evolution

To further enrich the discussion, could you cite at least some of the bases of Darwin's theory of evolution? Would it be proper to assume that Darwin is your favorite evolution theorist? If yes, why? Thanks, bamabride!;)

Darwin's theory is actually the 'Theory of Natural Selection,' Evolution is the resulting process. If you want the short course try;

http://evolution.berkeley.edu

Thanks for the very useful link, Chiang_mai_boy!;)

I've read that link, all it says is thus and thus is what happened. And no support! Of course so many believe the theory/assumption to be proven and fact, who needs to support it. Most folks don't even know what the theory is.. nor the difference between it and natural selection.. here's just one example: We so often hear how bacteria developing resistance to antibiotics is a PROOF of evolution.. but all it is, is natural selection of traits "already present" not the growing or evolving of "new traits" or "new species"/new life. The antibiotic kills off the nonresistant bacteria, and the resistant bacteria multiplies. This is natural selection (of traits*already present*) long believed before the stretch proposed by Mr. Darwin and those who have taken it so much farther after him.. The evolution theory/assumption is just another belief.. one filled with lots of weird mythical creatures, like the Greek satyrs, half one thing, half another.. Answer me Mr. Dawkins (most famous evolutionist today) how did the land cow/whale survive all those thousands/millions/billions of years it was no longer efficient as a cow, but not yet efficient as a whale?? Best case scenario.. it might've.. it could've.. maybe/ imagine this.. That's the whole theory in a nutshell. [The state enforced belief/philosophy.]
- We need more evolution taught! To include the many (many) questions and problems with the theory, which now, however is suppressed. Here's a brief list of more of those problems and questions:
www.inner-monastery.com/evolution.html
..have a good day!:)

I definitely agree that "We need more evolution taught" in order to "include the many (many) questions and problems with the theory, which now, however is suppressed," especially since it could potentially lead to a more enlightened discussion and better understanding of such a controversial topic.

Thanks a lot for openly sharing your thoughts and feelings with regard to evolution and for providing that very interesting link!

Have a good day, too, and Happy myLotting, flowerchilde!;)

Evolution got many flaws and is not accurate. You can't say it has lots of basis into it.

Thanks a lot for openly sharing your sentiments as regards evolution, xd14keilrisker! Enjoy the holidays and Happy myLotting!;)

For further enlightenment, could it be possible for you to cite some of the pieces of evidence that you've mentioned, which disprove evolution? Thanks!;)

...there are 70+ ways of dating the earth.. many suggest a much younger earth than the millions/now billions/soon trillions of years needed for evolution to have occurred. There's but a handful of ways of dating the earth which suggest this great time span. And there are just as many ways of dating the earth which actually agree (yes agree) with the biblical time frame..
- Actually, since Mr Darwin's day, we have been able to look into the inner workings of "the cell" and have seen that it is like a great metropolis in its scope and networking (and couldn't have possibly evolved, no matter how much time is allowed).. and we have discovered the DNA strands in all living things.. The program. Now when someone shows me a program (and computer) which evolved into being, all on its own, why then they'll have something.. or what about the lowly and humble bird, more intricate and efficient than our jumbo jets.. show me how the jumbo jet came together and came to be.. all on its own, and I'll believe the bird did too. Mr. Darwin's evolution theory is outdated.. we need to move the debate on to "what sort of intelligence was involved in origins?" But the cons and questions of this theory are suppressed.. And like every untrue thing, its motto is "there is no other opinion" (allowed).

Do you think that there's something wrong when "these people worked to [sic] hard to get evolution into textbooks and schools?" If you do, could you kindly share it with us?

Thanks a lot for sharing your views and Happy myLotting, oneandonemakesix!;)

Thanks for the clarification, Chiang_Mai_boy. I'll try to check the works of Dr. Francis Collins to further my understanding of evolution.

