Darwin’s Evolution theory: Now think if it’s a failure


If you haven’t read my hubs on thinking or thought process, please do read before reading this hub. It will be a kind of backup to make your mind awake and active to think.

We all know, following science and their evidences, all around the technologies and invention. Any one could go blind to follow seeing this scientific development any theory which is presented with some reasonable logic. Yet our science is not complete. But some theories propounded earlier could be a subject of revision.

For example: evolution theory by Darwin. Even a kid is taught in school about it. And he makes a firm believe that our ancestors were monkeys. This theory was given by Darwin in 1859 in his book “origin of species”.


About Evolution theory: let’s revise before criticizing the points made in this theory. It argues that all the plants, trees, worms, animals are formed from amoeba. Which is formed after the development of some micro-organism like bacteria? And from one category of worm known as water worm, fish originated, followed by further origination of frog, reptiles, birds, mammals etc.All this happened about 600 millions ago.

After a long time since this happened, the origination of archbishop took place. These are all mammals like apes, monkeys. They use to eat fruits. And this happened about 70 million years ago. They followed then a step by step development of monkeys, apes, gorillas, chimpanzees, following the time span of 40-20-8-5 million years ago respectively.

That means about 5 million years ago, after the origination of the chimpanzees a drastic change occurred. The backbone got straight from semi erect state and legs arms were also edited accordingly. And lastly Hominids appeared 4 million years ago. They could walk on 2 legs straightly.

Then Homo erectus followed by Homo sapiens appeared, the modern man, about

1, 00,000 years ago. Then you know the story of how they use to hunt, make use of fire, and other tools for there daily uses. This is Evolution theory propounded by Darwin.


EXTRACTS:

Let’s clear our thought process before thinking rationally into it.

1) The theory argues, fish or water worms transformed into frogs after certain development means they have now breathing capacity on land.


2) From frog, reptiles originated like, lizards, snake and crocodile. But because as they were very slow further development occurred and they developed into dinosaurs, first small and then huge sized.


3) Of about 130 million years ago fossil found, in Germany and near by London, it was said that the fossil was of a shape of a present crow with wings, two legs with some 350grams of weight. And as its face was like a dinosaur and teeth like a dinosaur. The theorist beliefs that the dinosaurs were developed into crows or birds. And further we fine small and sweet humming birds, resulting from a contraction. What a development?


4) So birds are formed from frog in short according to Darwin.


5) Again theory argues that some animals when developed from ground and exposed to sea water, they converted into whales and dolphins.


6) Cat became tiger and lion. But some remain short and are cat still. Strange!


7) A skeleton was being found 50 million year old look like a big dog like animal. It was the ancestor of all donkeys, horses, zebras and all other alike animals.


NOW THINK ABOUT IT:

Now when e had gone through the entire theory, lets think about it rationally or scientifically or technically:

1) Evolution process can’t develop senses, then how micro organism developed into those which have senses. It can’t see the outside world and then it converts to a being that can see how? And the organism that does not have bones, transformed into bone having beings, how? They argue that due to some physical labor they got bones. But through physical exercise muscled could go hard, it can’t be converted into bones. Further they ague that some veins and nerves collectively formed bones a s happens when our teeth fall, in childhood another comes. But again, if teeth falls further then no teeth comes. Do we lack veins and nerves now? Ha-ha…

2) The human evolved from a process following monkeys, gorilla, chimpanzees and soon. But any change can’t be happen in one day. It takes time. None monkey had given birth to a gorilla to start with new species. And we find fossils of monkey and gorilla, but we cant find the fossils of that slow change how it occurred ( I mean the tail of money could had been shorten over years slowly), but no evidence yet, why?

3) Humans are formed long back, still why the development stopped? Are we complete? Why we are not being transformed to more developed ones?

4) A species had a very narrow margin of DNA alteration technically, so its not possible to create new species. Yes multiples of same kind could be possible.

Further you can find 100’s of question to rise on Evolution theory of Darwin. Just think as not only man but also in other creatures we don’t see any development at present. Think!!!!

what do you think, Darwin

See results without voting

Comments 68 comments

Reynold Jay profile image

Reynold Jay 5 years ago from Saginaw, Michigan

Sorry this doesn't work for me--however I enjoyed this very much. You have this laid out beautifully and it is easy to understand. Keep up the great HUBS. Up one and beautiful. I'm now your fan! I am working a series of 5 novels, “Seeds from Heaven” that touches on a lot of the things you mention. One might ask, “What would the Messiah’s message be today if he traveled the Earth during our time?” Book one is now published, “Lean against the Wind.”

