I find it odd how people jump to conclusions about the theory of evolution.

They often just see 2 sides. God or evolution. It could be a different theory to explain life. Personally there are way too many gaps about the theory of evolution. Even the scientific community is torn. Random is not systematic. We will probably never know. But as the molecular world is revealed like DNA, its complexity makes believing it is all random becomes hard to believe. [quote]In particular, concepts related to gradualism, speciation, natural selection, and extrapolating macroevolutionary trends from microevolutionary trends have been challenged. [/quote]

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

ninalanyon · 61-69, T

[quote]there are way too many gaps[/quote]
And what might they be?

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@ninalanyon the flagellar

ninalanyon · 61-69, T

@Axeroberts The what? Can you provide a link to an article on the subject?

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@ninalanyon
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flagellum

ninalanyon · 61-69, T

@Axeroberts Ah, irreducible complexity. Well at least you didn't claim that eyes can't have evolved, that's an improvement over some deniers of evolution.

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@ninalanyon evolution is just one part of the process. But this motor contradicts that part of evolution about irreducible complexity

ninalanyon · 61-69, T

@Axeroberts No it doesn't. Even a badly functioning flagellum is better than not having one. Didn't you read the section about the supposed irreducible complexity where it pointed out that flagella deficient in several proteins still function?

Axeroberts · 56-60, M

@ninalanyon it has nothing to do with how well it functions. It means each protein has a purpose and then came together to make a more complex organism. But each protein on its own serves no purpose

ninalanyon · 61-69, T

@Axeroberts You have utterly misunderstood how evolution works. It is simply the differential survival, and therefore breeding, of entities that differ in how well they cope with the environment in which they live.

That is, it very is to do with how well it functions. It has much less to do with the 'original purpose' of any of the component parts. Evolution does not have a purpose.