Evolution

Recently, my 6 year old daughter (1st Grade) came home talking about evolution. And after discussing with her what she had learned, I was appauled to find that they (my community public school educators) are still presenting evolution as scientific fact.

I did some internet research and found that (by and large) most, school science books present evelotion as fact rather than theory.

I ask you, esteemed members of the CPF community - do you beleive that the theory of evolution has any legitmate basis of proof or findings to suggest that it could have been possible.

I feel that is is quite the contrary - every day since Darwin's "Origin of Man", more and more evidence has been found to disprove the theory. It is my understanding that the current fossil record simply does not support evolution, but rather mild adaptation.

This is not a question of creationism versus evolution - it is merely an question of if you have grown up thinking that evolution is undisputed as scientific fact.

LEDSmith,

I've grown up knowing that Evolution is a "theory" but have never heard mention of evidence disproving it, so I've always accepted it as more or less fact (which is essentially how it was presented in my formal education.) What are the definitions of "Evolution" and "Mild Adaptation" or how do they differ? (I've never heard of mild adaptation.)

Perhaps my interpretation of "evolution" theory is skewed. It seems that every time the subject comes up, it turns into a battle against creationism. Media, movies,ect commonly take complicated subjects and compress the ideas into something that removes the basic truth - only presenting information that fuels the debate.

None the less, if you look at the supposed evolutionary links to man - they are apes - nothing exists in between.

Human has been human since the beginning - their currently exists no evidence otherwise.

My point basic point is this - it was not impressed upon me enought that evolution was a theory - I remember seeing the artistic rendering of the evolution of man, and did not realize that is was a work of great creative licence where these images of intermediate man were envision with only a piece of an arm bone.

[ QUOTE ]
LEDSmith said:
Perhaps my interpretation of "evolution" theory is skewed. It seems that every time the subject comes up, it turns into a battle against creationism. Media, movies,ect commonly take complicated subjects and compress the ideas into something that removes the basic truth - only presenting information that fuels the debate.

None the less, if you look at the supposed evolutionary links to man - they are apes - nothing exists in between.

Human has been human since the beginning - their currently exists no evidence otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Umm.... you need to learn a little anthropology, and a lot of other things that end in -ology. Biology, etc. Science is imutable proof of evolution. This is accepted by all but those who have their heads firmly stuck in the sand. Nothing between apes and man? Only about a half dozen(or more) 100,000 year+ old species of early hominids. Man's ancestors.

Contrary to your skewed beliefs, every decade, every year, even every month, more discoveries are made that add to the fact that is evolotion. It hasn't been a 'theory' for more decades than I can count... except to the people who are science challenged, and either don't understand the current status of anthropology, geology, etc. etc., or simply ignore the mountains of scientifically valid evidence.

Creationism...now where's the 'proof' for that, aside from works of fiction like the Old Testament? /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/confused.gif It's been rewritten so many times that the 'original' fragments of text bear no resemblance to what's in print today. That does't happen in scientific literature; it's multiple peer reviewed, and the proof for evolution has been imutable for a very long time now. We are simply filling in the gaps, at this point.

I've never understood why people have a problem with evolution from a religious point of view. Who's to say that God didn't use evolution to create life? Anyway, I think it's a mute point most religions except evolution as a fact. Even if you only believe the world is 6000 years old you can still find examples of life evolving to adapt to changing environments.

POPE JOHN PAUL II EMBRACES EVOLUTION!!

Pope John Paul II shocks the Christian world by announcing that "Evolution is Compatible with Christian faith"!! How could this Pope so strongly and directly contradict the Biblical teaching and the Traditions of the Fathers? Is Pope John Paul II a Holy Traditional Pope or is he the Unholy Anti-Pope? See how this pronouncement greatly advances the cause, and the timetable, of the coming New World Order Religion. Must reading for Roman Catholic faithful!!

[ QUOTE ]
LEDSmith said:
Perhaps my interpretation of "evolution" theory is skewed. It seems that every time the subject comes up, it turns into a battle against creationism. Media, movies,ect commonly take complicated subjects and compress the ideas into something that removes the basic truth - only presenting information that fuels the debate.


[/ QUOTE ]

Evolution and belief in God are not mutually exclusive. One can accept the evidence of evolution without being an atheistic secular humanist. Science answers the question "How?", and Religion answers the question "Why?".

This debate is endless, and neither evolutionists nor creationists will ever be able to demonstrate irrefutable proof of the truth of their claims to the other.

All I'm going to say is that evolution is a theory which yields testable hypotheses, and has been supported by evidence from many scientific disciplines (genetics, molecular biology, physiology, biochemistry, etc.), not just paleontology.

This thread is total flamebait and presents a (in my opinion) false dichotomy between scientific inquiry and religious belief.

Well CRT, we have one thing in common - almost the same ammount of posts on this forum - I think that I am one ahead of you however.

I appreciate the Theory of Evolution as a unifying concept. It is an idea that generates excitement and promotes further research into the earth and the potential beniefit that we can extract for the betterment of the human population.

but I simply don't agree.

Fossils of the animal phylum have not been found prior to 5 million years ago. It was an explosion of animals who have either become extinct or remain relatively unchanged.

How can you say evolution is well documented - where is the documentation - point me in the right direction.

[ QUOTE ]
LEDSmith said:
It seems that every time the subject comes up, it turns into a battle against creationism.

[/ QUOTE ]

And so you go ahead and invoke the battle on CPF, huh?

The discussion can be taken to the Underground. Thread closed.