Based upon this HUB, you might enjoy

http://hubpages.com/hub/Linda-Kolhagen-reviews-Lea...


CSix 5 years ago

You have obviously never read the Origin of Species to say something like "The human evolved from a process following monkeys, gorilla, chimpanzees and soon" - this is NOT HOW evolution works. What you have just described are different branches of evolution - not some random gorilla giving birth to a chimpanzee. The senses didn't just pop out of nowhere either - look at how photosensitive cells developed over time to create the eyes...

You should research the topic before submitting this to people who may believe your 'revolutionary' way of thinking.


klevifusha 5 years ago

We can stay here and argue about evolution and how man kind came to exist all day. The thing is we'll most likely never know the truth. The only thing we know for certain is that Darwin was not right, because his theory has never been proven. After all these years, it still remains only a THEORY, not a scientific fact. There are so many different theories out there with just as much evidence and they can sound just as convincing and as persuasive as Darwin's. However, they receive little to no recognition. Soon, someone will come up with a new theory which will send Darwin's out of the equation. People who defend Darwin's theory with such passion are simply ignorant. Let me remind you that people believed in the Bible's story of creation for thousands of years before Darwin's theory came along. So to say that he has it all figured out and to stop questioning his theory is the dumbest thing we could possibly say or do. We need to keep looking and maybe, just maybe, one day in the future we might be able to figure out where exactly we came from.

Great Hub. Really enjoyed it. Keep up the great work.


CSix 5 years ago

Of course evolution isn't an absolute certainty (saying nothing is certain leads to a pointless philosophical debate) but it is SCIENTIFIC FACT. There are huge amounts of evidence out there and as yet no convincing argument against it or for any alternatives (feel free to show me any other 'theory' that has more evidence and show me how I'm being ignorant). The problem is that some people don't even look at the evidence and say - yeah its only a theory, we can't know anything for sure. The people who actually take time to read the Origin of Species (including many people of religious faith, with the current pope saying "there is much scientific proof in favor of evolution, which appears as a reality that we must see". I'm not arguing against faith, just 'passionately' saying being passionate about evolution isn't ignorance.


klevifusha 5 years ago

LOL

"Let me remind you that people believed in the Bible's story of creation for thousands of years before Darwin's theory came along."

That sentence alone proves that being passionate about an unproven subject is ignorant. And no, the theory of evolution is not a SCIENTIFIC FACT. Maybe in your world, but not out here in reality. It is the most ACCEPTED THEORY. Keyword here is theory buddy.

I don't seem to understand why people bring up faith every time the theory of evolution is being questioned. I am an atheist and I dislike religion.


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 5 years ago from Essex, UK

klevifusha, there is a difference. People believed in the Biblical creation as a result of trying to make sense of things for which there was no scientific understanding. The theory of evolution came about as a result of methodical research, unbiased observation and experimentation. And you are wrong. In as much as anything can be described as fact, the theory of evolution is a fact. The amount of evidence for it - fossil, genetic, anatomical, physiological, etc - is overwhelming. The only thing that is in doubt is the precise nature of the influences which have most effect on evolution, and how rapidly they bring about change, assisted by mutation and natural selection.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

I appreciate your all efforts and comments, I am here for healthy conclusion to clear up mind, if some confusion persists. Lets be rational in thinking , and go not in favour and against it. Then we can surely come to a constructive conclusion

thanks! again


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

klevifusha agreed with you..


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

Csix..i appreciate ur effort, dear but I think You are in a strong believe, not in a strong state of rational thinking.

Greensleeves Hubs i am very happy to see your comment as you are talking rationally and clearly

thank u!


Greensleeves Hubs profile image

Greensleeves Hubs 5 years ago from Essex, UK

Thankyou for your pleasant response to me moneycop. Even if we do not agree about a theory, it is possible to discuss and debate and accept that other people have a different opinion, so thankyou for accepting my comment


nicomp profile image

nicomp 5 years ago from Ohio, USA

"The senses didn't just pop out of nowhere either - look at how photosensitive cells developed over time to create the eyes..."

