do you believe in Dawin theory

[fvw53]

I see examples of natural selection every time I get behind the wheel here

I always say that based on Darwin's theory about the survival of the fittest ....the car drivers on the streets of Bangkok will one day develop eyes at the back of their head...may-be some of them feel already the bubbles

[joesanunu]

Actually the last 3 Popes have thrown in the towel and are on board with evolution and the big bang.

God created evolution is what they are saying. Science explains the physical but God created the soul.

The Chief Vatican Astronomer says, "Intelligent Design isn't science, even if it pretends to be. Intelligent Design/Creation could be taught in religious or cultural history but not in science class"

Case closed. The Vatican supports Darwin after dragging it's feet since 1859.

Edited March 1, 2015 by joesanunu

[ScarpoFongness4U]

The Vatican supports what?

The Vatican supports, the Vatican

The longest running mafia ever created, no, evolved, no created

[fvw53]

The Vatican supports what?

The Vatican supports, the Vatican

The longest running mafia ever created, no, evolved, no created

500 years ago yes...but now they are like every normal bureaucracy with inclination the preserve itself

[NickJ]

Anyone ever go to the Natural History Museum in Bangkok? They have a plaque that shows the stages of evolution from the sea to the various stages of ape and man.........Modern man is depicted as a Thai rice farmer......teased my wife for years.

[canman]

The case is closed. Science has put this debate to bed. Darwin nailed it.

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp.

There is no missing link.

The religious just haven't kept up with the scientific literature.

By the way. The latest estimates for potential Earthlike planets in the Milky Way Galaxy is 20 billion planets. They are in the 'sweet spot' that may support life.

There are also over 400 billion galaxies.

So there could be 400,000,000,000 X 20,000,000,000 potential Earthlike planets out there.

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp

No they didn't. No one who understnads evolution claims our ancestors were chimps. What you need to understand is that humans along with other primates have a common ancestor but to say we evolved from chimps is incorrect.

[fvw53]

The case is closed. Science has put this debate to bed. Darwin nailed it.

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp.

There is no missing link.

The religious just haven't kept up with the scientific literature.

By the way. The latest estimates for potential Earthlike planets in the Milky Way Galaxy is 20 billion planets. They are in the 'sweet spot' that may support life.

There are also over 400 billion galaxies.

So there could be 400,000,000,000 X 20,000,000,000 potential Earthlike planets out there.

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp

No they didn't. No one who understnads evolution claims our ancestors were chimps. What you need to understand is that humans along with other primates have a common ancestor but to say we evolved from chimps is incorrect.

I agree that our ancestor such as "homo sapiens" was not from the line of chimps...

There is also the mystery of the Neanderthals : the latest theory is that our ancestors took over from them in Europe because our ancestors learned to domesticate dogs from wolves.

[fvw53]

Can I quote The Guardian of yesterday : an article describes at the end the timeline of our evolution

http://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/mar/01/hunting-with-wolves-humans-conquered-the-world-neanderthal-evolution

[chrisinth]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There are 480,000 earth scientists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologist and biologists that belong to the American Academy of Science. These are elite scientists
99.9% are backing Darwins theory.

Only the religious and FOX viewers are at war with reality.

But does that make the 99.9% correct?

After all, it was just a theory, a questimation on what happened.......................

I have often found that with academics, a little bit of practice messes up a whole lot of theory. I believe in the visual.

[KarenBravo]

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp.

based on some of the responses from some members, they must belong to the chimp side of the family...

The Chimp is NOT an ancestor of ours.

Chimps and humans did have a common ancestor, though.

[joesanunu]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There are 480,000 earth scientists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologist and biologists that belong to the American Academy of Science. These are elite scientists

99.9% are backing Darwins theory.

Only the religious and FOX viewers are at war with reality.

But does that make the 99.9% correct?

After all, it was just a theory, a questimation on what happened.......................

I have often found that with academics, a little bit of practice messes up a whole lot of theory. I believe in the visual.

Just a theory?

A scientific theory is not a guess. It's well substanciated explanation acquired thru scientific methodology.

In this case, tested and confirmed thru observation and experimentation since 1859.

Be my guest if you want to dispute the 99.9% of the Earth Scientists that belong to the American Academy of Science.

You could be right. There is a chance that 2,000 year old book written by goat farmers has all the answers.

[luk AJ]

Darwin is right that we walk on two feet to have a better look and to be able to use our hands. That our intelligence is better developed is also understandable because we have no natural deffence against predators. But there is more than only what is necessary to survive, we develop things like computers etc.. and have thoughts which are not related and necessary for our survival. We live with the knowledge we will die one day, live with the knowledge of physics, the big bang, the universe etc.. We would also have survived as Homo Sapiens without all this. Did Darwin ever explain this?

[AYJAYDEE]

Darwin is right that we walk on two feet to have a better look and to be able to use our hands. That our intelligence is better developed is also understandable because we have no natural deffence against predators. But there is more than only what is necessary to survive, we develop things like computers etc.. and have thoughts which are not related and necessary for our survival. We live with the knowledge we will die one day, live with the knowledge of physics, the big bang, the universe etc.. We would also have survived as Homo Sapiens without all this. Did Darwin ever explain this?

darwin never claimed evry mutation was beneficial nor did he pretend that we would only use a mutation for a single purpose.

