Richard Dawkins - Charles Darwin and Natural Selection

Richard Dawkins - Charles Darwin and Natural Selection

Category:

People & Blogs

Tags:

• Richard
• Dawkins
• Charles
• Darwin
• and
• Natural
• Selection

[Lingerfoot]

Because it makes religion obsolete!

[beatus72]

Evolution turned into religion? Nonsense! Other than religion any scientific theory - like the theory of evolution - is falsified or verified by evidence. It takes a long and very critical process to turn it into generally accepted fact. Yet there is always room left for new facts or theories to correct our understanding of reality. Just because someone passionately defends these established insights, this doesn't make it a religion to him.

[Shokuju]

identical twins aren't identical individual- even if we toss out the whole growth and development parts they're off by a couple of somatic mutations.

[WolfProductions27]

Charles Darwin - Richard Dawkins - Stephen Hawking - Bob Dawking ?

[willbirful]

love the video really good

[xtremetom180]

some really good stuff here

[TheSpikeystuff]

interesting video and very informative

[sitodocambia]

@FinemRespice1

To find them search "evolution and natural selection" in google. The first four results should answer most if not all of your questions.

[sitodocambia]

@FinemRespice1 The scientific community gets its facts from carefully structured experiments and observations that were reevaluated and redone by many other scientists of many different backgrounds to avoid bias.

If you want more information about how evolution works I have three websites for you where you can read all about it.

[FinemRespice1]

@FinemRespice1 As for your institutes,(which is where your so call "Scientific Community" gets it's facts from) I've never trusted anything that comes from big organizations, just look to history or our current Big business/ Government corruption problem for the reason why.......

[FinemRespice1]

@mikelheron20 Look, just like anything in the "Theory" of accidental creation radio dating relies on unknown factors. Here are

some conditions we must know in order for this method to accurately work.

The amount of isotopes that was there to begin with, and the object would have to be perfectly contained to make sure no outside

contaminants were introduced or that no isotopes were lost......

Assumptions assumptions is that all this current so called science can produce?



[mikelheron20]

@FinemRespice1 The estimate of 4.4 billion years (give or take) is not based on carbon dating. Lots of other techniques such as radiodating (not the same thing - are you familiar with the idea of radioactive half-life?) are used. But it isn't my job to educate you. As I said, it has never been simpler to find information. Do your own searching and reading like the rest of us. Evolution is fact. The entire scientific community - excepting a few religious fruitcakes - accepts it.