They didn't. A random photosensitive cell to an eyeball doesn't fit any evolutionary model.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

nicomp plz elaborate what you want to say


Eiddwen profile image

Eiddwen 5 years ago from Wales

A very interesting hub and I am bookmarking plus voting up.

Thank you for sharing.

Take care

Eiddwen.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

Oh thanks! Eiddwen...

take care too....


Multiman 5 years ago

Interesting, but the flaw is in your explanation of evolution which does not state man came from monkeys, but says that both man and chimpanzee in the past had a common anscestor to both, making a Y the bottom of the Y is a common ancestor, and the branch at the top of the Y is on one side man and on the other chimpanzee, as you can see man did not come from chimpanzee in this thoery but chimpanzee and man came from common ancestor in the past. Overall the article was good, voted up.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

thanks multiman...what a beauty full..assessment u have done with Y concept..yes i know what i did..the thing is how i can make it in views of others and so asked the question of your side. Yo are a good thinker and decides rationally that's makes the difference to accept and be happy.

thanks for such a nice and in depth visit to this hub


melpor profile image

melpor 5 years ago from New Jersey, USA

Moneycop, your presentation of evolution is all wrong here. For starters, evolution is no longer a theory because today there are hundreds of facts to backup this process of the gradual change in organism from one generation to the next generation. Today medical researchers understand the causes of many diseases such as "Huntington's disease", Hemophilia, etc. and have develop treatment for many of these based on evolutionary processes thru the science of genetics. Today the process of evolution can be demonstrated in labs with predictable results. I can go on and on with this.

As a matter of fact fossils of the transitional species between ape and man was recently discovered in the last couple of years and was just published in a major scientific journal this month with some very interesting implications. Some scientists are calling this a major game changer in human evolution. Anthropologists do not want to call this the missing link but the fossil does show evidence of the gradual change from ape-like creatures to more modern man on the evolutionary tree. The evolution of life is clearly defined today. The problem is many people still have a hard time accepting it when the facts are clearly documented in scientific journals and papers everyday. They simply are not reading these papers and journals.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 5 years ago from JABALPUR Author

melphor..i agreed with you but not satisfied..

i don't want to see one or two laboratory proofs...just give me an example which can logically erase this explanation.

in present we cant see such evolution in all kind of species why so....cockroach is still cockroach...and mosquito is mosquito..still...

i am not a starter..but i have full proof and logical reason to present....

what happens in laboratory , no body seen...still i agree with u..but fro inner not acceptable..it seems irrelevant and shows incompetent in creator creating incomplete form of human.....can u tell me more improved form of human...


penofone profile image

penofone 4 years ago

I am glad you used the picture of the pen with the "A: it is inspiring to see the men of the world writing in the "owl project" or a literature of wisdom.

Anish


moneycop profile image

moneycop 4 years ago from JABALPUR Author

thanks penofone...i hope you have enjoyed the article.


Davesworld profile image

Davesworld 4 years ago from Cottage Grove, MN 55016

Evolution remains a theory in a desperate search for a mechanism to make it work - see my recent Hub.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 4 years ago from JABALPUR Author

daves i will surely read ur hub...thanks for comment


Ibtissam 4 years ago

The darwin theory doesn't make any sense at all.

Were is the scientific evidence behind it. Should we believe every theory that people come with. We as human beings used our sense of critism and logic sense. We let people think for us.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

You got to be kidding really. Darwin was an amazing observer of nature and he conducted not dozens but thousands of experiments to test his observations and help find answers to how nature actally worked. As far as your concerned..he would understand you much more then the other way around. Darwin was the first sscientist to understand the important relationship between flowering plants and insects and birds. As a result of his studies he was able to make amazing predictions on how certain species reproduced before anyone in science had a clue. I bet you were endoctrinated by the church, Sunday school or some such institution that causes you to defend such weak arguments that fly in the face of so much evidence. Of course if Darwin had lived till now he grasp of nature would be even more profound. He will be spoken of 2,000 years from now if mankind is still around. If you want to make a monkey out of yourself go ahead but your just proving his point. his work is one of the great cornerstones of modern biology. biologists see evolution all the time.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Darwin ... conducted not dozens but thousands of experiments to test his observations ..."

