The theory of evolution has changed over time as new facts have emerged. The biggest, recently, in terms of human evolution has been the idea that Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon lived together but were separate branches of the tree rather than Cro-Magnon being the decedents of Neanderthal.
We have also come to believe that two legged dinosaurs did not drag their tails but used them for balancing and that they are more closely related to birds than we thought.
On a recent trip to Utah, I saw a recently excavated dinosaur with amazing preservation of skin and tendon. This find, and others in the area, will change our understanding of these animals.
Science is constantly changing as new evidence is discovered. Sometimes there are dead ends and sometimes science is politicized, as with the global warming nonsense. But evolution, as a theory to explain the diversity of species and changes in the fossil record, is not going away.
In the same way that Einstein refined our understanding of physics but did not replace it, new discoveries will refine our understanding of the past but not overturn it. To claim that a discovery, like the one in the article about chimps, should make us abandon all of evolutionary theory is nutty.
The idea that thousands upon thousands of scientists, for 200 years, including geologists, anthropologists, paleontologists, geneticists, biochemists, physicists, astronomers, zoologists and naturalists of all kinds, are engaged in some kind of giant delusion, conspiracy or hoax is delusional in itself and indicates a deep lack of understanding on how science works.
Calling evolution a religion or a hoax is hardly different than criticizing the President without offering an alternative. What is the alternative theory to evolution? Where is the evidence? ID and others are incomplete. ID depends on an "intelligence" to explain the fossil record. What's even the point of doing that. Why even have science when you can just explain every phenomenon by saying, "God did it?"
Of course God did it. So? In the past, devout Christians used science to understand and appreciate God buy seeking to understand the world around us. Do today's Christians want us to just forget all we know? I, and all the geologists and physicists think the earth is millions of years old. Bishop Usher thinks it's a few thousand years old. Should the rest of us just ignore the data for a million year old earth?
If you don't agree with the evolutionary theory there is a simple solution. Instead of taking ignorant and cheap shots from the sidelines, do your research (might require getting one or more Ph.D.s) provide your evidence, and if your ideas have any merit, you should be able to convince honest scientists that you are correct. Of course, you will be trying to prove the existence of God, and he may not appreciate that.
bttt
I assume that you are describing a fossil here.
Could you please explain how soft tissue becomes fossilized.
ML/NJ
“Calling evolution a religion or a hoax is hardly different than criticizing the President without offering an alternative. What is the alternative theory to evolution?”
I’m an ahtheist, and I have no use for either ID or evolution. Why does there have to be an alternative? What if the so-called fossil record is never explained? What difference would it make?
Why can’t evolutionists admit they just don’t know where we came from—nobody does. I certainly don’t believe any one designed life, it’s to poor a design. Don’t see how it could have evolved either, no matter how many plausible stories the evolutionists make up.
Just one question. Why is it so important to know where we came from? Isn’t it more important to get on with life and determine where we’re going?
Even if evolution were true, what good would it be? It’s not like physics or chemistry or medicine which can actually be used to produce things of value and improve the quality of human life. Except for providing prestiguous jobs for a bunch of pseudo-intellectuals, what possible value would evolution be?
Hank
Whether or not one has "alternative theories", if Darwinism is false (which it is), or contradicts the facts of nature (which it does), then there is no reason to believe it, obviously.