Howdy!
The probablity of charles Darwin laiding the foundation of Evolution that became a subliminal suggest or hypotheses that the Homo Sapien is an offspring of Extraterrestial life in ''Theme'' only.

GMT -7

 

Is that a statment or a question?

"laiding the foundation" ???

 

Yeah I'm confused too.

Dave

 

Two of the key facts that underlie Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection are that individuals of a given species vary greatly and many of the traits that account for the differences are inherited.

It is a great irony that it is for these reasons that a great percentage of the human population does not understand his theory, and that this will continue to be true for a very long long time.

 

steveb,

It is a great irony that it is for these reasons that a great percentage of the human population does not understand his theory, and that this will continue to be true for a very long long time.

You are right about that. His theory explains why weeds take over your lawn during dry periods. It does not explain how inert substances organize themselves into a electro-chemical-mechanical entity that can sustain itself and reproduce. And during this time integrate itself into a biosystem that somehow also came into being. Yes, he has a lot of explaining to do. He should start be showing that things become hightly organized from chaos all by themselves, supposedly with no outside help. It is pathetic how many smart people embrace his theory.

Ratch

 

Beliefs are to facts as faith is to knowledge.

People with faith discussing topic with people with knowledge is like a baud rate mismatch, it can only create garbled communications and nether side can make sense of the other.

Which side is using the wrong baud rate depends on if you are a person of faith or a person of knowledge, there can be no winning of arguments or converting someone here, just personal choices or changes of mind to be made by oneself.

Unfortunately persons too young to make personal decisions tend to 'inherit' both beliefs and knowledge of ones nearby environment so both faith and knowledge are often passed on as part of ones upbringing. It's as hard if not harder to unlearn a belief as it is to acquire new knowledge.

Lefty

 

leftyretro,
cjdelphi,

I hate it when people bring religious arguments into scientific discussions. Darwinism falls on the scientific merits of the theory and the facts. It doesn't take anything else to disprove it.

Ratch

 

steveb,
Yes, he has a lot of explaining to do. He should start be showing that things become hightly organized from chaos all by themselves, supposedly with no outside help.

According to your logic, Newton has a lot of explaining to do too. He should have figured out Maxwell's Equations and Einstein's General Relativity.

It is pathetic how many smart people embrace his theory.

Ratch

There is a difference between embracing his theories and saying that they are capable of explaining all mysteries about evolution and the origin of life. I don't know of any smart people that embrace scientific theories to the extent that it becomes pathetic. That's a Catch 22 since doing so would automatically make them stupid.

 

Darwin proposed a hypothesis, DNA and a lot of other information has come to light long after his death, including how mutations occur.

He was not speculating on the origin of life, only how changes occur. So far the evidence supports his hypothesis.

You can't have it both ways, you make a religious argument, then complain it isn't scientific enough.

The really odd part, IMO, was as a minister his theory bothered him deeply until his death.

 

Just so we are all on the same page: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/origin.html

 

We do "evolve", in the sense that we learn, we develop, we pass on our knowledge, and we also change biologically partly because of the continuous changes in our physical surrounding environment, which is also a consequence of our development/progression.

Our environment changes us and vice versa. A sort of "continuous feedback loop".

Thanks.

 

We do "evolve", in the sense that we learn, we develop, we pass on our knowledge, and we also change biologically partly because of the continuous changes in our physical surrounding environment, which is also a consequence of our development/progression.

Our environment changes us and vice versa. A sort of "continuous feedback loop".

Thanks.

Which has nothing to do with survival of the fittest. Ultimately it is about who has offspring, how many, and how well they thrive.

 

Yes.

Thanks.

 

Good ya'll

This is not a religious subject.Of course i do understand that many people throughout the world have this odd conception that relate certain things with other things that don't have relativity. The same way that was done to Mr. Darwin and Mr. Galileo. The information that was gathered by Darwin suggested to me that things was in such an well ordered way and Darwin only observed and inferred what he observed.He did not deal with equations or chemical mixes subjects of that sort. But his observation is very convincing that as was said he provoked many researches that most scientist and laymen to apply their thoughts of knowledge to go beyond Which has benefited the human groups greatly.To boldly go where no human scientific logic have gone. The origins of life beyond the earthly population is being studied ,of course, through researches,perhaps cuddling the idea the origin of intelligent life. Especially Astrology. There are many old myths incorporate these idea straight forward from Egypt to Greek to Roman Mythology.In regard to evolution, at what period did Humans began to come to life by women. Also if something evolved it seem that it should be independent,self sufficient. Lets travel to remoteness.

 

steveb,

According to your logic, Newton has a lot of explaining to do too. He should have figured out Maxwell's Equations and Einstein's General Relativity.

How so? How does that leap of logic follow? Having said that, perhaps I was too hard on Darwin. Others have expanded on his ideas to include life appearing where there was not life before. And changes occurrng to make an entire new form of life, like a dog into a donkey. No one denies that environment and breeding can change one type of dog into another, but it is still a dog.

There is a difference between embracing his theories and saying that they are capable of explaining all mysteries about evolution and the origin of life.

OK, I will grant you that, depending on what his theories are. There probably is a lot in misinformation about what he really said.

Ratch

 

Nanophotonics,

We do "evolve", in the sense that we learn, we develop, we pass on our knowledge, and we also change biologically partly because of the continuous changes in our physical surrounding environment, which is also a consequence of our development/progression.

Our environment changes us and vice versa. A sort of "continuous feedback loop".

Yes, everyone agrees about the evolution of things like the automobile and airplane. There is intelligent non-random work done to make it happen.

Ratch

 

Thevenin's Planet,

...In regard to evolution, at what period did Humans began to come to life by women.

What has evolution have to do with it? Wouldn't creation or several creations explain it? As well as many other things. Now that is NOT a religious argument. There is no doctrine, advocacy of worship, proselytization, or churchiness involved. It is a theistic argument, and deserves the respect and standing given any other theory.

Ratch

 

How so? How does that leap of logic follow?

Well, you can tell me if I misunderstood your original point, but it seemed that you were saying that Darwin didn't answer some particular questions that were outside the realm of what he was addressing in his research.

Yes, he has a lot of explaining to do. He should start be showing that things become hightly organized from chaos all by themselves, supposedly with no outside help.

This seems similar to saying that Newton has a lot of explaining to do because Newton's Laws don't tell us the mechanics of the big bang and how our universe was generated with no outside help.

From a certain point of view we could make these kinds of statements. But that is setting the bar so very high as to prevent any scientific progress. Science advances in small steps. Even the great minds can only go so far to advance the current state of knowledge.

 

steveb,

Well, you can tell me if I misunderstood your original point, but it seemed that you were saying that Darwin didn't answer some particular questions that were outside the realm of what he was addressing in his research.

OK, since I am not sure what Darwin and only Darwin really said, I will agree with you that he should not be held responsible for the outlandish claims of those that try to extend his theory. I apologize to Darwin's memory.

Ratch

 

If we are human beings, we've always been. We've changed physically and will keep changing, but we've always been human beings. (Stand-Alone, not a derivative)

Thanks.