The Problem With Evolution

ChronWatch ^ | 09/25/05 | Edward L. Daley

[DARCPRYNCE]

Charles Darwin, the 19th century geologist who wrote the treatise 'The Origin of Species, by means of Natural Selection' defined evolution as "descent with modification". Darwin hypothesized that all forms of life descended from a common ancestor, branching out over time into various unique life forms, due primarily to a process called natural selection.

However, the fossil record shows that all of the major animal groups (phyla) appeared fully formed about 540 million years ago, and virtually no transitional life forms have been discovered which suggest that they evolved from earlier forms. This sudden eruption of multiple, complex organisms is often referred to as the Cambrian Explosion, and even Darwin knew about the lack of evidence in the fossil record to support his theory a century and a half ago.

[Dan12180]

I think the answers may be a combination of the two views. The earth is several billion years old. Did God use materials from some other planet to make ours? Did he take several billion years to create the heavens and the earth before he created the light which marked the first day? How long was a day? Was the earth was in it's current position in orbit around the sun? There is a world full of possibilities we just don't know exactly how it was done.

Darwin thinks we all came from 1 celled creatures, each of us was created from 2 cells (sperm and egg).

Darwin believes in accidental creation, I believe in a guided creation.

[MineralMan]

Here's a link I find useful. It is a link list to very good websites that explain a variety of creation myths of different cultures and religions. It's worth bookmarking:

http://www.magictails.com/creationlinks.html

[Dan12180]

Unless God created the scientific laws we use to prove the theories.

[Dan12180]

There is an evolution but is it accidential or guided?

[Tenacious 1]

"Every religion has its creation story. All involve supernatural events. I, personally, disbelieve in supernatural events and entities, so I treat those stories as mythology. Others believe otherwise. More power to them."

I agree with the scientific approach of your belief. But I know that even science fills unknowns with assumptions and theory. Scientist work to prove and disprove theories. Quantum Mechanics is mostly theory as most of it cannot be "proved." There is faith in science predicated on logic. We continue to update the theory of evolution as new artifacts discovered call into question what was previously accepted as scientific fact.

In the end, as humans, we all rely on a level of faith to make sense of the world around us. Through my life experience and wisdom, as well as my education, I believe there is more to our mere existance than happenstance luck. I also believe that our awareness makes us unique in the universe (that may change in the next 2000 years). Faith that something, someone started this whole explains what science never will. The question of why does the universe exist will remain unanswered for eternity for many. I believe that one day I will know. And that knowledge will come from another level of awareness granted by the "supernatural" being that set it all in motion.

[ZULU]

Science should only concern itself with whether or not there was evolution and the mechanical aspects by which it occurred.

Theologists and philosophers should concern themselves with whether it was God-guided.

Personally, I think its kind of stretching the laws of chance to say that millions of accidental mutations over millions of years just happened to create human beings. Its like saying you take several million monkeys, give them typrewriters and one of them will kick out a Shakesperian play.

Just like the evidence for evolution, although indirect, is overhwelming, I think the evidence that there was a Divine Guidance leading to the end product, is equally overwhelming.

Only the fool says in his heart there is no God.

[aNYCguy]

Agreed, but why the utter disdain for those of us that do believe?

He was simply satirizing Damoboy's utter disdain for those who do believe differently fron Damoboy. Read the exchange from the beginning.

[NJ_gent]

"Can you unquestionably refute the fact that my kitchen microwave created the entire universe 2 minutes ago from nothing, and implanted false memories and fossils?"

Don't be ridiculous, everyone knows the universe was created by the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[aNYCguy]

If I even found a penny on the ground, I would presume it was minted somewhere in the US. Shouldn't those billions of years been able to produce a lump of copper in the exact size and shape of a penny with a randomly etched pattern on it that just happens to resemble a specific man and building?

You may have noticed that lumps of copper, unlike DNA strands, do not produce imperfect copies of themselves. This particular straw man argument against evolution is one of the oldest and lamest, and is refuted at least once every couple weeks right here on FR.

[aNYCguy]

I fail to see the problem with wanting to teach the best theory we have about how we got here. I think the problem is teaching it as the ONLY theory.

The definition of a scientific theory can be found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theory#Science

Intelligent Design is not a theory. Creation by an omnipotent god is not a theory. Considering these facts, what other theories would you suggest teaching in school alongside evolution? What other theories exist?

