Should i put this theory in my book?

Question

I never majored in science or even minored, so should a lake of my knowledge in science stop me from putting a scienctific theory in a book of psyhcology even though it is based up the birth and evolution of one being in its self?
Here it is?

When we move down the family tree we start to see that are family could never have come from one singularity or one single branch of DNA.
We had two parents those two had four parents and those four parents had eight parents and those eight parents had sixteen parents and those sixteen parents had thrity two parents. (Thats just five generation) Using this concept we must understand that there were many humans walking around at the beganing of earth. Now we come upon the problem how could these people all be the same, there should be deformities when it comes to evolution.
Since we can not say that we as creatures on earth are all the same. We must think that we evolved from different formation of dna,(non singularity) each making us what.

creature that we are today, but to say that we were all different but started from the same point in time would lead us to deformites of dna and perfect beings as the creatures that we are. If we started at the same point in time life we as just simple being cells that we were millions of years ago would lead us togather to form deformities with each other and there would be nothing keeping us from deforming instead of becomeing better. IF we had all started from one singularity, there would be deformed creatures, there would be no way that evolution could take many creatures and not come up with all these deformites in the human being and other anmals that evoled along with them.
If you drew a line and called it the beganing.
This line would be non singularity (remember we can not start from a singlularity) since we are all different we would not evolve at all instead deform to the genes that we are spilting from. Over all there would be nothing to stop us from deforming even more.

Even if defomities died off, there would still have to be deformities to defomities, leaving us with some specias today with something toatly different than what we as humans have.
This is not including the little differences of skin color but should be a bigger change in are apperance such as a hand growing out of some ones elbow there is no reason that it should not be happening as an over all specias?

Answer 1

No.

Your theory is scientifically flawed, and your understanding of the theory of natural selection/evolution is limited. If you did the needed research you would learn a lot, but you would not include that theory in your book.

Answer 2

i think that you dont really understand why relatives sometimes become 'deformed' babies. If one parent has, lets say, has a daltonism gene in his dna, there is a chance that his relative has one too, so teh child gets 50% possibility of being daltonic instead of 25% with a single daltonistic gened parent. Deformity is just possbilities, how you can make sure that there were many possibilities that these 'beginning' people had genes that could cause deformities for their children?

Answer 3

With the responses that counts towards or counters your theory.

Answer 4

Well, the question you need to be asking yourself is... is this relevant to my book? If so, why? Then you can add it if the answer is yes.

Answer 5

WEll ONE PROBLEM BUDDY. MY BROTHER WHO HAS AUTISM AND IS EXTREMELY PHYSICALLY IMPAIRED SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT IMPERFECT IN FACT HES QUITE INTELLIGENT AND HE HATES HIS LIFE HOWEVER HES TOO HELPLESS TO END IT HIMSELF WE ARE NOT ALL PERFECT FOOL