usnews.com — If you judge the progress of humanity by Homer Simpson, Paris Hilton, and Girls Gone Wild videos, you might conclude that our evolution has stalled?or even shifted into reverse. Not so, scientists say. Humans are evolving faster than ever before, picking up new genetic traits and talents that may help us survive a turbulent future.
Jul 24, 2008 View in Crawl 4
c0mputarJul 26, 2008
Don't know why you're been dug down.
danaocebuJul 26, 2008
July 26. 2008 Remember evolution is only a theory, no different than the big bang theory on the origin of the universe. Of course there is evolution going on in our world. All species evolved to become better than ttheir predecessors. But to say that man evolved from chimpanzees is ridiculous, though we are better looking than chimpanzees! They will never find the missing link between man and chimpanzees because there are still chimpanzees roaming around our jungles. They should already have evolved to become men. Granted that our bodies evolved from animals, what about our spirits? This is what make us different from animals. There is no possible way our spirit can come from matter. A higher being cannot come from a lower one. This defies reason! Conclusion: Matter comes from matter and spirit comes from a Creative Spirit we call God.
essteeJul 29, 2008
@Do you honestly.... Ironically, there is much to be known in ones ability to interpret information. And in most cases, it often exposes some very significant traits in debaters, if we can even call this a debate. In typical conversations, people commonly propose unrealistic or unappealing scenarios as a means to emphasize sarcasm. In this case, "Do you honestly..." was encompassed in a negative context which emphasized the pointlessness of that particular topic in question.@DNA mutations are facts, inheritable mutations are facts, natural selection is fact.I looked up the definition of evolution and found the following: "Evolution can be precisely defined as any change in the frequency of alleles within a gene pool from one generation to the next."Sorry... despite your dire attempts to contort the *facts, evolution is not a fact. IN FACT!... based on your approach, creation would also become a fact(ouchies)! As I mentioned in an earlier statement... The general consensus in debates regarding evolutionary science is that most commonly, people will pull our technical wrap sheets as a means to show there prowess whilst shifting the focus from the framework which embodies the theory to begin with. And as I have stated numerous times prior to this one.... We simply do not have the scientific evidence necessary to support the theory that mutations can or have generated a new species. We can paste information until the cows come home... it won't change this standing *fact.Similarly... we can argue about what you accept or choose to believe without ever making a dent in reality. Make of it what you will, but unless the above mentioned criteria changes this argument is pointless. Additionally... based on the scientific method, if we settle on never being able to substantiate the possibilities that a new species can or has been formed as a result of mutations, then evolution will never become a fact. If were being intellectually honest about it.
disgodJul 30, 2008
****EDIT****Could the theory of evolution be wrong? Yes, but all evidence points towards the theory of evolution being correct, but the fact that species evolve is unequivocally true. The methods and processes by which evolution occurs is the only part which is up for debate
essteeJul 31, 2008
If a rant means someone not standing-by as you try and post manipulative statements such as evolution is a fact, then yes... this is definitely a rant. I don't really see what difference that can possibly make, but whatever. You know I'm a creationist because I linked to a creationist website? To be honest I never even took the time to look up the site credentials, and I don't think I ever would have anyways.... Does it even matter? If the questions are valid who cares who wrote them!Your determination of my preferences on life and origin do not being any credit toward you capacity to reason things out now does it. I wonder if you feel my position as a creationist on life and origin was fact?I can see you're frustration at this point in the exchange, and you should know that it was never my intent to swap evolutionary bits with you in the first place. Which was precisely why I insisted on redirecting attention towards your original statement. The bottom line is this....I can't tell you or anyone else for that matter what criteria to follow in determining what qualifies as reality or truth(fact). However... you can't expect people to sit idle as you post your beliefs on what are facts in regards to life and expect it to go unchallenged.While you may think evolution is obvious, I am not on the gravy train from claims, papers and websites. While I do accept evidence, my preference is to settle on areas that harmonize with the big picture. If a hypothesis correlate or harmonizes with reality and all the criteria are met then its worthy of being used as evidence. However, "truth" in science, can only truly be obtained we get to observe it such as in experiments. So... in the case of e.coli, who is to say that the organisms didn't have the means to change as part of its design? As far as that goes, it would not qualify as evidence to substantiate moving something up from theory up to a fact. Furthermore... I would still not approve the notion that evolution is somehow a fact because I find the term far to endearing. Everyone and there dog knows that most people are completely oblivious to the onset that evolution is a component of the Theory of Evolution and that there are few if any distinctions made to differentiate the two. In my opinion e.coli, the fossils, the similarities and common ground between all living things are all indications of a shared origin. Does this mean its evolution, well we don't know! It is possible that those change fall under that definition. And as it stands the best we can do without lying is accepting that we believe it to be true. Since we simply do not have the information necessary to change it at this time.So why the fact? The only fact I see is that you believe we have enough evidence to substantiate evolution. However, how can it be a known fact if it is not widely accepted as a fact in anything other than those who support evolution(evolutionists)? *** Evolutionists/Creationist. I have no idea where this came from but I think its a fitting term. I find many radical similarities between these two groups btw.
melvinschlubmanAug 6, 2008
> No, what he is saying is that evolution adapts you to your environment. Ok, that's fine. Still, "Evolution only goes forwards" seems to be no more compelling or meaningful than the more general claim that "Time only goes forwards".
ajkrikAug 18, 2008
They're cousins.