Hello everyone, this is a forum in which to talk of human evolution and try to figure out if sitratta a valid theory or if it is a hoax.
All comments will be well accepted!
Say what you think about it!
Thank you all
If serious, this belongs under "Off-Topic Discussion."
In principle all scientific theories are valid. The human evolution theory is well established and accepted by most educated people. There's no reason to think it's a hoax. It might even be proved wrong in the future, but thinking it's a hoax is childish and not very smart in my opinion.
Omg, I got another one, what's your opinion about the streets?
what's your opinion about gravitation? because I think it is invisible elves with invisible ropes keeping things down. And that's my opinion, so it is as valid as anyone elses
todo_pro
Thank you for your answer. I ask you kindly tell me one scientific evidence showing that evolution is valid.
Thanks
They just voted on this thread at the science convention: its bad
Usually scientific theories are hard to understand or relate to yourselves, like quantum theory which requires weeks of work just to make some understanding, but evolution is great exactly because you can see around how science works, you can travel even by yourself and gather proof, make deductions, spot similarities and finally add unavoidable trends.
This formulated quite with pathos, but it's great example to touch the very basics of scientific thought process, which IS our main progress during last thousands of years.
Only reason that this question is more discussed than others is that roots we got from monkeys are still alive and it's hard to throw off things like country, skin color, religion, hierarchy and so on.
hal9k, people just don't want to evolve. ;-)
I do believe in the standard evolution theory, because it can be proven, just that i disagree it to have been a random progress. As a Castaneda reader i believe there was intention involved. Eg, some Dinosaurs evolved to be able to fly because they intended to fly.
Of course this can neither be proved or disproved, that is why serious science should not be interested in this. If a Scientist says "this is not true", i have to tell him that this statement is outside his subject. Science can find out _what_ happened and _how_ it happened, but should leave the question _why_ it happened, if it can not be proven, to the philosophers.