Source, please.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

See this is what I mean. please check his own science journals please. Unlike Jesus who I admire but did not keep any journals in his life time Darwin made careful reports of all his observations all through his life. And may I turn the question on its head and ask you nicop what are your sources please? the bible? the bible maybe a crafty piece of work but it is not a scientific exercise in anything. next time you go to the hospital please ask the doctors before getting treated whats the source of their knowledge. if you dont like their answers I suggest refusing treatment.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

OK Im going to try and make this abit easier for all you sceptics about Darwins worth as a scientist. When he came back from his voyage on the Beagle he became very serious about the secret world of botany. He became a breeder of plants and flowers and conducted thousands of careful experiments cross breeding species. What he was able to observe shined a powerful light on how species are able to evolve under varying conditions. I know what your going to say what the hell does this prove about monkeys and man. To be honest I think Sunday school has much explaining to do if you rule out the idea of miracles. Much has happened just in the last 100 years where we needed big miracles. Millions apon millions of innocent people went to their untimely deaths at the hand of man. simply said the horrendous tragedies OUT NUMBER MIRACLES by a ratio of like millions to one. so much for so caLLED MIRACLES WHEN YOU REALLY NEED THEM. iTS A FREAKIN MIRACLE WE ARE STILL HERE IF YOU ASK ME.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

gconeyhiden..thanks for sharing ur views, for and against both visions are required for a true heart to make some conclusion, otherwise we will go on debating, with such aggression. its not a matter of our understanding at all. Its for them who are clear and pure to understand.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

nicomp thanks for ur views. U re always welcome to criticize.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

moneycop, Do you have a source that enumerates the 'thousands of experiments' that Darwin conducted?


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

I'm going to go to the big hubpages cloud in the sky now but I just want to leave you with the knowledge that Universites around the world teach science NOT creation science and there is good reason for this, as far as I know creation science doesn't even really exist the same way real science does. You might not like it but creation stories are just that and there are many not just the ones the bible features. The bible stories of creation are given a special place in your minds perhaps but have serious competition among other cultures. The "church " over millenia has placed itself in a morally superior position to these other cultures and sought to destroy them AND replace them. It is the science of anthropology that has sent hundreds of intelligent culture detectives out into the field to document these cultures before they are totally destroyed by "civilization". Thankfully some of the missionaries who were sent to convert the natives often documented these cultures themselves and provide important evidence to human history. But remember they were NOT sent there for that reason as scientists are. Real science is NOT ordinary opinionbut views based on verified factsthat stand up to peer review testing. You can disagree but that doesnt equal peer testing of evidence. Science is objective knowledge, creation science is subjective faith based lack of knowledge.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

nicomp, ur comment is still awaited, i will answer ur question in q n a part


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

thnx gconeyhiden to comment on my hub


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

moneycop, what comment are you waiting for? I am still waiting for you to tell us about the 'thousands' of experiments that Darwin conducted. Be sure to differentiate between experimenting and observing.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

nicomp, my hub is only my thought, not a universal truth, ur comment is welcome and i accept ur thinking and solution, i have just given a platform to have a healthy discussion. I am not in a mood to debate on it nor i am a scientist to make my point only true.

i gave some examples , just reply to them, on my logics if u can, otherwise, plz free me.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

moneycop, you mentioned "thousands of experiments" that Darwin conducted. I simply asked you for supporting documentation of that.

If you can't provide it, that's OK, but don't paint me as a bad guy.

We do agree on one point: you're not a scientist. :)


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

definately...who said u are a bad guy...no one is as bad as i am...

nicomp again thanx for ur precious time and comment.

i have just given logical examples, surely i am not a scientist but can understand logics. If some one says against must give my mind reason to understand logically. thats it


Wooxer Pt profile image

Wooxer Pt 3 years ago

Steps for posting stuff online:

1 - Learn how the thing you will be writing about is supposed to work.

2 - Write about it.

Why i'm saying this?

Well, let's suppose i wanted to write about breast cancer and wouldn't do any research at all, all would be based upon stuff i heard about during my life, i would reason about that like it was actual truth and try to make up my mind or get to a conclusion about the subject, and i would finally post it online, and in the end i would have the retarded conclusion of "pharmaceutics companies are controlling everything because they want to sell stuff and it's fairly obvious that one could treat breast cancer with C vitamin and a toothpick".

