Staggering complexity emerging from pure randomness. Uh huh.
I am not a scientist. What I’ve read sounds convincing. But I also get suspicious about a theory that seems to explain so much so easily. Like a scientific “just so” story.
The gall of these bastards. From the same clowns who said man will not fly in a thousand years.
“In 1859, 14 years after the founding of this magazine, Charles Darwin published the most important scientific book ever written. “
Idiotic hyperbole.
The title, too. The “staggering complexity of human evolution.”
Staggering. Not just complex. Staggeringly complex.
As if the ant or bacteria aren’t as “staggeringly complex.”
The entertaining bit is the anti-evolutionists are still wanting Darwin exhumed so he can be crucified when another observational scientist, Lord Alfred Russel Wallace, studying a completely different branch of the animal kingdom in another part of the world just a few years after Darwin’s field research, and who had never been privy to the bulk of Darwin’s work, came to the EXACT SAME CONCLUSIONS.
Darwin had a famously sour stomach and as he aged he grew highly averse to stress. He intended not to have On the Origin of Species published in his lifetime because he didn’t want to be at the eye of the sh1tstorm he knew it would cause among the fixed and rigid fundamentalists. But when Lord Wallace consulted with him about publishing his own work on the same subject, Darwin knew he’d have to publish right away, else Wallace would “scoop” him.
If that had happened, today Darwin would be little more than a footnote in Lord Wallace’s magnum opus and it would be Wallace the fixed and rigid fundamentalists would be clamoring to have resurrected so they could kill him.
It was Erasmus Darwin, Charles’ grandfather, who coined the expression, “survival of the fittest.” One of the reasons Darwin took the position on the voyage of the Beagle was that he believed in the immutability of species, and he hoped his research would prove Grandpa wrong.
Everyone focuses on Darwin’s work with finches in the Galapagos, but the voyage of the Beagle lasted nearly five years, and they were only in the Galapagos for three weeks. The majority of what he saw that served as inspiration for On the Origin of species he observed elsewhere. In fact, he’d begin doubting the “immutable creations of God” dogma long before they’d ever reached the southern tip of South America.
In Brazil he found parasitic wasps that laid their eggs on other arthropods and those eggs eventually hatched and devoured their host. This was such a cruel and grotesque process for the host that Darwin could not make himself believe that a kind and loving god would have created them (or their tormentor, the parasitic wasp) specifically so they could suffer this fate. So if it was not God’s handiwork, there must have been some other ‘natural’ mechanism at work. The parasitic wasp was “priming the pump,” to coin a phrase, for the revelations of the Galapagos finches, tortoises, and cactuses.
The thing I find most astonishing about Darwin’s insights into how the process must have worked is that when he wrote OTOOS, not a single hominid fossil had ever been identified. One or maybe two had been found in his old age and before he died, but I doubt he felt vindicated because it would be years before the theory that these fossils were of human ancestors be accepted in the scientific community. Forget about gene theory, forget about DNA, forget about alelles and background radiation, he wrote OTOOS before it was even discovered that the remains of any of our ancestors had survived to the modern era, much less whether they showed any proto-human physical traits.
And all this vitriol over Darwin seems a bit farcical because the evolutionary science hasn’t been about Darwin for well more than a century. And we’d still have the exact same science, even if Darwin had never been born, because other scientists, most notably Lord Alfred Russel Wallace, have independently come to the same conclusions.
A staggering complexity that doesn’t exist.
The amount of faith needed to believe in the religion of Evolution staggers the imagination.
It takes much more faith to believe in the Evolution than it takes to believe in a Benevolent Creator creating this World we live in.
… The tidy tropes of our prehistory have collapsed under the weight of evidence: there is no single missing link that bridges apes and humankind, no drumbeat march of progress toward a predestined goal. Our story is complicated, messy and random. Yet it still can be accommodated under Darwin’s theory of evolution and in fact further validates that framework. This is not to say scientists have it all figured out. Many questions remain. …IOW, your headline is a lie.
It’s such an impossible randomness, that it is laughable people believe it. Professing themselves to be wise, they become fools.
The article is not trustworthy, clearly deceptive:
“Although Darwin’s work came down firmly on the side of monogenism—the idea that all humans share a common ancestor—it was nonetheless co-opted to support notions about racial superiority.”
This is an outright lie and attempted rewriting history.
The full title of Darwin’s book was “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”
JoeBiden is inferior to Donald J. Trump.
I did some research of my own. Here’s what I found:
Then God said, “Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth.”
Solved it.
Sounds like the “scientists” who “explain” the Big Bang theory by saying that nothingness made it inevitable....
Human evolution relies on susceptibility to digestively-introduced viruses to accelerate evolution. Our closest relatives changed very little in the 3 million years since we diverged. Thank agriculture and the agricultural communities which it created.
