Scientists say evolution fits

Without raising religious objections, there is a mountain of evidence that is in direct conflict with the THEORY (not fact) of evolution.

Anything that doesn't fit the theory is ignored by scientists.

These are the same people that believe in the Big Bang theory to account for the creation of the Universe..
What blew up?
Where did it come from?
Where was it when it blew up?
What made it blow up?

These questions are ignored as is anything that doesn't support evolution.

Dump-ster: You seem to misunderstand how science works. Let's start with what a "theory" is. From Random House Unabridged:
Theory:
1.a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.

Biological evolution does not, and doesn't pretend to answer questions about how life started. Only about how species originate and diversified. Please take a community-college level biology course so you can speak with something less than ignorance.

I can't wait to see all the yahoos, droolers and pimps that post on this story. Bring on the "comedy of the soul experts." Zoltan is right Dumpster, but I'm sure that won't make any difference to you.

who cares

All this evidence of evolution ... but yet where is one bit of evidence of evolution creating a new species? Where?

Here's the evidence: http://www.nas.edu/evolution/

Now, please, stay away from the school boards with your insistance that creationism is a science. Creationism as a "science" is worse than voodoo; intelligent design isn't (think about it).

It is truly scary that Americans still cannot fully grasp and support the THEORY of Evolution because it has some unexplained holes; but will fully grasp that a omnipotent entity created everything in 6 days, no questions asked. That religion stupifies socieities that embrace its second hand stories and legends into fact does not bode well for our continuance as a major scientific contributor to the world. Without leading in science society will eventually start to decline and decay. This evolution - creationism arguement has its basis in christian bigotry - if you notice most supporters to teach alternate theories don't support teaching native American beliefs and other non-christian theories. Also, would these christians allow for the dissecting of each verse of the Bible and once enough holes are found then totally reject it and place it in the fiction section of the library? Taken to its fullest, then Scientology would need to be part of the curriculum if this will be a true educational experience. That would be quite a class.

Evolution has more holes than swiss cheese. Ecery other year the "missing link" is found, but there are millions of missing links. Remember the last one? The tooth? Turned out a year later to be a pig's tooth? Keep hammering long enough and a square peg will fit in a round hole.

To all those who feel that evolutionary science is incomplete, I say simply, Of course it is. One of the major differences between science and religion is that science claims to be searching for the answers to our questions, while religion claims to have the answers. No science has ever, to my knowledge, claimed to be complete.

To all thhose who want creationism taught in school, as this article points out several times, that is a religious precept and a matter of faith. Science is science and rligion is religion. Both have their places in our lives, but we don't teach phliosophy in an English literature class. We should not be teaching religion in a science classroom.

Again, The Mighty Feklahr will say this until He is blue in the face:

Public school science classes are not the place to discuss Creationism/ID. Not only are neither even vaguely scientific, but a federal court has found that they are theistic and NOT scientific.

There are many private and parochial schools that can teach Creationism/ID. Concerned parents can send their children there. No one is holding a gun to their head and forcing their child to have a public education.

Nobody, least of all the scientific community, will snub a legitimate scientific alternative to evolution. However, none have presented themselves. Creationism/ID is not an alternate *SCIENTIFIC* explanation.

Zoltan wrote:

Dump-ster: You seem to misunderstand how science works. Let's start with what a "theory" is. From Random House Unabridged:
Theory:
1.a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena: Einstein's theory of relativity.
2.a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact.
Biological evolution does not, and doesn't pretend to answer questions about how life started. Only about how species originate and diversified. Please take a community-college level biology course so you can speak with something less than ignorance.

MBA here moron.
Look at your own post: "how life started" "how species originate".
Evidently you think "start" and "originate" have different meanings.

Try learning how to think critically and use English to express yourself in a logical manner..

By the way Mr. Wizard, do you have an answer to any of the Big Bang questions? Hmm I thought not-no one does.

Glasnost

>>>"All this evidence of evolution ... but yet where is one bit of evidence of evolution creating a new species? Where?"

Tiktaalik was predicted by evolution. Unless uh, your ALTERNATIVE was able to do that. What scientific alternative do you have to present?

