Was Darwin a rich brat plagiarist? Lots of evidence of that and of not having much intelligence. What has been referred to since then, "the missing link" is a bold lie put in front of your eye.
The correct term, IF evolution at its core is valid, would be MISSING LINKS! Not just from monkey to man but ALL THE LINKS FOR ALL SPECIES is required. Some species appear to solve an evolutionary chain but those are rare and still not complete as "science" demands for conclusion.
Interesting column ... but I take major issue with your phrase, "discovery of evolution". What Darwin et al proposed is not fact-based. You want to talk about MICRO-evolution, I'm all ears. But Darwin's theory? Nothing there to "discover".
Roger! Totally agree here - I was looking to build off the mainstream comment that Darwin "discovered" this whole piece, but you're completely right. Darwin didn't discover anything, practically stole someone else idea and became the face of it. So yea, on the same page here.
Excellent point, people interpret truths by the lens they use. Cherrypicking to fit an idea rather than reviewing the data and then creating conclusions from it. Just look at politics lmao. Sadly the data-first scientific ideal is rare.
The theory of evolution could have easily been interpreted differently. For instance a historical fantasy setting known as "tales of kaimere" has a theory in its world that posits that evolution follows dynastic cycles (like that of chinese dynasties), with dynasties rising, standardizing and falling (for instance the cretaceous could be considered the second dynasty of the dinosaurs).
Another speculative idea in this world is that a world's health can be measured by its ability to support megafauna. More trophic levels = a more robust ecosystem. Where the age of the dinosaurs would be considered a healthier world than say the pre-anthropocene world.
Another speculative idea could be emphasizing how diversity in genre decreases over time. Just look at the strange experiments of the cambrian compared to the more same-y forms of today. Look at beetles who comprise 25% of all known species.
Its apart of my appreciation for fiction. The ability to think of perspectives outside even the real world.
Some people refer to Christian advocates of evolution such as Pierre De Chardin and others too but none of them even begin to take into account the totality of the human body-mind-complex as described here: http://www.integralworld.net/reynolds6.html
Was Darwin a rich brat plagiarist? Lots of evidence of that and of not having much intelligence. What has been referred to since then, "the missing link" is a bold lie put in front of your eye.
The correct term, IF evolution at its core is valid, would be MISSING LINKS! Not just from monkey to man but ALL THE LINKS FOR ALL SPECIES is required. Some species appear to solve an evolutionary chain but those are rare and still not complete as "science" demands for conclusion.
Almost finished reading your book, which I bought. Great topics leaving one much to ponder. Very enjoyable. Thank you!
Interesting column ... but I take major issue with your phrase, "discovery of evolution". What Darwin et al proposed is not fact-based. You want to talk about MICRO-evolution, I'm all ears. But Darwin's theory? Nothing there to "discover".
Roger! Totally agree here - I was looking to build off the mainstream comment that Darwin "discovered" this whole piece, but you're completely right. Darwin didn't discover anything, practically stole someone else idea and became the face of it. So yea, on the same page here.
Excellent point, people interpret truths by the lens they use. Cherrypicking to fit an idea rather than reviewing the data and then creating conclusions from it. Just look at politics lmao. Sadly the data-first scientific ideal is rare.
The theory of evolution could have easily been interpreted differently. For instance a historical fantasy setting known as "tales of kaimere" has a theory in its world that posits that evolution follows dynastic cycles (like that of chinese dynasties), with dynasties rising, standardizing and falling (for instance the cretaceous could be considered the second dynasty of the dinosaurs).
Another speculative idea in this world is that a world's health can be measured by its ability to support megafauna. More trophic levels = a more robust ecosystem. Where the age of the dinosaurs would be considered a healthier world than say the pre-anthropocene world.
Another speculative idea could be emphasizing how diversity in genre decreases over time. Just look at the strange experiments of the cambrian compared to the more same-y forms of today. Look at beetles who comprise 25% of all known species.
Its apart of my appreciation for fiction. The ability to think of perspectives outside even the real world.
Please find an Illuminated Understanding of evolution via these references:
http://beezone.com/current/fiveevolutionarystatesoftrueman.html
http://beezone.com/current/structureevolutiondestiny.html
Some people refer to Christian advocates of evolution such as Pierre De Chardin and others too but none of them even begin to take into account the totality of the human body-mind-complex as described here: http://www.integralworld.net/reynolds6.html
All theories of evolution are essentially creation myths. This reference provides a unique Understanding of such http://beezone.com/current/creamyth.html