Do you accept the Theory of Evolution?

[MastanKhan]

Then you have no clue what the word evolution means.

Evolution is change in heritable traits of biological populations over successive generations.[1] Evolutionary processes give rise to diversity at every level of biological organisation, including the level of species, individual organisms, and at the level of molecular evolution.[2]

Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Also, of course they are going to have similar form, their closely related. They all descend from a common ancestor 40 mya.

I do. I understand that part. I do have some clue. Like resistance to insecticides is it attained or attenuated. Now would that be termed as evolution.

Now off springs of bi racial marriages would also come under evolution or is it only when humans have sex with sheep and The off sprinng is evolution like the one just reported a couple of days ago.

 

[Aepsilons]

girl, was I that good last night?

Don't be too sure of yourself, lol.

PS. I'm not a 'girl'.

 

[syedali73]

I do. I understand that part. I do have some clue. Like resistance to insecticides is it attained or attenuated. Now would that be termed as evolution.

Now off springs of bi racial marriages would also come under evolution or is it only when humans have sex with sheep and The off sprinng is evolution like the one just reported a couple of days ago.

Lets make it ridiculously easy for understanding.

Those folks who believe in 'classic evolution' believe that complex life forms have evolved from simpler life forms. In essence, simpler uni-cellular organisms gave rise to complex multi-cellular organisms and it all happened under supposedly 'natural selection' process. Now the question is, if all the life forms started out in the sea (in the vicinity of the hydrothermal vents to be exact) as it is generally believed, why certain life forms evolved into complex life forms while others did not? Hydrothermal vents have not gone off and life forms around those hydrothermal vents have been collected and examined. Why those life forms, after millions of years in that vicinity, still remain simple and did not evolve?

For natural selection to occur, there has to be some kind of 'pressure' and the one example is given of antibiotic resistance (I'll dissect it later). So the pressure was present in a particular environment i.e. sea, where the simpler life forms were present. Now how did the pressure affect certain simpler life forms and left alone others that co-habited the same environment? There is no answer to this as of yet.

Antibiotic resistance as an evidence of evolution: There are two ways of acquiring resistance towards the antimicrobials i.e., i) through acquiring genes that produce enzyme that in turn change the chemical structure of the antimicrobial and render them ineffective, and ii) acquiring genes that produce proteins that could pump out antimicrobials from the cells (called efflux pumps).

Now where these genes or their products come from? If an organism evolves to become drug resistant through either of the above mentioned phenomena, the genes must come from within the organism. You put the organism under antibiotic pressure and the organism evolves to become resistant by making appropriate changes in its physiology. But does it happen like this? No. Instead, the bacterium acquires resistance genes from other bacteria (and not similar) through a process called horizontal gene transfer. This is not evolution because a complex trait has not developed from a simpler trait due to pressure.

 

[MilSpec]

Yes.

 

[T-123456]

I accept the theory of evolution but why doesnt it apply to some people,i mean no evolution at all,they eat fat,are fat and stay fat.
What you say @Armstrong ''buddy''(kuch kuch,traitor)?

 

[MilSpec]

If Darwin contends that the human race evolved from monkeys, then how come the monkeys we see have still not started wearing pants?

It doesn't. Humans and apes have common ancestors.

 

[OrionHunter]

It doesn't. Humans and apes have common ancestors.

The Hebrew Bible mentions Adam and Eve - the first man and woman on planet Earth! And they didn't descend from any common ancestor!

Is that a myth? If yes, then so is Darwin's theory of evolution! Mind you, it's only a THEORY, meaning not scientifically proven as yet!

My take - An ancient advanced extraterrestrial civilization artificially mutated a sub-species of ape/chimpanzee by genetic modification of DNA, producing homo sapiens 200,000 years ago. The human race was thus born.

Anatomically modern humans first appear in the fossil records in Africa, about 195,000 years ago, and studies of molecular biology give evidence that the approximate time of divergence from the common ancestor of all modern human populations was 200,000 years ago.

Now these were the common ancestors who were artificially muted resulting in the divergence.. Proof? It took several million years to arrive at this divergence when the human race appeared all of a sudden within a short span of a few thousand years! If that had not happened, the divergence would have taken another million or so years if you believe in the theory of evolution.

In other words, we would have been still hanging from trees eating fruit!

