Scientist: Evolution debate will soon be history , page 1

I always found the evolution/creation debate an interesting one. The one prevailing question for me has always been the missing link (or lack there of). We have been so close, yet so far away for a long time. Is the answer creation (god), evolution (natural phenomena), or intervention (alien phenomena).

"If you get to the stage where you can persuade people on the evidence, that it's solid, that we are all African, that color is superficial, that stages of development of culture are all interactive," Leakey says, "then I think we have a chance of a world that will respond better to global challenges."

"If you look back, the thing that strikes you, if you've got any sensitivity, is that extinction is the most common phenomena," Leakey says. "Extinction is always driven by environmental change. Environmental change is always driven by climate change. Man accelerated, if not created, planet change phenomena; I think we have to recognize that the future is by no means a very rosy one."

AP

Why does it seem that Leakey seems to be pushing a global warming agenda here. Interesting article none the less.

I am by no means an expert in this scientific area, I just thought I would post for the ATS community.

Have a go at Loyd Pye i think his name is.....Yoo toob.....hes got some heavy things to say and show about the evoution fantasy.......Actualy he goes with Sitchin with better proof than Sitchins speculations.....
Seems that hominids are earth beings born and evoved but humans are a haf breed of two types...hominids and anunaki blood
Hes a very good speaker too i enjoyed his argument immensely.....

.www.youtube.com...

Using evolutionist data he makes his point.....(they shot their foot with the mitochondrial DNA study world wide.....)
Definately hard to argue with his logic too......peace..........s

reply to post by ratsinacage

---

You need to clarify what you mean. I think the point you intended to make was sciences understanding of the universe is not much different than religions understanding. As both are infinitely beyond human understanding.

Originally posted by stirling
Have a go at Loyd Pye i think his name is.....Yoo toob.....hes got some heavy things to say and show about the evoution fantasy.......Actualy he goes with Sitchin with better proof than Sitchins speculations.....
Seems that hominids are earth beings born and evoved but humans are a haf breed of two types...hominids and anunaki blood
Hes a very good speaker too i enjoyed his argument immensely.....

.www.youtube.com...

Using evolutionist data he makes his point.....(they shot their foot with the mitochondrial DNA study world wide.....)
Definately hard to argue with his logic too......peace..........s

edit on 26-5-2012 by stirling because: (no reason given)

Also check out Michael Tellinger. He's done some really interesting research.

Originally posted by Xaphan

Originally posted by stirling
Have a go at Loyd Pye i think his name is.....Yoo toob.....hes got some heavy things to say and show about the evoution fantasy.......Actualy he goes with Sitchin with better proof than Sitchins speculations.....
Seems that hominids are earth beings born and evoved but humans are a haf breed of two types...hominids and anunaki blood
Hes a very good speaker too i enjoyed his argument immensely.....

.www.youtube.com...

Using evolutionist data he makes his point.....(they shot their foot with the mitochondrial DNA study world wide.....)
Definately hard to argue with his logic too......peace..........s

edit on 26-5-2012 by stirling because: (no reason given)

Also check out Michael Tellinger. He's done some really interesting research.

Lloyd Pye is VERY interesting to listen to. I've never heard of Tellinger, so thanks for that. Just checked out the giant foot.

reply to post by stirling

---

Lloyd Pye is a nut, he has no evidence, and basic logic refutes him. His Starchild stuff is pretty telling, he's a fraudster.

Originally posted by OccamsRazor04
reply to post by stirling

---

Lloyd Pye is a nut, he has no evidence, and basic logic refutes him. His Starchild stuff is pretty telling, he's a fraudster.

For the sake of balance, I have to refute OccamsRazor04.

Pie is an idiot and a fraud. He is after money only.

reply to post by GD21D

---

Good thread. Two points:

The one prevailing question for me has always been the missing link (or lack there of).

The commonplace concept of a "missing link" is a fallacy. It's based on an outmoded concept of evolution that resembles a linear progression of species, or a "chain". The reality is that it resembles a bush or a tree, and even that is something of an oversimplification. So what you should really be asking for are transitional fossils, of which there are many, and common ancestors, of which there are many. If you're specifically looking for ones in our own lineage, it's believed that the divergence of genus Homo from genus Australopithecus occurred via A. sediba i.e. A sediba is our last common ancestor with genus Australopithecus. Within our own genus, it's believed that our last common ancestor with H. neanderthalensis was H. rhodesiensis.

Why does it seem that Leakey seems to be pushing a global warming agenda here. Interesting article none the less.

