They say where is the Missing Link and we observe that we cannot see it above the ground and therefore conclude it must be below the ground. Inasmuch as paleontologists have not yet dug it out of the ground, it becomes incumbent on the questioner to do it. That the question is being asked at all shows an extraordinary optimism regarding the efforts of paleontologists and their ability to have dug up every square inch of the Earth to what may be several hundred feet below the surface. So, sure, get cracking on that and see if you can find this utterly useless piece of information.
Many people talk about macro evolution and this is such a glory in the modern world as DAYUM, I ain't descended from no monkey. I agreed at that point as I had never seen a monkey drink beer all day long just so it could spend the evening running over rats with a pickup truck. (Yes, they do this in Cincinnati) Macro evolution is a fish getting legs and becoming an amphibian. So now we have frogs and we can add wings so now we have flying frogs. Just add some rockets now and we'll have the Pentagon's newest trillion-dollar weapons system. But this information is useless also.
If you want macro evolution, you need a much bigger view than that. Studying more or less contemporary physical evolution is like a theologist studying Protestanism. Every time someone changed a comma, there was another brand of Protestants that hated all the other brands. Protestantism was never much more than a tax revolt against the Vatican that got a wee bit out of hand and yet now there are fifty-seven different varieties. And none of that has anything to do with spirituality any more than the study of bones will reveal the full depth of evolution.
The evolution studied by paleontologists goes nowhere until life exists and this is the evolution that interests most of all. In effect, how does a rock start breathing. How a monkey turns into a man is obvious and the question evaporates after reviewing anything Sarah Palin ever did but how rocks start breathing isn't quite as clear.
It goes far beyond the scope of the article to recite the process of the evolution of organic molecules, self-replicating molecules, etc. It's an exceedingly complex study and there are parts of it that still are not well-understood. My knowledge of it is dated so it would not serve to recite but it will serve, hopefully, to incite some research of your own.
Maybe someone wants to hoot that this information is theoretical and therefore of no value but that would only show that, in addition to being bereft of any knowledge of science, the speaker probably doesn't have much skill as a word mechanic.
The only reason for attacking such research is misguided religion but none of this is incompatible with the existence of God. If God did, in fact, have a plan then this was part of it. Believe what you like, it doesn't affect the science nor should it.
Many people talk about macro evolution and this is such a glory in the modern world as DAYUM, I ain't descended from no monkey. I agreed at that point as I had never seen a monkey drink beer all day long just so it could spend the evening running over rats with a pickup truck. (Yes, they do this in Cincinnati) Macro evolution is a fish getting legs and becoming an amphibian. So now we have frogs and we can add wings so now we have flying frogs. Just add some rockets now and we'll have the Pentagon's newest trillion-dollar weapons system. But this information is useless also.
If you want macro evolution, you need a much bigger view than that. Studying more or less contemporary physical evolution is like a theologist studying Protestanism. Every time someone changed a comma, there was another brand of Protestants that hated all the other brands. Protestantism was never much more than a tax revolt against the Vatican that got a wee bit out of hand and yet now there are fifty-seven different varieties. And none of that has anything to do with spirituality any more than the study of bones will reveal the full depth of evolution.
The evolution studied by paleontologists goes nowhere until life exists and this is the evolution that interests most of all. In effect, how does a rock start breathing. How a monkey turns into a man is obvious and the question evaporates after reviewing anything Sarah Palin ever did but how rocks start breathing isn't quite as clear.
It goes far beyond the scope of the article to recite the process of the evolution of organic molecules, self-replicating molecules, etc. It's an exceedingly complex study and there are parts of it that still are not well-understood. My knowledge of it is dated so it would not serve to recite but it will serve, hopefully, to incite some research of your own.
Maybe someone wants to hoot that this information is theoretical and therefore of no value but that would only show that, in addition to being bereft of any knowledge of science, the speaker probably doesn't have much skill as a word mechanic.
The only reason for attacking such research is misguided religion but none of this is incompatible with the existence of God. If God did, in fact, have a plan then this was part of it. Believe what you like, it doesn't affect the science nor should it.
No comments:
Post a Comment