First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
Post Reply Why I don't buy Darwin's theory of evolution
44 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/17 , edited 1/12/17
I'd recommend asking these questions when people, television shows, movies, websites, or books make extraordinary claims:

1. How reliable is the source of the claim?

2. Does the source make similar claims?

3. Have the claims been verified by somebody else?

4. Does this fit with the way the world works?

5. Has anyone tried to disprove the claim?

6. Where does the preponderance of evidence point?

7. Is the claimant playing by the rules of science?

8. Is the claimant providing positive evidence?

9. Does the new theory account for as many phenomena as the old theory?

10. Are personal beliefs driving the claim?

Also, there's a great book that goes into this a bit deeper called "The Demon Haunted World, Science as a Candle in the Dark" by Carl Sagan, if you're interested.
14424 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 1/12/17
If Kemono Friends taught us anything, it's that evolution occurs through "Sandstars".
53691 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / FL
Offline
Posted 1/12/17

Sogno- wrote:

i wouldn't buy it either. it's probably too expensive


lolololol, okay this was good =p, just take out a loan
Posted 1/12/17
Believe what you want but i'm not from an ape
5027 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
26 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/17 , edited 1/12/17
It seems that there are two/three popular theories of how modern humans came to be:

1. Darwin's Theory of Evolution
2. Ancient Astronauts/Creationism

The reason I lump creationism and the ancient astronauts theory should be immediately obvious to those who have done their 'tin-foil hat' research.

Make an educated guess on which position you initially prefer, do research for both sides, trying to stay as non-biased as possible, and then draw conclusions.

Good luck, truthseekers!

A little quote from Bloodborne to get the journey started (spoiler/bias alert):
1541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/12/17

gsm642 wrote:

The forms are becoming a bit to political with all the Obama and trump posts so I thought I would try and lively things up a bit. The main reason I don't by Darwin's theory is because of one simple reason time. We have evolved to quickly in the last 11,000 to 12,000 years for it to be natural selection which right there goes against Darwin's theory because it should happen gradually over time. Considering the dinosaurs where here for 150 million years and are still around to and still evolving I don't by Darwin's theory. I think a lot of it has to do with religion because if humanity dates are pushed back 100 million years or more there goes nearly all the worlds religions and creation mythology's. The only one that fills in the gap is the slave creation mythology The anunnaki added there own dna to our ancestor homo erectus to create a slave specie's to mine gold This is right around the time when we had a quantum leap in evolving and we still are today.. We were strong enough to do the work but to stupid to operate the machines required so the combing homo erectus dna with there own creating a smarter race of humans. This explains the quantum leap in evaluation we have had in the past 12,000 years or so. Not only that but when you look into Darwin he once said a elephant could evolve into a whale giving enough time. Also the reason why no one has challenged Darwin's theory is because the human race becomes and enigma with out it. I should also mention that in Africa they found complex mines that are equivalent to modern day mining techniques that are very deep and very old and completely depleted of gold a few years ago.


1541 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 1/12/17

Syndicaidramon wrote:

What "rapid evolution"? The modern human goes back as far as at least 100 000 - 200 000 years...
Besides, events of rapid evolution is covered in the theory of punctuated equilibrium.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium

And we see it happen in front of us.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/09/100901-science-animals-evolution-australia-lizard-skink-live-birth-eggs/


There's also this
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html
1118 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M / Kansas, USA
Offline
Posted 1/12/17
I had, at least, a brief moment of amusement before coming to "religions and creation mythologies," and then I resigned to shaking my head. I can do nothing but assume that the term "evolution" (at the genetic level) is being confused with "development" here, first because modern homo sapiens are estimated to have inhabited Earth for the last 200,000 years, and that barely touches the 2,000,000 year estimate given to homo erectus. The terms are synonymous in a sense, but each has an explicit meaning when used in the same breath as Darwin's Theory of Evolution. Secondly, little evolution (in the strictest sense) has occurred within the species during the paltry 12,000 years mentioned--some genetic traits but nothing drastic, in any case (at least nothing insofar as to suggest a quantum leap.) What has occurred, rather, is that we have continuously discovered and improved upon concepts that create the illusion of evolution through technological advancement. That is to say, our cognitive abilities and ingenuity have changed--but not much else.
13735 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 1/12/17 , edited 1/12/17
I suppose it could be summed up with this quote:
"Life is but a walking shadow. A poor player that struts, and frets his hour upon the stage, and then is heard from no more".
First  Prev  1  2  3  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.