This would be stupid because i would be accepting garbage that is not true into my brain and then would try to draw conclusions from that garbage and, unsuprisingly, i would get one and would be garbage, and that's pretty much all you did.

In my opinion or you are writing this cancer or purpose or you're really dumb because:

On purpose because you already researched and didn't liked that it would make sense because you feel that undermines your religion.

OR

You're really dumb because you have internet to post this stuff and somehow don't have internet to fact-check.

To all dumb commenters that say "it's just a theory so it has not been proven and such...", please allow me to correct, it's a SCIENTIFIC THEORY (scientific term), not a THEORY (common language term), but i mean... what to expect from a bunch of ill informed people that are trying to dispute the knowledge of some of the greatest minds ever without relying on studies and just on the word of some guy in hubpages without even looking at the wikipedia entry on evolution which is the least one could do.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

thanks wooxer, for commenting on my hub, its a great information u gave and the approach to make some one understand is acceptable, to an extent.

This way keeps the mobility in thoughts. nice approach


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Wooxer Pt : you had me until you brought in Wikipedia. Sorry!


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

thnx nicomp... i insist to elaborate ur point ...might be convenient for wooxer.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

hey nicomp I do believe I'm the one who mentioned Darwins experiments on evolution. seems your having trouble getting the simply facts right in this discussion. so you want to turn this here discussion into one of semantics? Well you can start off with the fact that common terms often have different meanings in science ok. I'm guessing your NOT a scientist so you dont understand this important difference but you want to debate the difference between observations and experiments. I really love the way endoctrinated religious people try to confuse the general public by questioning the meaning of every word. This is very feeble attemptto somehow put creation science on the high ground and put real science on defence. Since 1968 the high courts in U.S. have struck down all attempts bybible belt states to impose creation sciences on the free minded general public living in these states all 10 times thank GOD! It seems that God isn't on the side of these religious fundamentalists but sides with the "truth". By truth I dont mean opinion but verifiable evidence. Every time the courts have said..this is not science but religion. Creation science cannot jump the first obstacle to what verifiable truth is. Im sorry nicomp your stuck in the gates as the horses are coming down the back straightaway. Professors of theology are religious but dont get trapped in the nonsense your like seem prone to. By the way Darwin studied for the clergy for 2 years before he left on his world tour. He probably could qoute the bible far better then you or your kind and found NO profound answers as to how biology actually works in the bible. NONE. So in parting I like to ask you nicomp what experiments have YOU conducted or anyone you know that show how biology really works that are based on the bible? the high courts and God say there are none. If God sided with your arguments he would have provided you with a victory by now dont you think? But no, it seems God, whether God exists or not is not willing to help your case at all. So my last question is can religious people be truly religious and NOT believe in the truth? My latest hub Why are religious people and those who believe in the bible so slow to evolve? Living the lie of religious dogma..is now available on my hub site. PS. I dont believe Darwin ever said that God doesnt exist. He just came to the conclusion the bible didnt get IT right and the two are NOT the same. He did question that if God does exist what in reality its true nature is. Science takes us beyond myth.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

Hahahaha.....nice one gconeyhiden...

yeah i am not a scientist.

i appreciate ur effort. and believing in religion and God doesnot come by any verbal or written explanations.

what i believe is all depends on our believe first , then research must be done, sincerely, and then u reach to what u believe exist or not.

God loves all of us and we all are his child, if u believe he is not there, he will never try to make u feel, b coz it will hurt u,

So all depends on ur believe fst.

thats my openion, I am nothing to make u explain, just a try to keep my words, no oppose, and again a lot of thanks to comment on my hub


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

Hi moneycop, if truth and intelligence is truly valued by religion then the religion must reflect that fact and not play footloose with the facts. So the question must be asked if God "IT" exists did it intend humans to be less then intelligent and seek out less then the truth? Science is based on the critical analysis of carefully collected data. It is this careful process that has propelled human intelligence to unbelievable heights in the last few hundred years. without science we would still think the earth is the center of the solar system and other such nonsense that was forced fed to the public under the religious status quo. why do you even use the word HIS? do you think God has a sex? Religion actually asks very few questions and has even fewer answers. That said I do believe nature is a sacred trust of all humanity. religion has its place but it must be able to encompass the truth.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

hahahaha.....hiden, thnx again to come here and comment. U are very valuable to me.ther very first thing is, we must differenciate between religion and God. God made us, and we made religions. there is only one religion and one God. Some truth are very bitter my friend. and to run such an entire big planet , one has to accept every form of living standard. So its very complicated to understand the system of God. he is dual by nature, he does every thing and same time do nothing. he is present every where, but dint seen. and many more things, its a very deep subject.

Dont catch word like HIS or HER. that was not intentional.

I dont know much about god, but i know a dish which i ate, and i am helpless to make u available it for experience, from such a long distance hahaha.

hope fully i can only pray for ur enlightenment. But for that u have to start believing that God, is there. and if no....then u must be very strong to start accepting the thing which is against u, against facts. Then only my prayer will come true.

God bless.


Wooxer Pt profile image

Wooxer Pt 3 years ago

@nicomp

I said looking at wikipedia is the LEAST one can do, because although there is some bad information occasionally, it's all condensed in one page usually in a very readable form and with the important words that one might not know correctly linked to other articles, and because it's better to see what wikipedia has to say than inventing facts or do no fact-checking at all.

Also, most things that are written in wikipedia come from reputable sources, you have these little braces with numbers on them [x] that point to bibliographic sources, usually reputable ones, do not discard information based on the source, the source isn't what's important, the information is what's important, besides, you should be able to fact-check yourself, wikipedia, or anything else, in case you smell bullshit.

There is some doubtful information on wikipedia that is marked with "citation needed", because it's not backed up yet, that one you can safely discard.

To sum it all up, it's not like i was advocating wikipedia as a great source of study material, there are dozens of great books on evolution, but if someone that wants to know about evolution wants to write about it, i would want them to, at least, check the wikipedia article, instead of checking nothing at all, fact is, if 90% of the people i talked about would know only what is on the wikipedia article about evolution, it would be pretty much 99% more than they already know.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

" do not discard information based on the source, the source isn't what's important, the information is what's important"

huh?


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

wooxer..again thanks for giving ur precious time and views...

i am totally agreed with you, one must go in deep to analyse all the deep facts too.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

nicomp thanks again....didnt get you

whats ur point.?


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

moneycop, nicomp: To demonstrate how screwed up fundamentalist religious people can be when writing about evolution look up the evolution of turtles. I found unsigned article carefully written with many accepted facts in it. It was obviously written by intelligent person however these facts are mixed in with outragous opinions such as certain species like turtles went from terrestrial species into sea going species or otherway around in short time without any intermidiate transitions such as lagoon or delta environments and it goes on to say that such species could not have adapted quickly enough to survive such changes in environment. the writer uses turtles as perfect example because they are unique in their anatomy. it hinges its stance because no prehistoric missing link species have been found. after some more research I come up w two apparent turtle ancestors that have yet to form their shells Odontochelys semitestac at 270 million yrs ago and Eunotosaurus at 260 million yrs ago. the writer draws conclusion that because turtles seem fully formed in fossil record the great creator must have designed turtles NOT evolution. The writer left NO name and no place for reader to comment. nuff said. perfect example of scientific LIKE article that is really creation science NOT science. since 1968 all attempts by bible belt states in U.S. to have creation science taught along side real science have been struck down by the federal courts because it was actually religious dogma NOT critical science. Seems God is on the side of truthbecause they cant win no matter how hard they pray or screw up the facts. could it be that if God exists it values the truth more then religion? hey maybe God created evolution? why NOT? because its not written in the bible? could it be possible that this great book got the creation story wrong?


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

Evolution is fake its quite reasonable to me. Because, i feel the presence of God. every scientist is short in front of creator. its unnatural if evolution is true. Even according to Bible its untrue. Darwin was broadly accepted and so its very hard to get above him. I had thought and felt the above world and so i can say Evolution is fake. This is my view according to my experience. No argument or criticism to any one, I respect every one's openion and so obliged to have them in my hub.

Thanks again


Wooxer Pt profile image

Wooxer Pt 3 years ago

moneycop, thank you for being polite, i sure wasn't when i first talked here and i feel sorry for it.

Evolution doesn't have to be fake for your God to be true, that's garbage that people have put into your head.

