Being quite good at the evolution theory myself, I can say a few things to clear misconceptions in this thread up:Originally Posted by ghost908
1. Darwin's theory is faulty in many ways if you use it as a model for describing reality. It's not because he was a bad scientist, but because he only discovered the basic principles of it, and never made an attempt of creating a full model of it. Therefore, it's only of interest to scientists, not for laymen. The modern science, knowing this principle and having proved it both theoretically and statistically, is making better efforts at making a complete model based on this principle.
2. With the modern evolution model, there are no contraarguments which prove any of the parts to be wrong. Unlike the popular misconceptions of the 19th century fascists, scientists realize that it's nearly impossible for a man to predict which genes are "the strongest" in the long run, and scientists also realize the importance of genetical variety.
3. The Christian creationist theory in the popular catholic form has met strong contraarguments and has been, largely, counterproved.
4. Compare point 2 and 3, it's an important difference. We might not have fully proved the evolution model, not the creationism theory either. But at least we've counterproved the creationist theory but not the evolution model. A more methafor based interpretation of the creationism theory results in a view that isn't contradicting reality, for example the Bible knew that most other animals came before humans, and that earth was created before animals etc. I'd say the popular fundamentalistic creationist theory is counterproved, but not the creationist theory that's written in the bible, if you read it as you're supposed to. And the evolution model we have today is nearly correct.
Bookmarks