How many of you believe science is the best we have but see logical problems with evolutionary theory?

Question

Please, only respond if you see logical problems with neo-Darwinian evolutionary synthesis. If you just want to attempt to argue with me I'm going to delete your answer. I understand your arguments already.

I forgot to add that I do not want creationist mumbo-jumbo either, thank you! Your ideas have no logical consistency either!

Answer 1

I totally feel that way. It's hard to imagine that everything that we see on this planet evolved from essentially nothing. I suppose that's where I get caught up... because like everything else it still doesn't answer the question..."And what happened before that?". "What did that evolve from?".. dust? I don't know... hard to get.. hard to believe... but makes the most sense to me.

So I will still keep myself open to any possibility and continue to try to put it all together for myself.

:o) Be well.

Answer 2

Before I answer your Q, let me provide a context for that answer.

Science, modern science, is both empirical and theoretical. All scientific theories including the theory of evolution of lifeforms are rooted in the knowledge we have accumulated following a set of rules we collectively refer to under the term the "scientific method." We learn about life on and off the planet we live on by studying present living life forms and the evidence of extinct life forms. We have theorized based on that knowledge that life forms today evolved from life forms in the past and we have connected all these life forms by their common chemical and physical similarities which are passed on by DNA changes during reproduction. We have established explanations for the process of evolution which is more complex and more versatile than the bold founders of genetics and the biological sciences ever imagined back when they made public their ideas.

Now then, what are the logical problems with evolutionary theory? They are the same problems faced by any scientific theory which are addressed and discussed in the branch of philosophy known as the "philosophy of science" and specifically the "philosophy of biology." Some of the problems discussed are these. There is no way to indubitably prove causality of the origin of life from non-living physical components. There is no way to explain how the features we refer to as "intelligence" and "consciousness" emerged somewhere during the collective hierarchial organizations and processes we refer to under the word "evolution. " There is no logical way to address the why questions like why did evolution go this way and not that way. Much of the evidence we need to have has been erased by the ongoing changes taking place on the planet and we have to limit ourselves to the evidence provided by the present and the hard to impossible god-like task of knowing what the past was like. The logical problems of connecting the available evidence to our scientific conclusions and our scientific theories are the same any theory or conclusion in science faces when reasoned from evidence. The problems are found under the subject of "problems of Induction."

Answer 3

As with any theory, they are subject to change as new evidence is observed. It does seem logical to me that higher life forms did evolve from lower life forms, especially considering the mutations of DNA that occur over the eons.

My question is "when will we lose our tail bones, body hair, man nipples and other useless body parts?"

Answer 4

I do not think that science is fully equipped to deal with the problem. The reason for this (we assume our scientific understanding of evolution is OK) is that we, that is humans are are single largest force acting on humans. Primarily through sexual selection but in most every way. Humans shape their environments to a very substantial degree. This is unlike moths or birds whose influence on their environments is much smaller.

Therefore human evolution is quite spiritual in nature. If we create a world of want, with hunger and death, where survival requires our full attention this will shape us. Our hand is in the clay. If we create a world where ideas stand or fall on the merits of the idea or we create a world where people stand or fall on the merits of their ideas, --this will have evolutionary consequences. So philosophers and theologians are better equipped to deal with it.

Answer 5

There are very logical problems with evolutionary theory. Apes have not evolved enough to build their own homes!!!
God made man and animals separately, and although some species mutate to enable them to survive more efficiently, it is only mutations and not actual evolution.
May God bless you.

Answer 6

I don't see the logical problems you mention...but I'd be interested in hearing what you believe those problems are.

Answer 7

What logical problems do you see?