Inverto, we're talking about Darwinian evolution, not generic natural selection (variation within gene pools).
Inverto, we're talking about Darwinian evolution, not generic natural selection (variation within gene pools).
what scientific discoveries were derived from Darwinian theory
Ahh, much better. Yes, it certainly was "wishfull thinking" on Darwin's part. Or perhaps not, perhaps he was skeptical himself of what his findings meant. Yet the apparent lack of transitional fossils in the know fossil record has an obvious reason. Only under rare circumstances are bones preseverd long enough to fossilize, and even then it is rare when they are in any apparent order. Independant of how long the earth has been here, there has been much geologic activity since the fossilization of these bones. Tectonic plates converge, mountains rise up; rock is split, land shifts and avalanches. Most of the bones that happened to reach fossilization would have been destroyed by such widespread and violent geologic action.I look at it this way, what has been called evidence by Darwinists, such as "transitional fossils," are not that, just wishful thinking, and Darwin said himself that "in a hundred and fifty years, the paleontological record would prove or disprove the theory," so a hundred and fifty years later, no supposed transition fossils to prop up this bizarre theory, that goo morphed into you.
Not to mention that the "complimentary" uniformitarian geology scheme is belied by the geologic record, so the evidence is against what mainstream science is force-feeding us, and yet it's all treated as fact, very strange.
Since Darwinism was formulated by qualitative observation, it has no empirical value, and so, is predictive of nothing except what "may" be.
it's the morphing from lizards to birds that people have a problem with, Darwinian evolution.
Analogy.How can a meme ("unit of cultural transmission") be related to biological "evolution," speak or no speak?
If a tribe doesn't talk much, their tongues shrink?
People have known about that natural selection for millennia, you know, breeding horses, dogs, etc., that's all that Darwin's finches example was, with differing sized beaks, they still were just finches, it's the morphing from lizards to birds that people have a problem with, Darwinian evolution.
If a tribe doesn't talk much, their tongues shrink?