Can you call it "pushing an agenda" when it's the conclusion drawn by your field of research?

reply to post by iterationzero

---

I agree with your concept of the missing link or links as it should be put. Point being is that the puzzle has not been fully assembled yet, we're still missing some important pieces. If we had all the pieces there would be no debate.

As far as the global warming issue. Is it his field of expertise? How did he go from the evolution debate is nearing an end to global warming is man induced and we need to get everyone on the same page. In my personal opinion man does have some responsibility in the warming of the planet. To what severity is the real debate. I understand global climate changes could factor into extinction level events. Just because it's part of his field doesn't mean he's an expert in the climate field.

I'm not challenging your points, as the way you articulate yourself shows you know more about this area than myself. It just struck me as odd that it was a key point he made.

reply to post by GD21D

---

I agree with your concept of the missing link or links as it should be put. Point being is that the puzzle has not been fully assembled yet, we're still missing some important pieces. If we had all the pieces there would be no debate.

We will never have all of the pieces. Fossil formation is rare, which was even recognized in Darwin's time. When you look at where the evidence for evolution really comes from, fossil evidence is a relative small part of it. The majority of the evidence for evolution is genetic. Even in the complete absence of the fossil record, modern evolutionary synthesis would still be the dominant theory explaining biodiversity by a wide margin.

As far as the global warming issue. Is it his field of expertise? How did he go from the evolution debate is nearing an end to global warming is man induced and we need to get everyone on the same page. In my personal opinion man does have some responsibility in the warming of the planet. To what severity is the real debate. I understand global climate changes could factor into extinction level events. Just because it's part of his field doesn't mean he's an expert in the climate field.

I think he sums up his chain of logic pretty well himself:

"If you look back, the thing that strikes you, if you've got any sensitivity, is that extinction is the most common phenomena," Leakey says. "Extinction is always driven by environmental change. Environmental change is always driven by climate change. Man accelerated, if not created, planet change phenomena; I think we have to recognize that the future is by no means a very rosy one."

I don't think he's claiming to be a climate change expert, just outlining the effects of climate change on evolution via extinction events. Climate change is an accepted fact in the scientific community at large. Here's an interesting blog post from NPR about the "controversy" over climate change: Climate, Controversy and Strangers on a Plane

I's argue that the "controversy" over evolution is even less significant than that of climate change -- the controversy is in the details, not over whether or not it happens. Sure, you can talk about the Discovery Institute's list of scientists that signed a statement refuting that Darwinian evolution could wholly explain biodiversity. But when you realize that it's a small fraction of one percent of scientists that have signed that statement, you start to get a better grasp of the distinct lack of "controversy".

reply to post by Helious

---

Hi.

Can you please detail how evolution is a 'broken theory'?

Thanks.

Originally posted by stanguilles7
reply to post by Helious

---

Hi.

Can you please detail how evolution is a 'broken theory'?

Thanks.

Uh, sure. It doesn't explain any of THESE in point of fact, science often times just ignores things that it can't explain and that's a big problem when you seek truth.

Ah, I know the old tired routine where you tell me science has no agenda and theory and facts and blah blah blah. It's old and doesn't hold up under scrutiny. When scientists stop working for universities who have a figure head who reports to donors and share holders talk to me....

When scientist are allowed to express there own opinion other than what has been formulated for them without being labeled a heretic or kook by the establishment talk to me. There is too small of a window with what is allowed to be spoken or thought within the science world lest you risk your lifes work and in that fact and because of it, science is currently broken as it comes to describing human history. Evolution included.

Before you say anything I would like you too think of four words and just how silly they are. "Dark matter" and "Big bang" lol, it's funny to even say them and then think about science seriously....

Pokemon discovered in Venezuela
  Posted 14 days ago with 47 member flags

89-Year-Old Man Develops Bladeless Bird-Friendly Wind Turbine
  Posted 11 days ago with 45 member flags

Amazing snowflake images that you have never seen before.
  Posted 14 days ago with 44 member flags

Energy Solutions THEY don\'t want you to know about
  Posted 14 days ago with 35 member flags

High speed video reveals the bizarre physics of an ordinary water droplet
  Posted 4 days ago with 32 member flags

Does this video show a working self propelled magnetic engine?
  Posted 7 days ago with 31 member flags

Viruses: alive or not?
  Posted 11 days ago with 30 member flags

NASA reveals secrets it has hidden on the Curiosity rover.
  Posted 17 days ago with 29 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: