Below is linked one of many sources for an online version of "The Origin of Species" Darwin's Theory of Evolution - it's not a riveting read but is great for reference and understanding.
To put it in a nutshell, evolution requires two things, and two things only:
1. The generation of diversity.
2. Natural selection - culling of the "less fit".
Process number (1) is essentially a random process, entirely in accordance with the laws of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics. Process number (2), which involves the disproportionate death (or failure to reproduce) of the less fit, could perhaps be regarded as a "running down" process, if you want to look at it that way. But processes (1) and (2) together produce all the forms of life we see on Earth.
http://www.literature.org/authors/darwi … f-species/
Good luck. I already tried:
I have 600 or so comments attacking me on the hub I wrote about why there is no evolution vs creation debate
And I was lol "Challenged" lol to a debate because I kept "evading" the questions. You know - why I denied dinosaurs existed on the Ark....... sort of Kwestions. The result is here:
Kinda floored me with the "bath ring" and the "dinosaurs in China" arguments.
Simplified without posting links and giving book references, in your own words, explain why evolution has "no" design.
Just can't be bothered to do any work huh? You sure you are not religious?
Too funny marine.
Why is this so hard to simplify something? Are you getting mad because the question gives the religious ammo? Should I not ask a question just because you relate it to religion? Part of work is asking questions.
No - I am not getting mad. I am laughing at you being so lazy you cannot be bothered to do any research and keep asking the same kwestion over and over and over.
It is funny because it exactly what the religionists do when they cannot understand the answers they get.
You sure you are not religious?
Lazy? I just started reading my evolution book today to have you know. I keep asking the question because I haven't gotten any logical answers, only answers with links, book references, or telling me to research and stop being lazy.
I understand the answers I am getting, they are lazy. It is much easier than to give someone references than to answer a question having to think. Are you sure you aren't religious?
You have gotten logical answers - but you did not understand them. This is why you have bought a book is it not? Still - why not don't bother reading the book and ask the Kwestion again instead of reading the book huh? That ain't lazy.
Is it a good book?
The answers I saw was that it's not design because it's not predictable. Is this correct?
If I find this answer in the book when I am done reading it, I will admit it was my mistake for not reading before asking over and over. It is pretty good so far.
Let us see what kwestions arise after the book. Which one did you buy again? I think it was one I have not read if I remember correctly.
http://www.google.com/products/catalog? … s=reviews#
Answer the question.
If something is unpredictable, does that mean it's not a design?
Sweetie pie - I have answered that Kwestion so many times I am beginning to think you just like the sound of my voice.
What do you think? Express an opinion of your own instead of just challenging other people's answers. If you do not know the possible outcome of something - can you claim to have planned the eventual outcome? And therefore intended it - designed it to be that way?
The book looks interesting.
Are you flirting with me? I am a married man.
I think evolution is a design in the fact that it follows patterns. A design doesn't mean it has to predict the future, but I think it can. Because a design has random actions doesn't rule it out as being a design. When scientists and doctors design new medicines, they are making predictions on how the medicines will work based on previous designs. How would any of those medicines work if our bodies were all random and didn't have a design? I will keep you updated on the book.
Good on the book. Perhaps you will be able to see the difference between the example you have just given and evolution.
Unless you think "trial and error," is purposeful design..... .......
Ah, so it has to have purpose to be a design. I thought the purpose of evolution is for life to survive and evolve? Is this not a purpose? Trial and error can be a purposeful design, it naturally separates the strong/most adaptable from the weak/less adaptable.
by TruthDebater6 years ago
Is it possible to know the origin of species without knowing the origin of life? Is to know how life evolves or changes into new species knowing the origin of species? I do not see how understanding the changing of life...
by Ron Karn5 years ago
If all life forms evolved from a single organism, where did the first organism originate from? It seems to me that to classify the science of evolution as scientific fact that they would need to establish a basis...
by lovetherain6 months ago
Some people, like Richard Dawkins call evolution a "fact". What do you think? Is evolution a fact or a theory?
by marinealways246 years ago
Is Evolution an Intelligent or Ignorant Design?
by aka-dj4 years ago
I thought it interesting that another thread tries, in desperation to "prove" the opposite.http://www.faithfacts.org/search-for-tr … l-evidenceHere's a site with some FACTS, that show the Bible to be...
by Faith Reaper10 hours ago
I apologize, but it seems a "Best" answer was chosen on my question when I did not choose it. I hope the HP Team can help me or someone can inform me why that happened! I noticed it via my phone...
Copyright © 2016 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.