be a little more creative ( pun )?