[NJ_gent]

"I have a problem with the evolutioists insisting that creation/ID not be taught just because THEY don't believe in it."

I have no problem with ID and creationism being taught in schools, so long as they're not taught in science class. They aren't science. If you want the schools to have a "spiritual beliefs" class, or a religion class, then I have no problem with ID, creationism, karma, reincarnation, and any other topics or ideas related to religious and spiritual beliefs being taught, so long as they're presented in context.

If we're talking about bringing ID into a science classroom (so-called "equal time"), then I would also require that the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Scientology, and Raelianism be given "equal time". My guess would be that the kids will find all but one to be rather hilarious.

[voteconstitutionparty]

This means nothing. I suppose since most people don't even know what is meant by "Phyla" they don't realize that being a creature with a backbone puts you in the same Phyla as a Trout or a Toad.

Here is a list of all the Phyla.

Phylum Common Name Number of Species
Porifera sponges 10,000
Symplasma glass sponges 500
Placozoa placozoan 1
Cnidaria hydroids, jelly fish, sea anemones, corals 10,000
Ctenophora comb jellies 100
Rhombozoa small; obscure parasites 75
Platyhelminthes flatworms 25,000
Orthonecta orthonectidans 10
Gnathostomula gnathostomulans 100
Gastrotricha gastrotrichs 450
Nematoda roundworms 20,000
Nematomorpha nematomorphs 325
Kinorhyncha mud-dragons 150
Loricifera loriciferans 100
Priapula priapulans 17
Rotifera rotifers 1800
Acanthocephala thorny-headed worms 1000
Onychophora velvet worms 70
Uniramia uniramians or ateloceratans 1,000,000 These Phyla togther make up a group traditionally called Arthropoda, because they share a hardened exoskleton and jointed legs.
Chelicerata chelicerates (98% arachnids) 63,000
Crustacea crustaceans 40,000
Pentastoma tongue worms 100
Tardigrada water bears 600
Mollusca molluscs 100,000
Sipuncula peanut worms 350
Echiura echiuroid worms 150
Annelida segmented worms 15,000
Pogonophora beard worms 150
Nemertea nemertine worms 900
Entoprocta entoprocts or kamptozoans 150
Cycliophora cycliophoran 1
Phorona phoronans 20
Brachiopoda brachiopods 350 (25,000 fossil)
Bryozoa bryozoans or ectoprocta or polyzoa 4300
Chaetognatha arrow-worms 90
Echinodermata star fish, sea cucumbers, sea urchins 7000
Hemichordata hemichordates 90
Chordata chordates (including ourselves!) 42,500

[moog]

Posted by doc30 to moog On News/Activism ^ 09/26/2005 7:43:12 AM PDT · 95 of 152 ^ "In the first place, ID is not the same thing as Creationism."

ID is the same as creationism." Ever hear of the Wedge document? ID is a back door attempt to introduce creationism in schools. A lot of creationist organizations, like the Discovery Institute, have people saying that the designer in ID is the God of the Bible. You can't get more religious than that and it shows that ID is the code term for creationism

I didn't say that. I replied to it. Read further down in the reply for my take on it.

[NJ_gent]

"So many of those concepts and hypotheses have been incredibly counter to Occam's Razor"

Actually, Superstring Theory greatly simplifies the universe. Instead of there being all these fundamentally different things flying around interacting in very complex ways, everything is represented as manifestations of very simple things.

"not to say anything about how poorly they fit data and observations"

Some of the cosmology stuff (dark matter, et al) goes rather far off the observe/report path that makes science great, but what precisely is wrong with particle physics and String Theory, in terms of mismatching data?

[moog]

Agreed, but why the utter disdain for those of us that do believe?

HUH???? I think you met this for someone else. I haven't gotten on anyone here and am a firm believer in the Bible and creationism. That is throught faith and my own confirmation of it. However, I do believe science is important too.

[edsheppa]

The problem with "the problem with evolution" is that 1) pre-Cambrian diversity has been found (the organisms are unexpectedly tiny) and 2) the gentic evidence is that the various major lines diverged far earlier.

[moog]

refreing to things like the dragonflies from the Cambrian that had 2 foot wingspans

Thanks for the comment. I'm glad mosquitoes aren't that size.

[moog]

Saying something has no natural explanation because it is complex is not scientific, it is capitulation. ID offers no scientific insight that is not included in other theories that do not require reworking all of science to make it fit.

Boy, that's a mouthful to say:)