Exclusive: an Islamic scientific viewpoint on Darwin theory

Exclusive: an Islamic scientific viewpoint on Darwins theory of evolution

Category:

Science & Technology

Tags:

• charles
• darwin
• evolution
• creation

[244Ohiro]

It feels SO good, knowing that I know more about evolution that a man who claims himself a "Dr", who has sway over this amount of people and probably more!

[qwerty0019]

@244Ohiro

With all due respect, what you wrote remains vague and general. Would you mind being more specific: in what aspects do you disagree with the points mentioned in the video?

[CYBERJITH]

1:20 the islands name is galapagos not calatropis

[venuram1]

If I have to disagree Darwin evolution then I have the only choice of agreeing that my God is a racist bastard

[venuram1]

@qwerty0019

1, This guy agrees that Lucy came 3 and half million years ago and followed by home-saphiens, neandranthal and cro-magnon.... is that not enough for him to think why his God must have created these souls before reaching the complete man????

2, disagrees evolution theory becos there is no link between these species, can he able to make a link between his child photo to his current posture? afterall our life is some years but he says there is no perfect 'link' 3 and half mill. years

[SloveintzWend]

I have never come across of any book which says fact of gravitation. I wonder why?

[kilroy227]

1 minute in and I can already call this guy ignorant...

[tskasa1]

Okay then...so you admit that animals CAN undergo morphological and genetical changes within a species. So now, what mechanism, exactly, prevents these morphological and genetic changes from becoming so large that a long and distant animal branches off and become its own separate species? I'd LOVE to hear about this mechanism that you know of that NO biologist in the world has yet discovered. Hell, you're guaranteed a noble prize in biology for it.

[tskasa1]

How many of those noble prize winners are actually biologists? I thought so.

Furthermore, no, you CAN tell what descended from what based on the fossil record, and this is due in part to a nice little thing called morphology and genetics (albeit genetics is not always usable), which is a genetic trait and can be passed down from generation to generation. In other words, the closer 2 things are morphologically speaking, the higher the probability that they are related. Comparative anatomy 101

[tskasa1]

...What are you talking about? There are no links between Neanderthal and Cro-Magnon man? Is this why the dna evidence says the EXACT opposite?? Furthermore...no, cro-magnon didn't evolve from neanderthals, and BOTH of these species ARE homo sapiens.

[tskasa1]

And what the hell are you talking about? Darwin didn't receive support because his theory was against the bible. In fact, at first it was critically panned by most scientists precisely BECAUSE it contradicted the bible. They only started picking it up a few years later after there had been FAR too much evidence supporting evolution to be casually dismissed. Again, dishonesty.

[tskasa1]

Also...are you seriously using an argument from ("lack" of missing links) ~150 years ago as evidence against evolution? I mean....we've discovered MILLIONS of the bloody things since Darwin published his book. Yes, science HAS progressed since the mid-1800s, surprise-surprise.