Does anybody really even understand what evolution is???

Question

A lot of people do not know so I am wondering if anybody really even understands what it is. For people who's beliefs are based in science a lot of you are as ignorant as you claim religion is.

I like you're answer AlterEgo however even biologists do not understand evolution. I am not saying it is wrong but I believe our current model is extremely flawed to the point that it should be thrown out and restarted. I refer to the numerous problems and holes that many people have begun to recognize within the theory if you would like me to explain this further [e-mail] is my Email so contact me and I will explain.

Yes Rebecca it is a series of mutations but these in themselve do not explain the origin of species. There has been no scientific evidence of any mutation that has ever created "new" genetic material. All mutations form a variation on current genes but never create anything new. Therefore science cannot explain how we came from the single cell organisms they claim we did because there is no known way to create new genetic material and new genes only variations in those that already exist.

Also AlterEgo I have taken several courses on it as well as read several books on it and I still find numerous faults within it.

Terry if by spec of dust you mean boulder. I am all for science but not when they rely on principals that have already been disproved such as spontaneous generation (life from lifeless chemicals) Pasteur has already disproved this concept as well as several other scientists. So why is evolution allowed to claim that they work to make their theories right but in other cases it is scoffed and laughed at.

Answer 1

"There has been no scientific evidence of any mutation that has ever created "new" genetic material. All mutations form a variation on current genes but never create anything new."

You realize what you are saying with this, right? It's a lot like saying that no matter how many times you change the letters in a word, you will never create a new word and that all the words you will get will just be variations of existing words.

Most people would consider it patently obvious that you can change letters and come up with completely different words. Just as most people would consider it patently obvious the enough point mutations can turn ANY gene into ANY other gene. Why should this question even need proof? If you change everything that is there, you have something different!

Nor it is necessary for many genes to retain their original function. 90% of human DNA does literally nothing and can easily be a source for completely new material and unrestrained mutation. Even among the genes that are functioning there are many with numerous copies so a change of one might not even be particularly harmful for the parent organism.

Where the first life came from is abiogenesis, not evolution. Pasteur's experiments thus have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with evolution, even if you were characteristing their conclusions correctly, which you are not.

What Pasteur proved is that the 'lifeless chemicals' necessary to sustain life cannot spontaneously produce life in the same time period. Though you can lock two humans in a room with a lot of food and have three a year later, you can't just lock a bunch of food in the room and have one human a year later.

All this shows is that one procedure once thought to produce living things doesn't work. It says nothing about every other possible procedure. Just because explorers didn't find the 'northwest passage' in the 1600's, does that prove that it's impossible to navigate from Europe to China by boat by travelling westward? Of course not.

Are you sure YOU understand what evolution is?

Answer 2

I see it as easier than all of that. Genes get turned on or off, probably for reasons in the enviornment. But between say chimpanzees and humans, there is what--98% compliance? Evolution therefore can be the changing of certain specific genes, like only 2% or less, to affect a biological change.
It is often asked about the evolution of the human mind? It fits the same scenario. It could have been a gene turned on or off by our environment. Or it could have been an accidental series of synapses in the brain that rewired it to give it consciousness of consciousness.
Evolution is just a change from one thing to another.

Answer 3

Anyone who claims to "understand" any science is incorrect. At best, they understand a particular theory's ability to fit real life, but no scientific realm is complete in knowledge.

The reason that any scientific effort exists is to obtain knowledge continuously, to build on past discoveries, and to develop new models and theories for examination, test, and scrutiny. No theory is static or complete.

Evolution is the same way. The current theories are the beginnings of understanding regarding the origins and changes of life forms on Earth. Of course there are gaps. There's supposed to be!

The difference between evolutionists and religion-based science is that evolutionist expose their theories to scrutiny, invite dissenting opinion, and change their theory to match new information. Ignorance isn't a bad word, it's a challenge. Valid dissent is welcome to the community. Religion-based science refuses all such actions, and in fact has historically punished dissent with threats of "blasphemy" and derrogations of the questioner's faith.

In other words, science acknowledges ignorance, religious dogma denies it.

Answer 4

My understanding of evolution is that it's supposed to be a series of beneficial mutations that alters and improves a species. However, my knowledge of science says that it's nothing but a very popular theory that has never actually been proven. Natural selection has been proven, but that isn't the same thing as evolution. (Also, there are some indications now that natural selection doesn't improve the species for the long run, just for the short term.)

Answer 5

Evolution - the cornerstone of biology - is the process by which life changes and species come into and out of existence.

Crucial to your concern is the continuing growth in understanding in the biological community. While I agree that scientists, other than biologists,may not understand it in the detail that a biologist does, their failure to study it properly does not obviate the general truths that have been deduced.

As for "believing" in science - I accept nothing on faith. I don't believe in science, I test it. (Faith is not testable)

If you want to understand evolution better, take a college level course on the diversity of species.

Answer 6

Try this source.

Note that Theobald carefully distinguishes "common descent" as the portion of "evolution" that is scientific, as opposed to the anti-religious propaganda that gets thrown into the discussion.

It's always amusing to me that the anti-evolution Biblical fundamentalists and the anti-religious so-called scientists who try to use evolution as a proof of the absence of God actually agree on one fundamentally silly assertion: that the Biblical creation fables ought to be read and assessed as though they were scientific texts.

Answer 7

I suggest you take the massive plank out of your arguments for the existence of the supernatural / occult before you try to remove the spec of dust from the eye of science.

Answer 8

To evolute is to inovate, adapt to new things that appear as time goes by, make changes to what is know
(As you somewhat refer) Science evolutes really fast nowadays.
I hope this is what you need

Answer 9

The Evolution is a wild tree. growing as it likes. it is so after a number of springs and autumns. what it remains is the present. what has passed is the evolution.

Answer 10

I'm pretty sure I understand it of course I may be wrong. the general principles are easy to understand for most people even if they don't fully understand the entire process.