View Single Post
Old 10-28-2004, 12:00 AM   #11
bemanisuperstar
Banned
 
bemanisuperstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In HP Lovecraft's world
Posts: 2,461
Quote:
Originally Posted by IoriYagami n8
Evolutionary Theory has never been drilled in as fact. Natural Selection has and is. There is a distinct difference between the two. It's actually rather funny to see tags of the Jesus fish eating a Darwin fish considering the fact that Darwin's theories are solid, established, and proven. People have simply blended the two together since Evolutionary Theory is a step up on Natural Selection as far as time frames go. Natural Selection can be monitored, documented, and so forth. It does not make the claim that adaptation to ones enviroment jumps species, which is probably the biggest difference between the two. In other words, Natural Selection states that a bird could change dramatically over time, but in the end, it is still a bird, simply a different type of bird. Evolutionary Theory takes that concept and applies it to a longer time frame and speculates that a bird, given enough time (millions of years) could eventually become something that isn't what we view as a bird.

Your example is flawed as well, traits can develop from ancient man to what we are today. Over time, certain parts begin to adapt to our world (which is changed by how we live, which is also changed in turn by how much we know about the world). Evolutionary Theory is pretty well established in factual evidence up until the point where it proclaims that a fish could evolve to live on land, that said land fish thing could in turn evolve into something else, such as a lizard, bird, whatever. It's a reasonable theory mind you, one that would be the next step from natural selection. The problem is that it takes so much time. The human race may not even be around long enough to find out.

There are flaws with either arguement, neither side can be proven. However, I will say that Evolutionary Theory has some basis of scientific and factual support behind it, or else it wouldn't even be a theory. That doesn't make it true, but that also means that it isn't so easily dismissed. As far as being proven is concerned, I'm willing to say that Evolutionary Theory has the upper hand on Creationism.
While it is true that cirtian Species do adapt and change by varying Conditions they do not split off to ever become an entirely new one and there's not evidence of that actually happening.

Has anybody seen an ape become man?
or a Lizard become a Bird?

And What about the fact that scientists have found it impossible to clone a human?

I remember reading some where that some cloneing researchers found struction in Human Cells that made it impossible to replicate them them. As if Humans are Copy Protected. I want to say that was in Time but I'm nto sure.
bemanisuperstar is offline   Reply With Quote