The fact is, if the bible is accurate, your God doesn't exist (there's too much contradiction in the Bible, like the firmament from the biblic cosmological model which doesn't exist and that proves the Bible is not accurate).

By contraposition if your God exists, the bible isn't accurate.

I have no problem pondering the hypothesis of a God, seriously, it's a valid hypothesis even on scientific grounds, the God of the Bible isn't.

Besides, you say you feel God and you have some kind of relationship with him, ok, not doubting you, not judging you, just asking, how do you know, that is the God of the Bible and not just a God that isn't the God of the Bible?

If some God would talk to me, i sure wouldn't believe it's the God of the Bible, but i would believe God exists.

What i'm trying to say is, your God could have created Amoebas that by Evolutionary means would become other beings, or pools of light/electricity activated aminoacids, there's no need for religion to fight Evolution.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

moneycop with all due respect I do believe you have got it backwards. for 2 thousand years the bible creation story was the status quo fostered as the only possible explaination of how life came to be what it is. this view was upheld by the threat of tortue and even death at the hands of supposedly God fearing religious people who would accept NO other explanations. Then modern science and the enlightenment came and the doors to real knowledge based on carefully collected data flung the doors of knowledge wide open to the horror of the church. Now for the first time they had serious competition for the minds of FREE humans. Darwin is relative newcomer but upset the bible creation story with vast amounts of data collectedfrom the real world. Unlike real science religion isnt based on critical data but feelings. this explains why there are so many different creation stories throughout the world and so many religions. lots of awesome feelings but not backed by any data. the purpose of religion and science are NOT the same. religion did take the place of the science vacuum in human civilization while it could and sought to destroy its advancement like the devil itself because it understood full well it represented a very serious if not fatal threat to its control of the human mind and its overbearing empire of power. Darwin still stands dispite over 150 years of assassination attempts on his work. He might have not known everything about the mysteries of biology but his basic foundation is major cornerstone of biology. your personal relationship to God has nothing to do with science. PS. in my former statement I mistakenly said creationist webpage had no comment page but I was mistaken. It just didnt have any comments until I left my questions.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

WOOXER, its a great pleasure for me, that u have changed ur approach of commenting.

thats what i wanted when i started replying. U are correct, evolution had nothing to do for my God to be true. . I am not a Christian, so don't know much about Bible, I made it mentioned here because i thought u might be a christian and can understand it. Actually all this religious holy books, are full of contradiction and the God himself is. We cant judge them with our material mind, it need to be made divine by god grace, and this grace is done on people looking deeply for it, in full faith. And they became real saints( not those, who are seen these days in abaundent) Real saints are really few, u might read my hub regarding this. The rule is if u long for God, he with make a final grace to let u meet his real person, and then the matter of understanding starts, with experiences, before which its only a mind game, time pass, debate etc.

And religion and spiritualism is totally different, Religion are made by us, spiritualism is natural. and nature too is natural, Evolution is quite understandable theoretically and with practical experiments. My question is if evolution is true, y not it happens now, pigeon give birth to pigeon, from million of years, and soo onn others, the changing process is not seen in a single being on the planet, humans, elephant, lion all look as they were .

I am a student of geology and i study the fossils, u know if monkey is being changed to human, still y monkey are in existence. and if its so, then the tail of monkey might took million of years to reduce to become like we human are. Then why the fossils of money and human are found and not of those who where the part of the process of change...many thing i feel..And if we think according to Hinduism, as written in ved, there are 84 lakhs types of species.. this becomes easy to understand as God made variety , . Yet all this need deep research, for evolution u can do, but for God u have to chant and do devotion to understand the real fact if u are really hungry. Other wise neither u will change nor my believe.

Again so much of thanks for ur comment


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

hi hiden,

u are only trying to tell me every thing u know and believe, and so its accepted, no comments on ur knowledge base.

Regarding understand if u want some explanations , about God i can do. Evolution topic is not being taken to criticize, its just taken, to make some one think about some logic i made being never answered by any one.

