Objections to Darwin

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderator: BioTeam

lilskip
Garter
Garter
Posts: 6
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 6:20 pm

Objections to Darwin

Post by lilskip » Tue Jan 10, 2006 7:25 pm

I'm going mind blank! What are some scientific objections to Darwin's theory of natural selection?
Thanks!

User avatar
canalon
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 3909
Joined: Thu Feb 03, 2005 2:46 pm
Location: Canada

Post by canalon » Tue Jan 10, 2006 7:31 pm

Well I would say that there is none yet. But if you went to evolution forum we have a few threads about that.
Of course in my opininion all objections raised are not scientific and Darwin's theory of evolution stand the test of time.
Patrick

Science has proof without any certainty. Creationists have certainty without
any proof. (Ashley Montague)

Springer
Coral
Coral
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:20 am

Re: Objections to Darwin

Post by Springer » Thu Jan 12, 2006 11:15 pm

lilskip wrote:I'm going mind blank! What are some scientific objections to Darwin's theory of natural selection?
Thanks!


I think a better query would be, "Is there any scientific evidence to support goo-to-you evolution?"

User avatar
MrMistery
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 6832
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 10:18 pm
Location: Romania(small and unimportant country)
Contact:

Post by MrMistery » Fri Jan 13, 2006 7:38 pm

goo-to-you evolution :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
I am laughing my pants off...

PS: look at the topic with objections and their refuting arguments and decide yourself
"As a biologist, I firmly believe that when you're dead, you're dead. Except for what you live behind in history. That's the only afterlife" - J. Craig Venter

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Sat Jan 14, 2006 6:07 am

There are some differences between modern theories and Darwin's original proposals one of which concerns natural selection, search on wikipedia.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

cool A-level student
Death Adder
Death Adder
Posts: 61
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2005 11:19 am

Post by cool A-level student » Mon Jan 16, 2006 12:14 pm

Darwin was a gr8 man :)
good theories that are still unable to be challenged mind you he had some smaller issues wrong but so would you in those times! with a lack of equipment and general know how
how on earth did Darwin get so smart in a time so badly opinionated and underdeveloped?!?

User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)
Contact:

Post by alextemplet » Tue Jan 17, 2006 1:19 am

In my opinion, our current time is just as badly opinionated as Darwin's day. But that's just my own badly opinionated opinion. 8)

User avatar
ZakaSPFC
Death Adder
Death Adder
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:45 pm

Post by ZakaSPFC » Tue Jan 17, 2006 2:23 am

I would like to point out that Alfred Russell Wallace came upon evolution first and Darwin took the credit for it. He was doing research in the Malay Archipelago while Darwin was crouched in a corner sobbing because he didnt know what to put in his origin of species, which he had delayed publishing for 20 years until he thought that Wallace's paper would beat him to the punch
Sadattay, Whattata Respec.

Springer
Coral
Coral
Posts: 113
Joined: Wed Dec 21, 2005 2:20 am

Post by Springer » Tue Jan 17, 2006 3:48 am

cool A-level student wrote:Darwin was a gr8 man :)
good theories that are still unable to be challenged mind you he had some smaller issues wrong but so would you in those times! with a lack of equipment and general know how
how on earth did Darwin get so smart in a time so badly opinionated and underdeveloped?!?


Darwin was by no means the first to consider evolution by natural selection. Many others considered the idea, but deemed it impossible and inconsistent with the facts of nature.

The reason the theory became so widely accepted is because the world was ready for the religion of secular humanism.

User avatar
ZakaSPFC
Death Adder
Death Adder
Posts: 58
Joined: Mon Dec 26, 2005 11:45 pm

Post by ZakaSPFC » Wed Jan 18, 2006 12:31 am

It wasnt at first widely accepted but the time came when every body finally opened up their eyes
Sadattay, Whattata Respec.

vinaya
Death Adder
Death Adder
Posts: 78
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:17 pm

Post by vinaya » Thu Jan 19, 2006 1:48 pm

darwnsm did not exactly state how the variations arose.

the modern synthetic theory of evltn states that the origin of species is based on the interaction of genetic variation and natural selection.

thats their difference. the synth evltn theory is more developed as it was based on modern molecular studies

User avatar
Squawkbox
Coral
Coral
Posts: 199
Joined: Thu Jan 19, 2006 2:49 pm
Location: Newcastle

Post by Squawkbox » Fri Jan 20, 2006 11:57 am

The origin of species was actually entitled 'On the Origin of Species By Means of Natural Selection, or, the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life' and his book never once mentioned evolution- this word was used later by others. Are we talking about evolution within species, ie. natural selection, or evolution from one species to another because although i believe that there can be changes within a species, i dont think there is substantial evidence to support evolution from one species to another
Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest