I understand that my posts are far too nuanced for a buffoon like you.
As I stated.....the 'evolution' taught to buffoons...Darwin's version....is certainly not a fact.
Darwin wrote on many subjects, on some he was correct and on some seriously wrong.
His theory that life evolved from a common ancestor is considered to be proven fact beyond any reasonable doubt. His theory that tried to establish the mechanism for that evolution, natural selection, is mostly accepted but Darwin changed his theory over time and it became less accepted as it "evolved". So you are incorrect, not all of Darwin's theories are taught as fact.
"His theory that life evolved from a common ancestor is considered to be proven fact beyond any reasonable doubt. "
Only by buffoons.
Raise your paw.
Not only is there no evidence that supports Darwinian theory, but there is evidence that it is false.
1. Steven J. Gould reported: "In any local area, a
species does not arise gradually by the steady transformation of its ancestors; it appears all at once and fully formed." Gould, Stephen J. The Panda's Thumb, 1980, p. 181-182
2. " The intense modern interest in this "Cambrian explosion" was sparked by the work of
Harry B. Whittington and colleagues, who, in the 1970s, re-analysed many fossils from the Burgess Shale (see below) and concluded that several were complex, but different from any living animals.
[14][15] The most common organism,
Marrella, was clearly an
arthropod, but not a member of any known arthropod
class. Organisms such as the five-eyed
Opabinia and spiny slug-like
Wiwaxia were so different from anything else known that Whittington's team assumed they must represent different
phyla, only distantly related to anything known today.
Stephen Jay Gould’s popular 1989 account of this work,
Wonderful Life,
[16]brought the matter into the public eye and raised questions about what the explosion represented. While differing significantly in details, both Whittington and Gould proposed that all modern animal
phylahad appeared rather suddenly."
Cambrian explosion - Wikipedia
3. As Darwinian evolution is little more than a guess, I yearn for the day when the burning question makes it's way to the consciousness of its devotees.....
...why do you suppose it is mandatory in a secular society that every knee be bent and all obeisance be directed toward this view?
Why?
"But where is the experimental evidence? None exists in the literature
claiming that one species has been shown to evolve into another. Bacteria,
the simplest form of independent life, are ideal for this kind of study,
with generation times of 20 to 30 minutes, and populations achieved after
18 hours. But throughout 150 years of the science of bacteriology, there
is no evidence that one species of bacteria has changed into another, in
spite of the fact that populations have been exposed to potent chemical
and physical mutagens and that, uniquely, bacteria possess
extrachromosomal, transmissible plasmids.
Since there is no evidence for
species changes between the simplest forms of unicellular life, it is not
surprising that there is no evidence for evolution from prokaryotic to
eukaryotic cells, let alone throughout the whole array of higher
multicellular organisms." The Times Higher Education Supplement, April 20, 2001
SECTION: BOOKS; BIOLOGICAL SCIENCE; No.1483; Pg.29
HEADLINE: Scant Search For The Maker
BYLINE: Alan Linton
Nowe trendy w biznesie - Kolejna witryna oparta na WordPressie
Really....stop being afraid to actually pick up a book, or to question Liberal orthodoxy.