 

[MilSpec]

T

My take - An ancient advanced extraterrestrial civilization artificially mutated a sub-species of ape/chimpanzee by genetic modification of DNA, producing homo sapiens 200,000 years ago. The human race was thus born.

 

[graphican]

You don't know what theory means then.

Theory is a scientific explanation that comes after compiling multiple data, all of which are falsifiable and haven't been proven false. Theory used by the laymen is very different from scientific theory. When laymen use the word theory, they are thinking of hypothesis.

Here is extra reading:

Scientific theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It is 150 years old theory still a theory despite medical and biological research have gone through the sky during this time. Just a thought provoking question that if the theory is that stable, there must have been some empirical evidence in the favor.

Just a little question for you and the theory followers that cattle can eat cellulose because they have a enzyme (cellulase) capable to digest a tough cellular model found in plants. That enzymes is absent in carnivorous and humans. Think of an "evolutionary explanation" which explain that of nowhere, pancreas started producing cellulase (cellulose digesting enzyme) which led to entirely different food cycle for a family of animals. Now Humans eat both plants and animals, our "ancestors" supposedly had cellulase but we the next generation have it absent.

or we evolved from animals yet our teeth came from herbivorous out of nowhere?

You cannot come up with a logical explanations that why human have inherited characteristics of two branches of animals?

 

[Akasa]

The thing that seperates evolution from other hypotheses is its foundation in centuries of observational studies, genetic proofing, and biological research.

 

[graphican]

Like theory of gravitation, atomic theory, germ theory of disease, theory of relativity so on so on... and thumbs up for telling humans can digest cellulose... this year's bio noble just got taken....

Did you read I called it is absent in humans and twice so? Has the forum just discovered its genius?

 

[East or West India Best]

Just a little question for you and the theory followers that cattle can eat cellulose because they have a enzyme (cellulase) capable to digest a tough cellular model found in plants. That enzymes is absent in carnivorous and humans. Think of an "evolutionary explanation" which explain that of nowhere, pancreas started producing cellulase (cellulose digesting enzyme) which led to entirely different food cycle for a family of animals. Now Humans eat both plants and animals, our "ancestors" supposedly had cellulase but we the next generation have it absent.

Except cattle don't have cellulase. Their gut contains microbes that have evolved those genes.

Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen - MicrobeWiki

Educate yourself before you talk lol.

 

[Jaanbaz]

Hang on people still believe God made Adam with clay and then his wife out of his ribs?

 

[syedali73]

Did you read I called it is absent in humans and twice so? Has the forum just discovered its genius?

BTW you know cattle produce lots of methane (an average cow would produce conservatively 100-200 liters per day) and scientist are worried about it. I wonder if by letting the cattle to live for ever our neighbor would contribute significantly to methane production that would contribute to ozone destruction.

 

[graphican]

Except cattle don't have cellulase. Their gut contains microbes that have evolved those genes.

Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen - MicrobeWiki

Educate yourself before you talk lol.

And these microbes could not exist in the gut of carnivorous. You can object since animals do not eat cellulose, they shouldn't have them - good - what about humans then? We eat fruit, grain and plant-based food yet we never developed or "hosted" those bacteria. Why not? If humans are infected with such a bacteria, would we start absorbing cellulose? No? Why Not?

There are 1000s of such reasons which evolution cannot explain. How would you explain enlargement of human brain in one go? so evolution improved three and half pound in one go? How would you explain addition of neck vertebrates which enable us stand straight while our supposed ancestors do not have that. Our bones are several times softer, less powerful and less capable psychically than a baboon. So does the theory of evolution suggests that despite the fact humans came out of caves some 10 thousand years ago, we are by-design less capable and less survival eccentric even though we were living in the same harsh environment in which monkey and other animals were living.

I am not a researcher myself, I am just a humble student but there are scientists who are putting these questions on the table and evolutionists are unable to explain. There is a reason it is "theory" after 150 years and likely to be that until the end of times. Evolution didn't happen in cockroaches. why? There are fossils of animals who are still living today (search living fossils) but the same evolution is allegedly responsible for the creation of 2 million animals species. Does that mean evolution happens selectively only?

I am not antagonist or resistant to this ideology but my learning has led me to believe that evolution may have happened but there are jumps in human and animal species which evolution cannot explain. What should a rational person do? Still believe that theory is broken but I would refuse to give it up?