Plateforme Level Extreme
Abonnement
Profil corporatif
Produits & Services
Support
Légal
English
Evolution Article in National Geographic
Message
De
29/11/2004 13:37:21
 
 
À
29/11/2004 03:35:57
Information générale
Forum:
Politics
Catégorie:
Autre
Divers
Thread ID:
00965338
Message ID:
00965473
Vues:
13
And the debate continues...

http://www.answersingenesis.org/docs2004/1106ng.asp

More NG debates:

http://www.cato.org/dailys/09-09-04.html
http://www.trueorigin.org/ng_whales01.asp


>In the November 2004 issue of National Geographic the main article is about the theory of evolution. Considering the recent monster thread about the same topic I thought I would post the opening paragraph from this article for those who are interested. The entire article is worth reading.
>
>
>Was Darwin Wrong? No, the evidence for Evolution is overwhelming.
>by David Quammen
>National Geographic, Nov 2004.
>
>Evolution by natural selection, the central concept of the life’s work of Charles Darwin, is a theory. It’s a theory about the origin of adaptation, complexity, and diversity among Earths living creatures. If you are skeptical by nature, unfamiliar with the terminology of science, and unaware of the overwhelming evidence, you might even be tempted to say that it’s “just” a theory. In the same sense, relativity as described by Albert Einstein is “just” a theory. The notion that Earth orbits around the sun rather than vice versa, offered by Copernicus in 1543, is a theory. Continental drift is a theory. The existence, structure, and dynamics of atoms? Atomic theory. Even electricity is a theoretical construct, involving electrons, which are tiny units of charged mass that no one has ever seen. Each of these theories is an explanation that has been confirmed to such a degree, by observation and experiment, that knowledgeable experts accept is as a fact. That’s what scientists mean when
>they talk about a theory: not a dreamy and unreliable speculation, but an explanatory statement that fits the evidence confidently but provisionally – taking it as their best available view of reality, at least until some severely conflicting data or some better explanation might come along.
>

>
>Also very interesting is the results of polls taken in the US and discussed in a few subsequent paragraphs of the article:
>
>No less than 45 percent of responding US adults believe in creationism and that evolution played no role in shaping us at all. 37 percent allowed for a divine initiative to get things started and evolution as the creative means. Only 12 percent believe that humans evolved from other life forms without involvement of a God.
>

>
>That’s interesting …
.·*´¨)
.·`TCH
(..·*

010000110101001101101000011000010111001001110000010011110111001001000010011101010111001101110100
"When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser." - Socrates
Vita contingit, Vive cum eo. (Life Happens, Live With it.)
"Life is not measured by the number of breaths we take, but by the moments that take our breath away." -- author unknown
"De omnibus dubitandum"
Précédent
Suivant
Répondre
Fil
Voir

Click here to load this message in the networking platform