Was Darwin REALLY right?

Question

Or do most of us just assume he was based off what the media says.
Do we really know the truth about Evolution or Creationism?
Both sides have lied, after all.

Answer 1

When Charles Darwin published The Origin of Species in 1859, he brought scientific credibility to the concept that man developed slowly from previous life forms. Most people don't realize that the concept of evolution did not actually originate with Darwin but predates him by thousands of years. Even the mechanisms proposed by Darwin can be attributed, in a large part, to others. What sets Darwin apart is the timing of his work. The intellectual community of Northern Europe was ripe for a naturalistic explanation of life. The distortion of Biblical Christianity was brining faith in the supernatural under increasing ridicule, and humanism (man making himself the center of all things) was rapidly replacing the Christian belief in absolute truth. Thus, when an alternative to creation seemed to have been found, it was rapidly accepted as fact. In actuality, Darwin proved neither where life came from nor how it developed. He merely proposed a method whereby this transformation from beast to man seemed possible. With the exception of mutations, what Darwin believed about evolution has changed little in the last 140 years. The concepts popularized by Darwin have been taught with the fervor of religion dogma ever since.

Darwin suggested several things concerning the origin of our current biological diversity. The first was that "the species are not immutable." In common language, this means that the present forms of animal and plant life have developed by changes from ancestral forms over great periods of time. Evolutionists still believe that given enough time, there is essentially no limit to biological variation. Darwin proposed that micro-evolution could be extended to account for nearly all of the diversity of life and that all life has a few original ancestors. Darwin also postulated that a force called "natural selection" (commonly known as "survival of the fittest") is responsible for guiding this upward development of all life. Can this magical force transform an ameba into a man?

Almost every biology textbook has the following example of how the following example of how natural selection works. In England, before the industrial revolution, it was common to find peppered moth in proportions of 95 percent light-colored to 5 percent dark-colored. This was primarily because the majority of the trees at that time were light-colored moths were better camouflaged. Thus fewer light-colored moths were eaten by predators. After the industrial revolution, the trees became primarily dark-colored (due to pollution) and the light-colored moths were now at a disadvantage to the predators. Thus, the peppered moth population shifted to 95 percent dark-colored peppered moths. This is a classic example of the powerful ability of natural selection to adapt an organism to its environment. But how does this explain the development of completely different types of animals? We started with light and dark moths and ended up with...light and dark moths. Nothing new developed; the population merely shifted. Furthermore, it has recently been disclose that the evidence for the shift in moth population was doctored by gluing moths to trees for illustration purposes.

There does not exist even one example of natural selection producing a new animal, a new organ, or even a major permanent change in an existing organism. This is because "natural selection" is just that-selection. It can create nothing new. It can only select the most advantageous information which is already present in the molecular blueprint of the organism. Natural selection cannot cause new information to be added to the DNA of an animal

Answer 2

As to whether there is truth in evolution, my best example is the Human Brain.

Studies, like that done by the University of Michigan, and features in the Discovery Channel program, The Amazing Life of the Human Brain, shows just how amazing the human brain is.

Every second while awake, we are absorbing 40MBs of data per second. That’s 144 gigabytes per hour and about 2 terabytes per day. That’s a lot of data even for the largest computer. When we sleep at night, and only at night or under nighttime conditions, all that data is sorted and stored through the creation of synaptic connectors and biochemical bounds. The brain has enough volume to allow for the creation of these storage connectors to last over 10,000 years.

Without the need of a creator, what evolutionary pressure could cause the need for this much volume that would take that long to fill? Clearly, man was either created by God to live that long, or if evolve, once lived that long, and has since de-evolved to what we are today. Which do you think it is?

Evolution does take place, in that animals have evolved and humans have de-evolved since the time of the creation. Many divergent species are related, such as the Meerkat/Hyena and the Lion/House cat. A house cat can breed with a lion, I wonder if the same is possible the Hyena and Meerkat?

This is why I believe in God. I use the brain he gave me, and designed for me, to determine something beyond imagining.

Answer 3

What do you mean 'most of us just assume he was based off what the media says'?

Yes, Darwin was pretty much right about natural selection - it's one of those ideas that is so beautifully simple that it's more or less undeniable (well, people do deny it, but not on good grounds).

Of course, he knew nothing of genetics. Also, certain modern evolutionary biologists also question whether all features of organisms should be explained by natural selection - drift, environmental factors etc can play a part. Interestingly, Darwin anticipated some of this to an extent.

I think it's dangerous to talk about 'both sides' 'lying'. There have been evolutionary biologists who might have lied about things, just as there have been astronomers and creationists and linguists and vicars and politicians who have lied. Also, people make mistakes and misinterpret evidence or pass on urban myths etc etc.

The problem is that the same charge could be laid at any door. Communism versus capitalism? Both sides have lied. This makes no real difference to whether you prefer one system over the other.

Now, if you mean by your question 'Do organisms evolve by natural selection?' then there can be no doubt that he was right. If you mean 'Are we all descended from ape-like ancestors and do we share ancestors with other animals?' then the answer is almost certainly yes - the evidence overwhelmingly points that way.

Answer 4

Scientists have far less reason to lie though. They aren't supported by donations or taxes and in return all they have to do (if religion is lies) is recite some mumbo jumbo once a week. If evolution is proved to be wrong they're not out of a job, they can keep doing research, or move to a different field - but if religion is proved to be wrong then all the religious people lose all their wealth, status and power.

Darwin's ideas can be understood by lots of people, their beauty lies in the simplicity, so you can think for yourself about whether they're right. Religion is often filled with smoke and mirrors and difficult concepts, which people who haven't studied religion and accept it as truth may find hard to understand.

Answer 5

this is an interesting point. Why do you think that Darwin is always the one criticized the most and not more modern evolutionary scientists. It is because, Darwin wasn't completely correct. He developed many ideas about evolution, but over the last 100 years research has improve on his ideas. Evolution isn't wrong but Darwin, hadn't worked everything out yet. Man problems with Darwin's theories are correctly pointed out by creationists but not the fact that many of those problems have been solved with modern theories.

Answer 6

Those who think ID or Creationism (two sides of the same coin) is in any way real are deluding themselves. Evolution is a fact. Creationism is a fantasy.

I would like to see a SPECIFIC INSTANCE where a qualified scientist has "lied" about evolution. It is easy to make statements like that, but you need to back them up with some evidence. I have no idea whether Creationists have lied or not, but I do know that they are delusional at best.

Answer 7

Of course he was, for the most part. Evolution happens. If all you know is what you get from the media, try opening a biology textbook sometime. I'm sure there are some at the library. You can see for yourself that evolution makes perfect sense, and that creationism is bullshit. It's not all that hard, really.

Answer 8

If you have that much distrust in science, why would you think that the photos from Mars and Hubbell are true, that chemotherapy has cured cancer, that flu vaccines work, that nuclear power actually produces electricity, that ultraviolet sunlight causes skin cancer, that bears hibernate, and that your cells contain DNA?

I suggest that you look into the Dover School Board decision to see how a Federal Judge ruled about the presentations of both sides.

^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^ ^v^

Answer 9

Evolution holds up to scrutiny. I find many of the Creationists that choose to rip on it rarely even understand what the theory states. They create a strawman and then proceed to beat it to death.

Answer 10

Science doesn't lie, science is a tool we use to uncover the mysteries of the universe.

Religion says that humans were created seperately. Science (and the truth) says that all life is connected.