If Darwin was right and evolution is a scientific fact?

Question

does that mean that the missing link between man and ape really is black people? Or was that just the one tiny area of his theory that isn't correct? Don't evolutionists gloss on aspects of Darwin's theory they don't like, while claiming at the exact same time that Christians do this with the Bible? An inconvenient truth?

thank you atheists, for calling me ignorant, a bigot, an idiot, saying christianity is for me, etc. you clearly out-debating me again. good show, young chaps. you will always be slightly above me when it comes to class

Answer 1

Please remember that it was DARWIN HIMSELF who said, "Indeed, if it comes to be that living cells are more complex than we at first presumed (which at that time was only thought to have a wall and a nucleus...nothing else), then my ENTIRE THEORY OF EVOLUTION IS WRONG [[emphasis mine]]."

Answer 2

Evolution is real. As for the missing link, it probably is an apish-man and not black people. Not to say it might not be, but you cant say that black people are the missing link because humanity arose out of africa and that is where black people can trace their roots to. Evolution is not not real as some people might say. They say that the creation story in the Bible is the right version. Well who's to say that the story wasn't 7 days and it was 3 billion years? The evidence is heavily against them and anyone who says that there is no evolution. So, in conclusion, for the most part, evolution is real and Darwin was essentially correct.

Answer 3

Evolutionary theory is by no means the exact same theory as it was during Darwin's day... Christians don't seem to understand that scientific theory is not absolute, not constant and unchanging, quite unlike their bible which has been the same for many centuries. Creationist logic is odd... they think that the logic that they apply for their dogma is the same logic applied to scientific theory; i.e., if you manage to find one thing wrong with evolution, you have to throw out the entire thing. That's not the way science works.

Answer 4

Do you really need people to explain the difference between "faith" and science AGAIN, so that you can again ignore it and again make idiotic statements like this?

Science is about progress. It's about the refinement of ideas, and, eventually, inevitably, about the replacement of old and outmoded ideas with new ones that better describe and explain and predict reality.

Religion is about starting with the assumption that you've been handed the complete picture by some external "authority," and then stubbornly proceeding to try to wedge reality into that framework, like Procrustes with his bed (look it up). No "new" knowledge is even allowed, much less accounted for. Pointing out facts that don't fit is seen as mere "blasphemy."

Then there's the whole ridiculous racist element of your "question," and you end by calling it an "inconvenient truth," which I bet you think is some kind of clever jab at global warming. Sigh. It really IS pointless trying to educate some people, and you're living proof.

Answer 5

Ugh, here we go again... One would think that if you REALLY wanted to know the truth about evolution, you would have at least read 1 book on the subject written by a scientist. It is clear that you have not, according to your questions.

No modern scientist says that black people are missing links between humans and apes (black people ARE just as human as any other human alive). Do your homework first. You are only making Christians look bad.

Answer 6

Good lord, man! Black people are modern Homo Sapiens Sapiens just like everyone else. There is no one missing link there are hundreds of links between Man and apes - Homo Habilis, Homo Erectus, Zinjanthropus, Australopithecus etc.
Evolutionists don't gloss over Darwin. Evolutionary theory has expanded and deepened since Darwin's ground breaking work just as physics has since Newton.
Y!A converted the word h-o-m-o to ****. I didn't know it would do that.

Answer 7

Darwin came up with the beginning of the theory and it was later added to and corrected.

And a black person probably was the missing link considering that people are only white skinned due to a mutation.

I forgot which study showed that black people were the original people and that asian DNA is about 95% similar to black and white is a mix of black asian and "other"

Nobody knows what this "other" is though.

Answer 8

First off, you are grossly misstating what darwin said.

But here goes:

1. Virtually all Englishmen in Darwin's time viewed blacks as culturally and intellectually inferior to Europeans. Some men of that time (such as Louis Agassiz, a staunch creationist) went so far as to say they were a different species. Charles Darwin was a product of his times and no doubt viewed non-Europeans as inferior in ways, but he was far more liberal than most: He vehemently opposed slavery (Darwin 1913, especially chap. 21), and he contributed to missionary work to better the condition of the native Tierra del Fuegans. He treated people of all races with compassion.

2. The mention of "favoured races" in the subtitle of Origin of Species merely refers to variations within species which survive to leave more offspring. It does not imply racism.

3. The views of Darwin, or of any person, are irrelevant to the fact of evolution. Evolution is based on evidence, not on people's opinions.

thank you, and good night.

Answer 9

The first humans were probably black, yes, seeing as it appears that the hominid line originated in Africa.

What's your point? Oh, gonna make the claim that since they were first, they were inferior?

Wrong again. They're still Homo sapiens sapiens, so we're all one species. Further, evolution does not have a concept of 'better' or 'worse' just 'more adapted' and 'less adapted'.

So... any point you might be making, you might want to be a little more clear because it looks like you're just blowing smoke.

Answer 10

That's the beauty of the scientific process. They present a theory and then say "come and knock this down" and then people come along and improve upon the theory.

Why is it so fantastically difficult for christians to comprehend. They seem to think that if one aspect of something Darwin said is wrong, the whole house of cards falls down.

Please understand,...this ain't constructed like biblical literalism where it all falls apart if one thing is off. Evolutionists discarded that long, long ago. Read a book! No! Not THAT book! Read *another* book!

Answer 11

Um. Primate skin is pale.

Dark skin evolved because it gave better protection to folate levels (B vitamin) against damage by the sun. There was no need for that when we were covered by hair.

Folate deficiencies lead to malformations of the neural tubes in a fetus. It's a serious birth defect; anything that guarded against it would be evolutionarily advantageous.