Is Evolution justified enough that our world is made up of so many diversified species?

Question

If not what do u think the earth is made up of? 10 points will be given to the most sincere attempt irregardless of answers. Tks!

Answer 1

I find it hard to believe that evolution, alone, results in all this based upon other science, such as animal behavior.

Let's start with man and make everthing else a given.

It is said the Chimp DNA and MAN DNA is 97-99% the same, the difference is about 4 million added or subtracted strands of 35 million altered strands.

Evolution shows man in like 4 - 6 steps. How did all that millions of DNA change and alter in just 4 - 6 steps. AND more importantly why do we not see such changes today.

Here's what we see today. Blind, mute, hearing impared, color blind, psychotic and retarded.

Six recessive classifications of humans that amount to a small portion of the births and gene pool. The rest of us are "basically" normal.

Society, as a whole, has problems with ALL of these sub classes.

How many of you out there actually "embrase" not just "put up with" if you'll excuse my French "retardos."

You know what I mean. "Special olympic people."

How many of you run and hide the moment they appear.

This is COMMON behavior in general. Animals do it too.

Now, if a Chimp gave birth to someone with more human nails, less hair and the ability to speak, what would the other Chips do. Run, hide and avoid them.

We tend to reject such mutations.

Human parents tend to love them, but dogs, cats and many other forms of life generally do not pamper the "defective" members of the litter.

It's called "survival of the fittest."

It's called the "weak shall be left aside to die."

Now, under Evolution how does the "different" survive and more imporantaly how does it propigate!?

There would have to be a "lot" of similar "defects" to create a gene pool that allows "Cro-magnon" to propegate.

What, Chimps started making "mutants" in groves and NOW they no longer do this?

What, the Chimps that spawned mutatants became extinct and all that is left or "normal" or not "abnormal" chimps?

For a species to flourish there has to be a gene pool of "like" beings.

The alternative is to admit that Cro-Mangnon man mated with Monkeys. What we term Bestailaty today. Today we put people in Jail for doing that. We call them criminals, deviates.

It would concevably take far more than just 4 - 6 steps to develope man with 35mm base pairs changed and 3 - 4 million additions and subractions.

This kind of gene mutation is done with just 4 -6 steps! 4 -6 species of man?

Minows begat sharks and whales?

To say, even over millions of years, that all of the life on the Earth came from either a simple virus or an amoeba is a very big leap of faith.

How come we're not evolving any more?

And why is it the SENTIANT being, MAN is primarily the ONLY ONE that praticses WAR.

Few, if any, in the lower species go to war.

They do not, as a rule, band together and strike an enemy to take over land and territory. Some do run in packs, but a pack is not an Army.

How much "refining" does it take to make methane, pentane, octane out of oil!

This refining doesn't occur naturally. It is done with willful intent.

One grape may burst and the sugars meld with the yeasts to form a small amount of alcohol, but it takes willful intent to create Wine or Mead.

Why are there no new species today. Science has observed nature for hundrdreds if not close to 1,000 years and we nave no new species to speak of.

We certainly do see mutations in viruses.

It is entirely possible if not probably that, AIDs for example, could switch from being fluid based to air based, in which case people could catch AIDs from being too close and breathing the same air as someone with AIDs, which is a scarey thought.

We see it in things like Bird flu, which jumps to humans.

But this is about the only form of evolution we see.

How many gene alterations are required to produce a Savant? A mute, a blind person, a color blind person.

Resessive and dominate genes. These cause blue eyes, brown eyes.

For man to evole as science says, certainly takes hundres of steps, not just 4 - 6 steps.

Maybe thousands or millions of steps.

Then we have to get these "step" changes in numbers to create a gene pool with most of the new additions or changes!

This means we have to get 25 - 100 mutants to make the next step by propegation.

The odds of this in the WORLD are astonishing!

This also leads us and some say it did Darwin, to the conculsion that BLACKS, WHITES, REDS, YELLOWS, BROWNS are truly autonomus are are derived from different sources, but have enough similarities to create a gene pool.

Maybe the current mating patters between Black and Whites are going to create a new race of what we currently term MULATOS.

Are we seeing it in action?

We have two factions: LIke should be with like (white with white, black with black, yellow with yellow, etc.) or who cares!

ARe the who cares a living example of Darwinism in action and in 500 years will this bring a new "race" or "species" of humans?

Is inter-breeding as bad or can be likened to the cloning concepts? To genetic alteration concept?

We are making a new set of DNA by whites and black breeding.

It's not so much a matter of is it good or bad (although it gets us back to Cro-magnons mating with Monkeys) --- sorry, we have to face these possible realities --- or does it simply "create something new" to the gene pool!

It is said, but not totally proven, that in black families they want the "whiter" children to mate with "whiter" people rather than "blacker" people.

This is selective genetics, done on an amature basis.

A black family that produces a near white child feels that child has a better chance of surviing and growing in the society becasue they are "whiter."

This is often as sad but true statement.

See, this is how people (and animals) think.