Oh, and Dumpster? Please, keep bringing up the Big Bang every time you try and argue against evolution. It in no way makes creationists look dumb as doorposts. Honest.

"The Bible is worth all the other books which have ever been printed."

Dump the PC wrote:

<quoted text>
MBA here moron.
Look at your own post: "how life started" "how species originate".
Evidently you think "start" and "originate" have different meanings.
Try learning how to think critically and use English to express yourself in a logical manner..
By the way Mr. Wizard, do you have an answer to any of the Big Bang questions? Hmm I thought not-no one does.

In English the words "Life" and "Species" are not synonymous. If you don't even know that, you have no business disparaging other's use of the language.

Evolution does not address the origins of Life (or the Solar System or the Universe). Evolution only addresses the origins of species and the diversity of life on Earth After life appeared.

Dump the PC wrote:

<quoted text>
MBA here moron.
Look at your own post: "how life started" "how species originate".
Evidently you think "start" and "originate" have different meanings.
Try learning how to think critically and use English to express yourself in a logical manner..
By the way Mr. Wizard, do you have an answer to any of the Big Bang questions? Hmm I thought not-no one does.

Evolution works independent of the "Big Bang" theory. Evolution needs neither the Big Bang nor Abiogenesis to be real.

BTW, there is a ton of literature devoted to the Big Bang theory, that would cover it a lot better than the summarized answers any of us could give here. Go to your local library and pick a few of these books up.

Finally, describing the origin of a species, like we do in evolution, is a mutually exclusive event from describing how life started on this planet. Not every species (nor any that I am aware of) still exists as it did 6 billion years ago. Evolution describes known, identifiable species.

Patrick-Henry wrote:

"The Bible is worth all the other books which have ever been printed."

No Christian bias here. 8^)

I say if we are going to teach "Intelligent Design" it needs to be done under the heading of Cultural or Religious Studies. It should also show as many different cosmogenies as they have time for. Most of the Middle Eastern religions have some variation of a creator pulling order from chaos, light from darkness and land from the waters. But other religions have different STORIES about what happened in the beginning and I think it would be far more interesting (and educating) to exposed to those stories than repeating the fables that, if you are already a believer, you should have gotten in your Sunday Schools. But it should not be distributed under the topic of science, as it isn't. Pointing at perceived flaws in the Theory of Evolution and then not coming up with a SCIENTIFIC alternative has no technical merit, and frankly, I want my children to learn enough science to be competitive with other countries' children who are not forced to learn bad science in the name of appeasing religious fundamentalists. I guarantee that the Indians that are learning Biology aren't being told in school that all of the answers to life are that Vishnu did it...

"The Big Bang" is only part of "Evolution THEORY" to Creationists.

A real scientist would have no more response to this topic than he would answers to "what does moon cheese taste like?" or "why do unicorns have three hearts?"

Simbledun wrote:

"The Big Bang" is only part of "Evolution THEORY" to Creationists.
A real scientist would have no more response to this topic than he would answers to "what does moon cheese taste like?" or "why do unicorns have three hearts?"

I was of the understanding that moon cheese was quite comparable to white cheddar?

The Dude wrote:

Glasnost
>>>"All this evidence of evolution ... but yet where is one bit of evidence of evolution creating a new species? Where?"
Tiktaalik was predicted by evolution. Unless uh, your ALTERNATIVE was able to do that. What scientific alternative do you have to present?
Oh, and Dumpster? Please, keep bringing up the Big Bang every time you try and argue against evolution. It in no way makes creationists look dumb as doorposts. Honest.

WOW! A fish -> mud puppy ... ROFL
That is your big species leap?
We have hundreds of thousands of species ... show me something ... a common ancestor for an alligator and turtle .. a bear and a squirrel .... SOMETHING! Evolution has NOTHING!

We can all agree earth was molten at one time. Where did all the water ... plant life ... insects and animals come from? Evolution has no clue. One theory by the evolution "scientists" is life on a comet smashed into earth. Where did the life on a comet come from? Have we any evidence of life on any comet? NO ... But heaven fordbid we say life mysteriously appeared on earth ... oh no!... A COMET brought it... and the evolutionists call US crazy...