Chalres Darwin himself admitted that if it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, his theory would absolutely broken down. His theory breaks down at the molecular biological level. There is a book out by Michael Behe titled "Darwins Black Box" that has the central focus on the fact that ther are many organs that have not been and cannot be "formed by numberous, successive, slight modifications." What does this mean... the difference that humans have with monkeys are distinctly different and have been proven to not have evovled from anything so there is no way we evolved from monkeys.
The truth of the matter is that the fossil records shows not evidence of transitional fossils and consequently does not accurately describe a large class of observations.
It is untrue that the fossil record is complete except for a few missing links.
2006-11-16 07:02:42 · 13 answers · asked by Pastor 1 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Your whole statement is untrue.
2006-11-16 07:05:27 · answer #1 · answered by October 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Obviously Lehigh University has never heard of Grafting plants or Gene splicing, both of which are a part of Man's desires to Intellegently Design.
Intellegent Design is used on a regular basis inscience. It's how they create Flu Vaccines!
Some guy thunk it up, tinkered in the lab and made it happen!
What, when MAN does it, it's legitimate, when MAN can't explain it, it's not!
Only experimental "evidence" has ever been found of Gluons. Neither free quarks nor free gluons have ever been observed
2006-11-16 15:33:05 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
True, I feel if darwin were absolutely correct with his theory of natural selection, then the religious would have already degenerated into babling monkeys by now.
Wait a minute.....Nevermind...
Faculty on Dr. Behe:
"It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific."
2006-11-16 15:08:18 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
You sound like a religious person who made up his mind about evolution, then decided to study it.
Don't get stuck on stupid, evolution is a fact! I will say that although not all is known about how we all evolved, it in no way discredits the theory. Many of Einstein's theory's are still not proved, but that does not make them false. Galileo's theory about the Earth not being the center of the universe was discredited by religious people like you for centuries. Until of course science proved it beyond a doubt. But he was still jailed for the rest of his life because of religious zealots who refused to believe the bible is wrong.
Don't be on the wrong side of history, get off the 'science is bad' band wagon and embrace the truth.
2006-11-16 15:09:31 · answer #4 · answered by barter256 4 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Er this has been dealt with. Try reading the trial notes for the Dover case which is a good summary as to why Behe is a charlatan.
Edit:
Nice link J.P. I think it should be posted at the top of this site!
2006-11-16 15:05:30 · answer #5 · answered by fourmorebeers 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Our knowledge is not complete in any field and Michael Behe's book just proves that we have much to learn.
2006-11-16 15:06:13 · answer #6 · answered by kearneyconsulting 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
"the difference that humans have with monkeys are distinctly different "
if they are so different, why are chimpanzees used in medical research as a precursor to human trials? it's because they aren't "distinctly different", they are very similar, you don't know what you are talking about...
2006-11-16 15:18:18 · answer #7 · answered by Nick F 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's kinda funny that Michael Behe's entire (ENTIRE!) Department has disowned him, publicly and vehemently, on their website.
Don't believe me? http://www.lehigh.edu/~inbios/news/evolution.htm
2006-11-16 15:06:00 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
I don't see how, you need to read up on the force called Gluon.
2006-11-16 15:06:03 · answer #9 · answered by RoboTron5.0 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Never heard of this "Darwain" fellow. And this wasn't a question. IT's a drive-by preach.
2006-11-16 15:04:51 · answer #10 · answered by Black Parade Billie 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
What is with all of these stupid people posting science material in R&S?
IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT EVOLUTION POST IN BIOLOGY JACK@SS!
2006-11-16 15:17:06 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