This concept regualates progegation.

This concept regulates "acceptance" of a given offspring.

It is true in all species.

"Defective" dogs are often shunned by the mother and not even fed.

If humans intervine and the defective dog survives, who know what will happen down the road.

It is because of this " shunning" process that evolution has a hard time exsting in the real world.

If ma and pa Chimp produces a baby with flater nails instead of circular nails, with less hair on the body and head, do they keep it. Most times, nature says NO it is rejected.

By rejecting the mutants evolution is set back.

How, then, did ALL the species of animals on the Earth evolve from a simple protozoea and survive, breed and created vastly different offspring and with whom did they propegate!

Why don't we see this today!

Why don't we see, Salmon creating something that isn't Salmon!

In enough numbers to created a viable spieces!

Man and monkey were obviously designed, based upon mammary, to produce only one, two or at the outside three offsping from one mating, while a Dog or Cat, which has far more nipples, was designed to create a "litter" of offspring.

Humans, therefore, never made "litters" on a regular basis, otherwise human females would have 4, 6 or 8 nipples or teats.

Evolution also doesn't explain redundacy. Why do MEN have nipples!

Can anyone answer this?! Do male DOGS or CATS have nipples?

Why do human males have nipples.

I'll admit it's confounding as to why male Apes have nipples too!

These things are duncil. They are not needed, so why in all the hundres of thousands of years of Evolution hasn't the MALE nipple vanished!

Evolution, at least in the Darwinian sense, doesn't fully explain any of this!

It leaves more questions than answers!

Have any humans been born without an APPENDIX!?

Someone answer that, too!

If the Appendix serves no great purpose today, why aren't some humans born without it! Evolution would DICATATE this occur!

Undert the tenants of Evolution those born without an appendix, would marry those without and appendix and created a species that, for the most part, has no appendix.

That would be a sub-classification.

The Darwinian concept that ALL life and ALL spieces evololved from the amoeba is a very hard pill to swallow and requires the kind of "leap of faith" that the devotely religious hold dear!

Plus, not one scientists has ever created an AMoeboa out of a test tube full of Amino Acids.

We know what the building blocks of life are in Science, but we can't produce one cell of life from those building blocks without resorting to human and scientific trickery, which then becomes INTELLEGENT DESIGN!

Now the Randomists are stuck!

I offer no solution other than maybe an INTELLEGENT being far superior to MANKIND made all of some of this happen.

The means a GOD.

A superior being who "made" all of this.

All of you RANDOMISTS, shake up your test tubes of Amino Acids and MAKE anything!

Answer 2

Absolutely. When you start researching Kingdoms, phylum's, etc., it is pretty clear how all the various species are divided. At first glance, it seems there are hundreds of millions of variations of life. However, once you start dividing things up by endoskeleton and exoskeleton, it divides up a lot. Next, divide up mammals and non-mammals, cold and warm blooded, ans so on, it's gets real pretty quick. Then, some examination really sheds light - like giraffes and humans have the same number of neck vertebra, birds and humans have the same number of arm and leg bones (humerus, radius, ulna, tibia, fibula, femur).

Take an anthropology class in college and a HUGE amount of light will be shed on how similar all life forms are.

Answer 3

Evolution, in the sense of goo-to-you, is a philosophical idea that is not supported by the evidence, and is easily refuted.

Sometimes when people say evolution they mean natural selection. (Often people deliberately confuse the two.)
Natural selection happens all around and has resulted in, for example, wolves, coyotes, foxes, domestic dogs, etc. All different kinds of dogs, but their gene pool is a subset of the original dog gene pool.
Evolution is unable to explain where the information in the dog genes came from in the first place. It is claimed that mutations are the cause, but mutations do not add new information and are almost always harmful. Natrual selection acts to weed out mutations.

The presense of information implies intelligence, namely the God who created the world.

Answer 4

Diversification is a wonderful example of evolution. Organisms of all sorts are always (gradually) changing to attempt to find a better fit in their environment. Because so many organisms are trying so many different ways to survive in so many different environments, it is no wonder at all that evolution produces diversification.

Intelligent design would show just the opposite of what is seen in the world today. Rather than having so many organisms struggling to make it in the world, they would be designed to perform optimally and would always manage to keep ahead of the food chain competition.

Answer 5

I believe in evolution enough, only from the point of view of adaptation, but I STRONGLY am against the belief that man originated from primates. If you have a religion, you'd probably agree with me...

Surely Adam and Eve couldnt have evolved from primates. The thought of it is totally unacceptable.. they were the first of their kind, created newly, hence, called humans....

evloution could be justified for most animals but not us... 'early humans' in my opinion weren't really humans

Answer 6

If you're asking if the theory of evolution can explain all the different species, then yes. Is there anything else that explains it?

Answer 7

Yup. I'm in the middle of reading Darwin's "The Origin of Species" (slow, boring reading), and it's amazing how much detail he has in there. (That's a big reason why it's so boring. But I wanted to read it to see what everyone's fussing over.)