Wow, what a hilarious great discussion between NeSCio and parissenoor. The problem with biology is that it's not an exact science like mathematics or physics and so it gives rise to more and more arguments and counter arguments.
I am no biologist, so i am not sure how much i can contribute to the discussion.
But i was wondering why this non coding regions in DNA can cause so much difference in the structure or even behaviour of a species which finally lead to seperation of species. I thought only coding regions code for all the protiens and hence a mutation on them would cause the maximum change.
There is distinct and very obvious proof of evolution and its sister natural-selection in the quick and visable mutation of viruses and bacterium. Its a case of simple extrapolation.
There are also very obvious examples of the evoution of various other species in fossils and rocks. You can literally put them in order and see how they progressed and adapted to better suit their environment. Why are we still arguing this again?
Anyone have a link to an article or pictures to these fossils or skelatons?
Hiccup, but there is also plenty of proof that rejects the theory of evolution. You can't just make a bold statement from looking at the argument through one end. Disprove the opposing views, and then it will be valid.
unfortunately it depends which side of the atlantic you grow on hiccy...on our side we are all very confident about it but on the other side, well you who they elected as president, it is not their fault...all their school system is rubbish...
That's very biased of you. You're saying that people in America all reject the theory of evolution because we voted for president Bush and our school system is "rubbish".
Well. Yes. Its a well extablished fact outside the US that US education is not actually that great. A high school graduate from here is often admitted into the second year of very established and well renowned colleges. Not so far fetched I'm afraid to say.
Especially in the case of evolution. What do you expect when PTAs determine the ciriculum and the whole country is rife with religious fundamentalism. If this was not the case - the issue would not continuously be in contention and nor would it be in internation news.
It's people of America, who elect a president holding an intellectual capacity of an eight year old kid. It's again people of America who re-elect a President who always speaks white lies to the whole world and whose own daughter breaks the law. When you can elect such a rubbish president twice, then I wouldn't be surprised by the above statement that "people in America all reject the theory of evolution".
All fundamental research took place in Western Europe (Britan, France, Germany and Italy) and all the benefits of the advancement which the current generation is enjoying (Cheap food, high quality health care, comfortable life etc), is because of those fundamental research. Americans and Japanese took advantage of those research to make economic gains. It's only recently that Americans are contributing to the fundamental research and that too due to brain drain from other countries.
Regular mutations taking place around us are the living proof of the theory of evolution. All the differences among Europeans, Asians and Africans are the result of those mutations of over 50,000 years. Blonde hair, White Skin, Brown skin, various shapes of noses etc are all the result of mutations over a long period of human history. White skin is the result of a need to efficiently manufacture Vitamin-D in a sever cold climate with little sun rays.
Let me add one more thing regarding mutations. The change or mutation is of two types. One which takes place gradually all the time and another which I will call in my own language as "BREAKTHROUGHS". It is this BREAKTHROUGH mutation which happens once in thousands of years that gives rise to so called new species.
I've been born, raised and educated in Europe, and I have major doubts about evolution theory (see previous posts).
So now that we have established that advocates for and against evolution theory are on both sides of the pond, let's leave US politics out of this discussion and get back to the matter at hand
So how does this relate to why Darwin's theory is being questioned?
Almost all mammals have two eyes, two ears, two nostrils. I mean to say that humans bear a strong resemblence as far as body plans are concerned. Again as I posted earlier and repeat again, "whole living world from plant to animal kingdom, share the same genetic language (A,T,C,G) despite the fact that there could have been billions of different genetic language possibilities. From plant to human, all have same genetic letters". Is this not an ample proof to support Darwin's theory?
Let me add further, that I am a person of open mind. If I get convinced that Intelligent Design concept has overwhelming proof then I wouldn't hesitate to accept it.
So what proof are you looking for? It’s all over the place in nature (referring to the Golden Ratio). But even that is just one aspect of the Intelligent Design theory.
A few examples of the Divine Proportion in nature:
The human body. If you take the length from your belly down to your feet, and divide this number by your entire body length, you will end up with the number 1.618, or “phi”, which is what the divine proportion is based upon. This same pattern can be found in elbow-to-fingertips vs. arm length, nose-to-chin vs. face length, upper thigh-to-knee vs. leg length. Leaonardo Da Vinci’s study of the human body came to this as a conclusion.
There are also various animal markings, plant seed sequences, bird song frequencies, and even the orbit of the planets. (http://evolutionoftruth.com/div/nature3.htm)
The examples are infinate.
Also, the divine proportion is not found in the structure of the body of an ape, so I find it unbelievable that humans evolved from an animal that had no essential proportion of body structure, into a body structure that displays the divine proportion all throughout. I do not see how this ratio could have just “naturally” come up and that an animal simply evolved into a structure that has such precise proportions.
Wheather I agree or disagree with the above views, is a different matter. But I must admit that I admire and appreciate this posting for giving a new angle to the whole discussion. Thanks Fatima. Thanks also for the link. I’ll go through it.
this goes to everyone on this thread, you people are talking about something you really don't understand, firstly evolution describes a process which occurs and is controlled by the defined environment, a changing environment 'CAN' cause mutations in certain species, the size of this effect differs depending on how aware that species is to its environment and wether it has the intelligence to do anything to control its exposure to such changes or counter its effects.
Humans are the only species to date which can do such things and therefore the theory of past evolution cannot be applied to humans in the same way it has been applied too non human species, this is because any major change in the human species will be the direct result of humans 'playing god'.
Humans will die out, ie comet strike/Nuclear war/Sun expansion etc unless we develop a means to travel between solar systems so as to escape extinction level events. We have a limited means of detecting future catastrophes but not much in terms of avoiding/escaping them.
So everybody stop thinking about 'is evolution the way it happened or not' we obviously evolved from something, stop researching from textbooks and just take a long hard think, evolution is not a 'programmed' system but a random one so you can't say 'why can't it do this', and why hasn't it done that'.
Remember, scientist are people too, they have traits such as envy, jealousy, and their dreams are to have their theories planted in history, why wouldn't they try and disprove another's theory, theories are based on science, so if one scientist develops a theory, theoretically all scientists should agree or disagree collectively, but this doesn't happen as different scientists interpret related theories differently (i.e. theories forming the bases for evolution).
These small differences in interpretations cause confusion amongst the scientific community. So until a someone can come up with a fully developed theory of how we became to be on this earth, which the majority of the science world agrees, evolution is how it happened, there's no point in arguing as non scientists, whether it was evolution or intelligent design etc as everything said is second hand information which is not fully understood and therefore no outcome carrying any weight can be achieved.