[Neeranam]

There are 480,000 earth scientists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologist and biologists that belong to the American Academy of Science. These are elite scientists

99.9% are backing Darwins theory.

Only the religious and FOX viewers are at war with reality.

I am neither religious nor a FOX viewer but think Darwin's theory is definitely wrong. There are valid oints in it , like natural selection, but to claim a theory is correct then all must vbe correct.

I used to be an atheist and wanted to believe in this theory but when I became more aware, I started seeing the wonder of God's creation and to see that is could never happen by chance.

Why are there no missing links still around?(well outside Pattaya that is )

[Neeranam]

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp.

based on some of the responses from some members, they must belong to the chimp side of the family...

The Chimp is NOT an ancestor of ours.

Chimps and humans did have a common ancestor, though.

You don't really believe that ridiculous notion, do you?

[luk AJ]

Darwin is right that we walk on two feet to have a better look and to be able to use our hands. That our intelligence is better developed is also understandable because we have no natural deffence against predators. But there is more than only what is necessary to survive, we develop things like computers etc.. and have thoughts which are not related and necessary for our survival. We live with the knowledge we will die one day, live with the knowledge of physics, the big bang, the universe etc.. We would also have survived as Homo Sapiens without all this. Did Darwin ever explain this?

darwin never claimed evry mutation was beneficial nor did he pretend that we would only use a mutation for a single purpose.

difficult to understand what's your point, but Darwin could never prove things like "conscioussness". As a matter of fact a lot of things cannot be explained by Darwinism alone. Interesting link http://www.naturalselectionanddarwinism.com/soul.html

[AYJAYDEE]

Darwin is right that we walk on two feet to have a better look and to be able to use our hands. That our intelligence is better developed is also understandable because we have no natural deffence against predators. But there is more than only what is necessary to survive, we develop things like computers etc.. and have thoughts which are not related and necessary for our survival. We live with the knowledge we will die one day, live with the knowledge of physics, the big bang, the universe etc.. We would also have survived as Homo Sapiens without all this. Did Darwin ever explain this?

darwin never claimed evry mutation was beneficial nor did he pretend that we would only use a mutation for a single purpose.

difficult to understand what's your point, but Darwin could never prove things like "conscioussness". As a matter of fact a lot of things cannot be explained by Darwinism alone. Interesting link http://www.naturalselectionanddarwinism.com/soul.html

so a theory of the evolution of species doesnt explain consciousness?? wow! astounding, I'm all for scrapping such a simplistic theory!! lol

[ScarpoFongness4U]

Darwin never proved anything

DNA proves, EVERYTHING

creation implying religion is where the sale doesn't close

[luk AJ]

Darwin is right that we walk on two feet to have a better look and to be able to use our hands. That our intelligence is better developed is also understandable because we have no natural deffence against predators. But there is more than only what is necessary to survive, we develop things like computers etc.. and have thoughts which are not related and necessary for our survival. We live with the knowledge we will die one day, live with the knowledge of physics, the big bang, the universe etc.. We would also have survived as Homo Sapiens without all this. Did Darwin ever explain this?

darwin never claimed evry mutation was beneficial nor did he pretend that we would only use a mutation for a single purpose.

difficult to understand what's your point, but Darwin could never prove things like "conscioussness". As a matter of fact a lot of things cannot be explained by Darwinism alone. Interesting link http://www.naturalselectionanddarwinism.com/soul.html

so a theory of the evolution of species doesnt explain consciousness?? wow! astounding, I'm all for scrapping such a simplistic theory!! lol

no it doesn't, I do understand this is astounding news for you. A lot happened since Darwin, maybe some reading will close the gap?

[KarenBravo]

In 2005 scientists studying the human genome have proven the chromosomes are a perfect match with our ancestors, the chimp.

based on some of the responses from some members, they must belong to the chimp side of the family...

The Chimp is NOT an ancestor of ours.

Chimps and humans did have a common ancestor, though.

You don't really believe that ridiculous notion, do you?

Of course I do. There is demonstrable evidence in DNA and in the fossil record to show this is true.

Where is your evidence for an alternative?

Show me evidence and I will change my mind. Can you say the same thing?

[AYJAYDEE]

no it doesn't, I do understand this is astounding news for you. A lot happened since Darwin, maybe some reading will close the gap?

I never met anyone who claimed his theory had aything to do with consciousness. the fact you brought it up speaks volumes about you

[canman]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There are 480,000 earth scientists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologist and biologists that belong to the American Academy of Science. These are elite scientists

99.9% are backing Darwins theory.

Only the religious and FOX viewers are at war with reality.

But does that make the 99.9% correct?

After all, it was just a theory, a questimation on what happened.......................

I have often found that with academics, a little bit of practice messes up a whole lot of theory. I believe in the visual.

Just a theory?

A scientific theory is not a guess. It's well substanciated explanation acquired thru scientific methodology.

