Well, given that gravity isn't a law, but a theory, and one that probably has more holes and
questions than evolution, I think we probably won't be going to you for any science advice.
Not exact matches
I personally feel that the theory of
evolution has just as many
questions, if not more,
than my faith does.
= > I cant puzzle out what you're trying to say with «this
question has nothing to do with
evolution other
than it the most cosmetic sense that dna worked because it everything else didn't.»
However, this
question has nothing to do with
evolution other
than it the most cosmetic sense that dna worked because it everything else didn't.
Significantly more of the Muslims
questioned believe that
evolution has been disproved by the evidence
than the population as a whole (28 \ % compared with 9 \ %).
Evolution has more holes
than cheese, when you ask
questions like, how did this happen in spite of the laws of physics, the answer is I do not know.
For many Christians to accept
evolution and reject creation hits at things much deeper
than the
question of origin.
In fact, your silly
questions prove nothing other
than your lack of understanding of
evolution and the beginning of life.
As I have contemplated a response, I came to realize that your
question about hell is really no different
than the
question of how things began: Which is right, creationism,
evolution, or intelligent design?
The «overwhelming evidence for naturalistic
evolution» no longer overwhelms when the naturalistic worldview is itself called into
question, and that worldview is as problematical as any other set of metaphysical assumptions when it is placed on the table for examination rather
than being taken for granted as «the way we think today.»
The third section, fifty percent longer
than the first two together, considers several theological and philosophical
questions raised by the relation between sacred theology and contemporary evolutionary theory, They include the distinction between spirit and matter, the unity of spirit and matter, the concepts of becoming, of cause and of operation, the creation of the spiritual soul, the insights of Aristotelian scholasticism, and the biblical narrative of man's origin as it relates to the theory of
evolution.
If one approaches the problems of
evolution with a similar readiness to accept that the process may essentially involve very numerous components, one again comes out with a set of
questions which are characteristically Whiteheadian rather
than present - day orthodox.
I'd been convinced that young earth creationism (absent of any
evolution at all) was a fundamental tenant of the Christian faith and the only truly biblical position... so rather
than simply
questioning my approach to science, I
questioned my entire faith in God.
Today, researchers at the annual meeting of AAAS (which publishes Science), previewed data from a recent poll showing that when the word «human» is replaced with «elephant» in the
evolution question, 75 % of Americans agree — about 25 percentage points higher
than before.
Impact on
Evolution Debates over whether to label viruses as living lead naturally to another
question: Is pondering the status of viruses as living or nonliving more
than a philosophical exercise, the basis of a lively and heated rhetorical debate but with little real consequence?
Digital organisms that breed thousands of times faster
than common bacteria are beginning to shed light on some of the biggest unanswered
questions of
evolution
Understanding the beach mouse example was a better predictor of good responses to
questions about
evolution in general
than was performance on the course as a whole.
Despite the wealth of data, the initial analysis invites more
questions than it answers, Stringer writes, including «Where does H. naledi fit in the scheme of human
evolution?»
Whatever the cause, there is no
question of the outcome: mothers of opposite - sex twins end up with 19 percent fewer grandchildren
than moms of same - sex twins, meaning
evolution would seem to favor the latter.
Your September article on human
evolution was clear and beautifully illustrated, but I am amazed that there was no mention of the aquatic ape theory, which has much better answers for some of the
questions posed
than the establishment theories Zimmer noted.
The day after the 2004 presidential election, Gary Wills famously asked the
question, «Can a people that believes more fervently in the Virgin Birth
than in
evolution still be called an Enlightened nation?»
The problem of GCM's representing the
evolution in the Arctic rises the
question, if the faster
than expected decline might have at least hemispheric consequences that are not captured by the models.
Our results call into
question the current emphasis on social rather
than ecological explanations for the
evolution of large brains in primates and evoke a range of ecological and developmental hypotheses centred on frugivory, including spatial information storage, extractive foraging and overcoming metabolic constraints.
Rather
than flailing away over the
evolution question itself, director Jon Amiel casts the matter in personal terms as Charles Darwin (Paul Bettany) wrangles with the book that would spread the theory and his own loss of faith over the death of a daughter, the backdrop to his struggle.
Though publishers are making a positive move toward the fast - growing
evolution of book publishing, there are still more
questions than answers.
The problem of GCM's representing the
evolution in the Arctic rises the
question, if the faster
than expected decline might have at least hemispheric consequences that are not captured by the models.