Is science being unduly influenced?

[Darren King]

There is a proven common ancestor, this was only a single example as well. I'm awaiting a legitimate response to my post still.

What I was trying to say is, ignoring where things started, "origin of the species", but concluding that current animals evolved, is rather short sighted. On the part of the scientists

[Akitu]

What I was trying to say is, ignoring where things started, "origin of the species", but concluding that current animals evolved, is rather short sighted. On the part of the scientists

My apologies for misunderstanding. I believe that the origin of the species is another matter altogether, we don't have the data to prove or disprove either conclusion as of yet, but to deny that animals have evolved is rather incorrect I believe, hence my personal division of the two as separate matters. For all I know, the origin of the species is someone from the future went back in time and rubbed one out into the great cosmos and BOOM, life. Until there's proof of any sort, I'll remain open minded.

[Darren King]

My apologies for misunderstanding. I believe that the origin of the species is another matter altogether, we don't have the data to prove or disprove either conclusion as of yet, but to deny that animals have evolved is rather incorrect I believe, hence my personal division of the two as separate matters. For all I know, the origin of the species is someone from the future went back in time and rubbed one out into the great cosmos and BOOM, life. Until there's proof of any sort, I'll remain open minded.

I'm not trying to insult or to beat a dead horse/rhinocerous, but how can the origin of life have nothing to do with the continuation of life?

[Akitu]

I'm not trying to insult or to beat a dead horse/rhinocerous, but how can the origin of life have nothing to do with the continuation of life?

I'm not saying it doesn't have anything to do with it, but merely that how it happened has no bearing on whether or not evolution occurs in life. Nature adapts to changes, gets better, evolves.

[Darren King]

I'm not saying it doesn't have anything to do with it, but merely that how it happened has no bearing on whether or not evolution occurs in life. Nature adapts to changes, gets better, evolves.

When did it start evolving? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but there has to either be evolution or not. It can't be, " life spontaneously appeared and then started evolving". There is no way to create life out of nothing.

[Akitu]

When did it start evolving? I'm not trying to be a smart ass, but there has to either be evolution or not. It can't be, " life spontaneously appeared and then started evolving". There is no way to create life out of nothing.

Again, I'm not debating how the universe and life itself started, the fact is irrelevant, we are here now, I'd rather spend my time learning about what presently exists while I can and let someone else with a vested interest in the former subject arrive at their own conclusions. However life started is irrelevant to me, personally. All I know is that life is evolving around me presently, and will continue to do so into the future and long after my own time is done. Perhaps someone else will figure out some answers to these questions we raise after our lifetime, or that of our kids even.

[Darren King]

Again, I'm not debating how the universe and life itself started, the fact is irrelevant, we are here now, I'd rather spend my time learning about what presently exists while I can and let someone else with a vested interest in the former subject arrive at their own conclusions. However life started is irrelevant to me, personally. All I know is that life is evolving around me presently, and will continue to do so into the future and long after my own time is done. Perhaps someone else will figure out some answers to these questions we raise after our lifetime, or that of our kids even.

It is still a theory no matter what we discuss here. Meaning it is unproven. And likely unprovable. But I do enjoy the arguing...er... I mean the discussing. lol

[Akitu]

It is still a theory no matter what we discuss here. Meaning it is unproven. And likely unprovable. But I do enjoy the arguing...er... I mean the discussing. lol

See my earlier definition of what theory actually is, it means that it can't be disproved, not proved.

[Darren King]

See my earlier definition of what theory actually is, it means that it can't be disproved, not proved.

Theory:
a proposed explanation whose status is still conjectural and subject to experimentation, in contrast to well-established propositions that are regarded as reporting matters of actual fact. Synonyms: idea, notion hypothesis, postulate.

Are we going to "discuss" the meaning of the word "theory"?
It's all semantics. Can't be disproved is a scientists way of saying it can't be proven either.

[SargeNZ]

The accepted reason that there are no transitional fossils found is that once a mutation is found to be beneficial to the species, it very quickly (within comparatively few generations) becomes the new normal for that species. - Thus any inbetween fossils of this type are -very- rare compared to your average fossil which is very rare to start with. Hence we don't find them.