In this case, tested and confirmed thru observation and experimentation since 1859.

Be my guest if you want to dispute the 99.9% of the Earth Scientists that belong to the American Academy of Science.

You could be right. There is a chance that 2,000 year old book written by goat farmers has all the answers.

Plenty of well accepted scientific theories have been proven wrong. One of the biggest in recent time is the expansion of the universe. 20 years ago (ish) 99.9 percent of scientists would have scoffed at the idea of the universe expanding at an accelerating rate. They would have said there are only two possible scenerios Expansion was steady or most likely slowing down. They also would have told you that they had a good approximation of how much matter was in the universe (hint: what they call dark matter. they didn't know about 90% of the matter in the observable universe).

[luk AJ]

no it doesn't, I do understand this is astounding news for you. A lot happened since Darwin, maybe some reading will close the gap?

I never met anyone who claimed his theory had aything to do with consciousness. the fact you brought it up speaks volumes about you

thank you!

[canman]

I am not saying that evolutionary theory is wrong in principle but...

It is interesting to note that the sum total of differant human ancestor fossils could comfortably fit in the back of a pick up truck. Not much to go on really is it?

[AYJAYDEE]

I am not saying that evolutionary theory is wrong in principle but...

It is interesting to note that the sum total of differant human ancestor fossils could comfortably fit in the back of a pick up truck. Not much to go on really is it?

evolutionary theory does not depend on human fossils.

[KarenBravo]

<script type='text/javascript'>window.mod_pagespeed_start = Number(new Date());</script>

There are 480,000 earth scientists, geologists, archeologists, paleontologist and biologists that belong to the American Academy of Science. These are elite scientists

99.9% are backing Darwins theory.

Only the religious and FOX viewers are at war with reality.

But does that make the 99.9% correct?

After all, it was just a theory, a questimation on what happened.......................

I have often found that with academics, a little bit of practice messes up a whole lot of theory. I believe in the visual.

Just a theory?

A scientific theory is not a guess. It's well substanciated explanation acquired thru scientific methodology.

In this case, tested and confirmed thru observation and experimentation since 1859.

Be my guest if you want to dispute the 99.9% of the Earth Scientists that belong to the American Academy of Science.

You could be right. There is a chance that 2,000 year old book written by goat farmers has all the answers.

Plenty of well accepted scientific theories have been proven wrong. One of the biggest in recent time is the expansion of the universe. 20 years ago (ish) 99.9 percent of scientists would have scoffed at the idea of the universe expanding at an accelerating rate. They would have said there are only two possible scenerios Expansion was steady or most likely slowing down. They also would have told you that they had a good approximation of how much matter was in the universe (hint: what they call dark matter. they didn't know about 90% of the matter in the observable universe).

And that is the strength of science over superstition.

When additional evidence comes to light that shows the present understanding is wrong, then the present understanding changes to take in that new evidence.

I'm still waiting for Neeranam's explanation of why evolution is not correct and his evidence for that belief.

If he comes out with some kind of God argument (for which there is no concrete evidence), then I'd like to ask who created God?

[pegman]

I am not saying that evolutionary theory is wrong in principle but...

It is interesting to note that the sum total of differant human ancestor fossils could comfortably fit in the back of a pick up truck. Not much to go on really is it?

Hey Nova Scotia, you one of those Neanderthal Harper voting men?

[Squeegee]

Where did Darwin come from?

He came from a gene pool situated on a small group of islands you've never heard of. Basically, he started out as a fish in that pool but managed to crawl out as a turtle then climb a tree as a monkey. The view from up top was so good he declared himself God and got murdered for his sins. Now we give thanks to him by giving awards to stupid people to remind us we are only three steps away from a mud bath.

Remember: fish + turtle + monkey = Darwin/God.

(On a small group of islands you've never heard of, and even if you found the place he ate all the dodos already.)

Codswallop. Darwin suffered from sea sickness, so never in creation could he have started out as a fish. You need to revise your theories.

I was merely providing an overview for the beginner. Obviously Darwin started out as a multi-cellular organism pre-dating his even his bacterial persona, around the time of the In Viri LP. I believe he said somewhere in an interview that he even draws influences from as far back as when he first arrived on the solar wind.

[Stan42]

Sure, why not?

[jcisco]

Actually the last 3 Popes have thrown in the towel and are on board with evolution and the big bang.

God created evolution is what they are saying. Science explains the physical but God created the soul.

The Chief Vatican Astronomer says, "Intelligent Design isn't science, even if it pretends to be. Intelligent Design/Creation could be taught in religious or cultural history but not in science class"

Case closed. The Vatican supports Darwin after dragging it's feet since 1859.

While I agree in support of your views on life, I can't back your seemingly supporting Big Bang theory. That one is still totally Unkown and more and more data supports the Idea the the scientists have no idea about the start of the universe.

I would say there is no satisfactory theory of the start of the universe. The theory of the Big Bang needs to stop being held as fact or taught as though it's a well supported theory. I don't hold much hope, much like the teaching of the speed of light being invariant, and yet that is only true in return path ie two way calculations.