So if u want to ask me some thing u are welcome, and want to let me know some facts u know just share.

thank you very much

take care


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

hi moneycop with all due respect the actual details of how evolution progressed through time is under constant study and reclassification is happening all the time. note the new turtle gnome study of dna now placing turtles closer to crocodiles and birds rather then lizards. it is more true that the basic idea of evolution is accepted in science but there is still alot to learn and scientists work hard to fill in these gaps of knowledge. Gnome study has supported the basic idea of evolution so its not only the fossil record you should pay attention to. what came first the chicken or the egg? im no scientist but evolution can be seen in low life forms right now. in most cases evolution is very slow to achieve entirely new species. it is widely believed that humans only evolved voice box which enabled true speech about 200,000 years ago. i love to read about evolution as it is fascinating subject. if you love nature and biology i urge you to read as much on evolution as you can. new updated info is always coming out. you should also study the fetal developement of species because they show the entire evolution process in short time frame. PS. I have traveled all over the world but not yet to India.I hope one day soon to see your amazing country.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

hi hiden,

thanks for guiding me.

i am so much blessed reading ur comments, thanks a lot for ur precious information.

And yes u are most welcome in India, i would be ur guide here. Once u enter India, u will forget every part of world, so better to come after seeing all other parts, would give u better understanding, India is full of grace and love.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

Hi moneycop, OK Im going to correct myself here so im not misunderstood. ancient religions dont enlighten so much as far as biology but I must admit aspects of the Hindu religion and Buddhism maybe much more enlightening when it comes to the actual nature of the cosmos or universe. I have traveled to 25 countries around the world visiting many sacred sites. I have saved India almost for the last. If Im in your area you may hear from me. thank you for your invitation.


moneycop profile image

moneycop 3 years ago from JABALPUR Author

very eger to here from u hiden..

enlightning always done in darkness..and if u having some light that enlightenment may not seem to u much more.

so welcome again.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

hi again Moneycop, thanks for the positive response. I also find that the ancient cultures and religions of India have tested the inner landscapes of the human mind and body much more extensively then say western religions have dared, so its obvious that if one is going to start studying world religions India is not a bad place to start. No wonder Indian cultures seem to have a much more accurate view of the nature of the universe, our world within it, and it's relation to our inner universe and our bodies relationship to everything. On the other hand the concept of love is greatbut not at the cost of sacrificing truth. the two must not be separated for sake of expediencyof power. unfortunately many religious leaders make this very trade off.


gconeyhiden profile image

gconeyhiden 3 years ago from Brooklyn, N.Y.C. U.S.A

Hey Moneycop, I just read piece on Indian Samkhya the philosophy of Kapila. It means perfect knowledge and it states the "prakriti" all physical objects are in a state of constant change or "evolution" if you will. So the idea of evolution is not foreign to Indian thought at all. I might be going to India this Oct. Im not certain of my journey yet but maybe you can make my trip more interesting. You would be 1st. hubber I have pleasure to meet in person. By the way Im an artist w side mission of helping to start reformation of all world religions if at all possible. take care, g


Heckayeah 2 years ago

give me 1 transitional fossil :) Just 1, hard to find a link? cus we didnt find any :( Any fossil found that is in transition has shown to be a fake :( Lie to keep the theory alive? Damn that is low.


Carmen 2 years ago

I believe we were created but not by anything divine...more extra terrestrial and not god like.....as far as evolution goes there is not one shred of evidence either in fossil form or living of one creature changing into another....there would be millions of examples of this in fossils but there I not one example of this. Also there would be living examples today of creatures partially changing into another but there is not one example. each species is unique to its own and I am not referring to different types of the same species. For example there are many breeds of dogs and many breeds of cats, but there are no dats and there are no cogs......there is absolutely no connective proof, not 1 shred of evidence that one creature has ever evolved into another.


Aeschylus 2 years ago

Without a Shadow of doubt Money you are right actually .for instant if we are evolved from Monkeys why Million of monkeys and human are on earth but not of their transitional species left over on earth?


moneycop profile image

moneycop 2 years ago from JABALPUR Author

i am really agreed to u for all points, except truth and love, as i have not much knowledge and understanding to make tune these two...what is more important and how they are valuable in ones life is really a deep subject to research .


moneycop profile image

moneycop 2 years ago from JABALPUR Author

i bow to you. and i am sure u will reach to very constructive conclusions . keep it up


moneycop profile image

moneycop 2 years ago from JABALPUR Author

agreed..


moneycop profile image

moneycop 2 years ago from JABALPUR Author

hahah...right aesxhylus

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working