Is Evolution false

Scroll to see replies

I love how people say "why arent we evolving right now!!1!" or "where are the transitions?"

Good one, we dont have fossils FOR EVERY LIVING CREATURE EVER.

Yea Evolution is fake. Some big massive dude made us from the sky.

Reply 24

InVinoVeritas

Also, on the subject of fossil gaps, the theory of punctuated equilibria is very interesting. This theory suggests that evolutionary change is pretty limited for extended periods of time and then, normally as a response to a (relatively) large environmental change such as a new predator or a change in temperatures, a sudden large scale evolutionary change happens over a very short space of geological time (i.e. in 100,000s of years) as a response to this stimulus. This would mean that, due to the very low chance of fossils being created, very few fossils (if any) from a particular region during a particular small space in time when the thrust of evolutionary change is happening will be formed. There really aren't as many "gaps" in evolutionary theory as people make out and it is changing all the time to take into account new evidence.

phil.

Reply 25

aKarma

azhao

Holes in the fossil evidence, lack or transition stages etc. doing work at the mo so don't have time to give specific examples just do a google search.

LawBore

While evolution is only a theory (like everything), at present it seems most likely and arguing it is invalid as we don't have a complete evidence trail in favour of any theory with absolutely no evidence is not the best tactic.

Reply 26

The West Wing

Flyingaround

I just watched an amazing thing on BBC2 about Chimps and evolution...
But...If we evolved from Chimps...Then why Don't we see chimps still evolving into humans....I'm still to see a human cross breeding with a chimp :p:

We didn't evolve from them, we have a common ancestor. It is true that the ancestor looked more like a chimp than a human. The reason we aren't seeing the process is because evolution of large organisms happens on a time scale which is not observable in our time. The recent common ancestor between chimps and humans lived 7-9 million years ago according to the genetic clock.

Reply 27

The West Wing

The_Bear

I love how people say "why arent we evolving right now!!1!" or "where are the transitions?"

Good one, we dont have fossils FOR EVERY LIVING CREATURE EVER.

On that note, here are a number of possible transitions in the hominin lineage between the recent common ancestor between chimpazees and humans.

Australopithecus afarensis

Homo habilis

Homo erectus

Reply 28

evaki

so why then isn't racism more accepted and allowed?

Reply 29

nolongerhearthemusic

evaki

so why then isn't racism more accepted and allowed?

Er, why would it be?

Reply 30

Age_of_Innocence

Evolution is not false, and the excuse of the human record being somewhat patchy in places just does not cut it. There is a lot we don't know about the origins of humans, but what we do know makes a great deal more sense than creationism. There is the presence of evolution in other organisms from the fossil record, stretching back millions of years. Fish are probably the best example.
Oh and as for the argument "But how comez we arent evolvings now??" Well, we are. The human body has its flaws - bad backs, joint problems etc. are often the result of continuing evolution. Also the location of the foramen magnum (hole for the spinal cord) - chimps for instance do not get whiplash due to the location of their foramen magnum.

Reply 31

evaki

errr because if we believe in evolution the way we believe in it today it is quite natural to also draw the conclusion that some races of humans are more superior to others.
Isn't that what Hitler was all about? I mean, it was a quite common and accepted theory up until WWII really. Then the debate kind of ended. In Sweden they studied the aborigines up in northern Sweden, measuring their noses and stuff, just like we do on animals pretty much. They had Nazis come there on seminars and such. Forced sterilization was practiced until the mid 60's or something.

Reply 32

evaki

Age_of_Innocence

Well, we are. The human body has its flaws - bad backs, joint problems etc. are often the result of continuing evolution.

I thought that was caused by us sitting on our buts all day in front of computers :p:

Reply 33

evaki

Age_of_Innocence

but what we do know makes a great deal more sense than creationism.

That's quite a week argument.. it's the best we have besides creationism so it's got to be completely true. Doesn't sound too convincing to me.

Reply 34

evaki

The West Wing

The reason we aren't seeing the process is because evolution of large organisms happens on a time scale which is not observable in our time. The recent common ancestor between chimps and humans lived 7-9 million years ago according to the genetic clock.

This may very well be true, but it's not that different from what some religious person might say to defend their faith. We can not have any proper evidence that shows it because [insert something here], and therefor we must believe in something which is not seen, but that we still hold to be true.

Reply 35

evaki

aKarma

Arguing it is invalid??? INVALID?

Reply 36

Age_of_Innocence

evaki

That's quite a week argument.. it's the best we have besides creationism so it's got to be completely true. Doesn't sound too convincing to me.

Perhaps I phrased it some what weakly...What I mean to say is, the evidence we possess for evolution exists. It is substantial and there is a lot of it, for thousands of species. There is absolutely no evidence for creationism. The Bible may as well be a novel. Therefore, evolution - evidence, creationism - no evidence: evolution = winner.

Reply 37

nolongerhearthemusic

evaki

Of course it doesn't mean we would think that some races are superior to others. There is no 'more evolved', only 'differently evolved'. There are differences in adaptations, but that doesn't suggest superiority. I don't even feel that humans are superior to other species. They're just different, they fill different niches.

There is also the fact that people who accept evolution aren't trying to find their morals in it. By saying 'this is how it happened', we aren't saying 'this is how everything should be ever'. Humans make their own moral decisions based on rational thought. We're not worshipping evolution or trying to find some spiritual meaning in it. It's just science, and science can't give us morals.

Edit: also, Hitler et al. based that on artificial selection, which we already knew about well before Darwin.

Reply 38

cowsgoquack

all those scientist will be kicking themselves when they realise they've based their lifes work on something which is false :rofl:

nice one for pointing it out

Reply 39

evaki

InVinoVeritas

There really aren't as many "gaps" in evolutionary theory as people make out and it is changing all the time to take into account new evidence.

Aha. So you are basically saying, "the theory of evolution is simply so week that every time a new discovery is found we have to rewrite it"
I think you might have a point. I remember thinking about that when I was first taught about the evolution in school. I was thinking "hm, that's so strange that they are sure about this, and still it seems like every time they make a new discovery they change the story.."
Now this is good, I mean, of course, we should adapt our scientific theories to new evidence, but does not this just show that it is possible that we might be a bit off, and that some new discoveries in the future will cast a new light on the theory of evolution as we see it today? Of course that is possible, that's science. A theory is valid only until it is falsified, and since we have so little actual evidence to do research upon, the current theories are likely to be falisified and replaced by new ones.