I'm not the one who said that, that would be a direct quote from Bishop Wilberforce back in the 1890's.
To answer the question you asked me on the other thread, the reason I don't believe in evolution is:
1.) The law of probabilities suggests our very existence via natural selection is unlikely (human beings are incredibly complex).
2.) History has shown us that scientific theories are constantly changing and being disregarded as new ones take their place. Odds are (there we go with probabilities again) that within a few years science will abandon the current theory of evolution for something else.
3.) Our understanding of how DNA and genetics work is in its infancy, to say the least. We have really just begun to scratch the surface there. How can we possibly think we have an understanding of evolution when the building blocks of what makes us evolve, our genes, are so poorly understood?
Then there should be scientific studies that exist to back up each one of your claims from 1-3.
Let me address each one individually.
1. The Law of Probabilities is applied math correct? Used in science, traffic studies, disease control, medicine, car production and on and on and on. In a sense, it is a science . . . and you trust it. If you could show me the studies using the law of probabilities that has eliminated the universally accepted Theory of Evolution when explaining life on this planet I would be grateful. Any claim this large must be well documented and tested.
2. Yes, people once thought the earth was flat and people once thought the sun revolved earth, and that life spontaneously started in piles of horse dung (
true story), however, none of these were scientific theories . . . not a one. You see, it was science, and scientists who observed, tested, observed, tested . . . over and over again who developed the "Theories" we have come to accept as fact. You won't debate gravity because you observe it everyday. This is not to say we won't learn more and more about evolution. We are finding new fossils of early hominoids every year, but it isn't going to change the over all theory.
3. This is another common argument from the people who have not been familiarized fully with theory of evolution. It isn't just the DNA studies, it is a combination of many sciences. However, you seem to want to focus on what we don't know about the genomes of all living things instead of what we do know . . . and how it has been observed and tested. Follow the Mitochondrial DNA and you get useful information to guide the studies in evolution, but it is the fossil record, combined with what we know about DNA (
What we do know won't change, it's been tested and observed), and all the other scientific information that seals the deal.
By the way, not every scientist agrees about evolution as it relates to the out of Africa theory. Some scientists believe they have proven a multiregional development of modern humans. It is not accepted by 99% because there is no fossil record as of yet that can be used to back it up. And even though some scientists may disagree on the origin of modern humans, they still accept the Theory of Evolution just like the fact they know we have gravity on earth.
