Is Theory of Evolution Now More Questionable in Light of Today's Report?

Question

Latest research shows that Home Erectus lived side by side with Homo Habilis. So, it could very well be that the fossilized bones that scientists had earlier looked at belonged to a genetic freak rather that of normal people who lived in those days. If they had found fossilized bones of a pygmie, wouldn't they have made the same wrong assumptions?

See this link, fresh from Yahoo:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070808/ap_on_sc/human_evolution

Most responders missed the point. "Evolution" by the very definition of the word assumes modification in successive generations over hundreds of thousands of years. But if Homo sapiens and Homo habilis lived at the SAME time at the SAME place, it makes the theory of evolution highly dubious. It could mean one of several things:

1. Home habilis were not even human and never EVOLVED into Homo sapiens.

2. Homo habilis were freaks of nature-like pygmies-and never in the chain of evolution.

Now, the mere opinion of some scientists cannot be taken as facts, unless they put forward some other evidence to support their continued belief in evolution. Simply asserting that "scientists are still working on it" and therefore one must continue to believe in Evolution is hypocrisy, when we are asked to believe only for which there is strong evidence.

Unless scientists come up with a better explanation, the theory of evolution, in my view, has suffered a deathblow.

Answer 1

10?

Answer 2

No, it isn't. Evolution has always been questionable. That's what science is: questioning reality to find out what is true. Evolution is a proven theory, but those that want to hold on to their own beliefs simply choose not to accept it.

Think of it this way, if you find a Ford Model T in the junk yard and decide to try to figure out how it worked, based on the way your 2007 Mitsubishi Eclipse works, it's clear that there is a relationship between the two. Both have four tires, seats for driver and passengers, a steering device, and an engine, but they are also very different. The Eclipse has an iPod docking station and CD player mounted in the dashboard, as well as a different braking system, climate control, power locks and windows, fuel injection, and too many other innovations to mention in this post.

Again, it's clear that the two are related, both are definitely cars, unquestioningly. But when you try to figure out how the Model T works by comparing it to the Eclipse, you're bound to have some misunderstandings. You think the Model T is missing parts, when those parts were never there to begin with. So when the mechanics trying to put the Model T back together discover that you need a hand crank to start the Model T instead of simply turning the key in the ignition, as with another Mitsubishi model of that same time period, that DOES NOT PROVE THAT FLYING CARPETS ARE REAL!
It simply means that they discovered MORE about the evolution of the automobile then they had previously known.

Please, leave the flying carpet ideas behind and think logically.

Answer 3

Nope. For real scientists, it is just as questionable. All theories are open to question. It is not a belief system.

Darwinism, however, that group that BELIEVES in evolution and tries to use it as a club to strike at religion is likely to be upset.

No credit to science there.

It would be kind of like condemning all Christians because of the Branch Davidians.

Kind of silly.

Understand the nature of science. Don't just buy into the playing the "adversary" or Satan to the Darwinist's "God".

Science is a method, a tool, the theories are the best present idea of how things work, why they are what they are, etc. They are always open to question and adjustment, or even to being tossed out completely. Those who resist that are unaware of the basics of science.

Answer 4

Not at all. There have been several conflicting theories among evolutionists for decades. The article simply points to new evidence to support one of those. It'll be difficult for many here to understand but that's what science does folks. It searches for new evidence to explain phenomena. Were it true that every theory was correct from its inception we would still think the world is flat or that Newtons explanation of gravity was correct. Columbus and Einstein demonstrated new ideas when they came across new evidence. That's science my friends.

Answer 5

Science progresses and adjusts as new facts are brought to light. And no, they might not have lived "side by side", their reciprocal anatomies being much different thus probably leading them to live in very different ecological niches.

The arborescence of evolutive affiliations is very complex, and adjustments to it are inevitable as the fossil record increases. Do not make the mistake of thinking about these fact-based revisions and adjustments as weaknesses, they are strenghts.
.

Answer 6

Wrong!

It just means H. habilis lived on later, possibly after giving rise to the ancestors of H. erectus (via another species).

Whether or not H. habilis is a direct human ancestor or not has been a debate for some time, and it's still not resolved (though we have a better picture now).

Answer 7

Have you missed this part of the article?

"This is not questioning the idea at all of evolution; it is refining some of the specific points," Anton said. "This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn't do. It's a continous self-testing process."

Evolution is a fact. Mutation occurs; natural selection occurs; if you understand them, you understand evolution. There is no question about that.

However, it's the process that shaped (and is shaping) all life on earth - as such, there's an immense amount of details to be worked out.

As we learn more we gradually refine our knowledge. It doesn't mean that evolution is questionable - it seems only christians jump to that wrong conclusion.

http://www.wellingtongrey.net/miscellanea/archive/2007-01-15%20--%20science%20vs%20faith.html

Answer 8

"'This is not questioning the idea at all of evolution; it is refining some of the specific points,' Anton said. 'This is a great example of what science does and religion doesn't do. It's a continous self-testing process.'"

Why doesn't this question the idea of evolution? Because they say it doesn't. The idea of evolution isn't allowed to be questioned or otherwise people might get all sorts of strange ideas in their head like maybe it's false.

Answer 9

No, the theory is not "more questionable." Read the whole article.

Meanwhile, ponder this: Let's imagine that you're in a restaurant and you order veal piccata. The waiter apologizes and tells you that they've run out of veal.

Do you insist that the waiter bring you veal, or do you change your order based on new information?

Answer 10

Hi,
There are many people here that haven't done their homework. You are in fact correct. Modern Man has been around just as long if you look at all the data. Everyone here should read Forbidden Archeology. This book deals with all the data in a very honest and scientific way. If you are going to look at the data, then at least look at ALL the data.

Answer 11

This does nothing to throw the theory of evolution into question. As a matter of fact, this has been known for quite some time. Try again.