Darwin and Intelligent Design, where are the missing?

Question

links ? is Darwin's theory of life being a coincidental product of chemicals in a warm prehistoric environment and human life nothing more than another coincidental product of millions of years of genetic mutation and development accepted and where is the evidence ? Serious answers please .. thanks

Answer 1

What link is missing?

I think it would be better if evolution is explained better. Start with current evidence, and go backwards:

- We see it happen very quickly within viruses, molds, etc

- We see it happen gradually within species. When environment changes, we see species change as well. A perfect example is a species of bird who's beaks have been getting smaller as a result of their environment changing. Some people argue that these are merely mutations, not evolution. Well, when a species changes enough, it is no longer that species anymore.

- We see it in happen slowly in the fossil record, espceially from ape to man. We've dated apelike fossils from 5 million years ago, apelike with some human features 4 million years ago, half ape/half human about 3 million years ago...all the way to about half a million years ago when the fossil records became completely human.

Click here for pics, descriptions, timelines, etc. http://talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/

All this evidence IMPLIES evolution as the creating factor. No, it doesn't prove it, it doesn't even come close. Darwin himself said that its tough to believe...but its the best explanation we have with the evidence we have.

Personally, I can believe that some amino acids got together and formed a protien or two. I can even believe that perhaps enough proteins got together to form some sort of life (from what I understand, certain viruses are only made of 6 or 7 protiens). But even a single cell is so complicated that I don't see how a being as complicated as humans could have come to be.

But like I said, as of NOW all the evidence we have implies evolution...so that's what we're going with.

Email me with any questions

Answer 2

Yes, it is accepted by the overwhelming majority of biologists and palaeontologists. The evidence is multiple (which is one reason that the theory is so widely accepted). For further info, go to http://www.talkorigins.org .

In general, the evidence includes organismic DNA evidence, the mitochondrial DNA evidence, and structural divergence evidence. Since this is a complex scientific theory, it requires more than a 4 paragraph answer. (You would probably not expect a physicist to explain the workings of the structure of an atom within the confines of this forum.) However, the number of biologists who argue against evolution is so small and the evidence they produce so easily refuted that they are only rarely published in the scientific literature.

FROM TALKORIGINS.ORG:
Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution -- genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. -- is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory."

Answer 3

First, Darwin said nothing of how life began. Evolution has nothing to do with that.

Second, the missing links are all around you in any reputable museum of natural history. There is a fairly detailed fossil record of the human evolution, and the DNA analysis of thousands of species supports evolution, and the DNA analysis of the primate families supports human evolution.

Humans are nothing more than electrochemical systems of a certain type that arose by chaotic processes.

Answer 4

Your reality, "Darwin's theory of life being a coincidental made from chemical substances in a warmth prehistoric surroundings and human life no longer some thing better than yet another coincidental made from tens of millions of years of genetic mutation and progression..." isn't authentic. this isn't Darwin's theory, no longer even close. in case you opt for to communicate, you could carry close what you're speaking about; or you'll look ignorant and this would harm your reason. today, a number of your fellow creationists are cringing, understanding that you've made all of them look a touch stupid.

Answer 5

I believe that nothing or on one made us. I do believe that we may have been altered from a creature that was here before Us.
It only takes one creature to change a little bit . to make a new species. What are the odds of finding that one human type creature that changed into what we finally became.

Answer 6

Shouldn't it be Darwin or Intelligent Design? Come on dude.....undoofus yourself.
And yes ...there is 'Intelligent Design'......us. We're the intelligence.

Answer 7

Every fossil that is discovered is a missing link. We have thousands of missing links.

You need to read what science really says about evolution, not what creationists claim science says about evolution. Creationists LIE.

Answer 8

intelligent design means absolutely nothing besides 'miracle.' another ploy by the evangelists to discredit evolution theory.

Answer 9

There are no answers. Even Darwin said his theory was filled with assumptions and questions.

Too bad we often forget, even in the classroom that it is a THEORY - a poor one at that.

Answer 10

Can you think of any better explanation?