Sorry there is no missing link. The science of Comparative Genomics shows that the human genome diverged from the chimpanzee 4.5 million years ago. That is when we became human. There is nothing missing so there is no missing link.

well, the most immediate ancestors of humans are definitely primates, the origin of life was first seen in oceans, in deep oceans, as there was no ozone layer and uv rays could reach the earth and then with time organisms evolved that could live on land. so the first organisms that evolved on earth were those that used to live in water

Thanks a lot for that interestingly valuable piece of information about evolution, gharinder!

Happy myLotting!;)

..Clarification: it is believed by some, the human genome diverged from the chimpanzee 4.5 million/billion/trillion years ago.. There are plenty of scientists which do not believe in the theory of evolution.. And if we listen to the debates, rather than one side, the "Intelligent Design" theorists are ahead by a mile when it comes to both logic and evidence. But still the band plays on.. it's proven.. it's fact.. If ya say it long enough, why that's what makes it true.
- As far as missing links, they have a handful of particles.. No liovng links found, ever. No fossil links found.. just desperate attempts, where part is found here, and another part ten miles away.. weird things like that! I don't call that science.
- The human genome proves evolution as an origin of life, or even species, cannot occur. The DNA strands are the program. The information. Where does information come from? Programs?

Thanks a lot for sharing your inputs as regards evolution, flowerchilde! Happy myLotting!;)

Thanks a lot for sharing your unique view and Happy myLotting!;)

Thanks a lot and Happy myLotting!;)

Thanks a lot for sharing your opinion on the matter!

Happy myLotting, sarahruthbeth22!;)

I truly appreciate your fine contribution to this discussion, gharinder.

Thanks a lot and Happy myLotting!;)

There is a big reason to disbelief that primates are our ancestors. The reason is that is a BIG lie. The theory is not so accurate. And there are many reason why human do not come form primates. That theory is a mere speculation.

^Your claim that evolution "is a BIG lie," "is not so accurate," or "is a mere speculation" seems really interesting.

To be clear and for our enlightenment, though, can you share some of the "many reason why human do not come form primates?"

Thanks a lot in advance and Happy myLotting!;)

To be honest, drannhh, I haven't had the opportunity to read or watch Scopes Monkey Trial yet, but I surely want to read and watch it to understand better essentially where you're coming from.

Who's its author and who directed the movie version, if I may ask?

For our enlightenment, why do you say or prefer to believe that your ancestors are "Reptilians, maybe, but not apes?"

Just to clarify and further enrich this discussion, too, since you clearly said that "I never cared much for Darwin, actually but neither do I buy any of other prevailing theories" and "It would be better if people just postulated their ideas without either science or religion trying to shove their pet theories down everyone else's throats," would you be so kind to share what your beliefs are, if any, in so far as the origin of our species is concerned, at least?

Thanks a lot for your substantial contribution to this discussion and Happy myLotting!;)

Stanley Kramer directed what is probably the best film version of this story in 1960 with Spencer Tracy and Fredric March acting. Also, there is a lot of information about the case on Wikipedia:

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

It is a difficult and complicated piece of history, but I think very important. If this were science, I should be happy to share my personal views, but it would be impossible to do so without veering off into religion and politics and those are two subject I prefer not to discuss in this kind of setting.

My comment about "Reptilians" was meant to be a humorous reference to a book by David Icke called Children of the Matrix, the content of which is not completely unrelated to the kinds of issues brought up in the Monkey Trials. Happy myLotting to you, too!

I perfectly understand, drannhh.

Anyway, thanks a lot for the clarification and for the very interesting link.

Happy myLotting!;)

I must agree that some factions may surely not like what you've just stated.

Nevertheless, thanks a lot for your significant contribution to this discussion!

Happy myLotting, RosieS57!;)

I read recently that scientists had managed to recover some Neanderthal DNA and that it was quite unlike the same DNA sequence in us. This possibly indicates that Neanderthals did not evolve from us, but where a separate branch. I can't cite a reference for this at the moment but I'll try to do so later on.

Thanks a lot for that interestingly relevant piece of info, jwfarrimond. I would truly appreciate any other data you could provide to further broaden the scope of this discussion and, hopefully, deepen my understanding of evolution.

Again, thanks for your participation and Happy myLotting!;)