http://truthufo.blogspot.com/: The evolution has a well-meaning?

Friday, 22 August 2008

The evolution has a well-meaning?

Who has never questioned the appearance of a form as sophisticated as that of our brain? How to admit that this summit refinement is the result of pure chance? Especially as physicists and biologists agree that life could not appear in the precise conditions governing the formation and expansion of our universe. From there to think that evolution is already included in its formation and that it necessarily leads to the appearance of being aware, there is a big step.
And yet, more and more physicists support this theory.

The theory of Darwin
The story is presented as a foisenement biodiversity. The forecast appears to be governed by simple laws, but the explanatory power surprising. Thus, Darwinism (theory darwin) suggests that the history of life is the result of a single principle: that of natural selection of morphological changes occurring at random over time.
Problem, of Darwin's theory has many weaknesses:
By chance, by definition, is employed by the blind. If one accepts that the transition from fish to fish gills to the lungs was made by chance, this implies that there are a thousand forms of fish with gills bizarroïdes, as amended at random, before reaching the fish to the lungs.
It was therefore possible to confirm the theory by studying fossils. If it was true, the fossils would have to present a continuity between all species and we would find the "innumerable links transition between species. "Darwin strongly encouraged the search for fossils, but it proved disappointing. It does disclose that rare forms of transition as archéoptéryx, an intermediate between reptiles and birds. However, archéoptéryx already had wings and feathers as complex as those of birds today and was able to fly. No intermediate form was discovered between the wing and hind limbs. The darwinistes advanced that the coelacanth, a fish that was thought extinct for millions of years, was an intermediary between fish and amphibians. This belief collapsed in 1938 when repêcha, off South Africa, a coelacanth specimen that was thought extinct; studying the anatomy of the fish revealed that it had nothing in common with amphibians and it was not an intermediary.
Darwin recognized gaps in the fossil documents: "Although geological research have undoubtedly revealed the existence of a past many links that have already moved closer to each other many forms of life, they do not, between species present and past species, all infinite gradations and insensitive that calls my theory, and this is, without doubt, the most serious objection that one can oppose him. "
Moreover, when broadens its reflection, he wondered how even some animal or plant structures have evolved to achieve what they are today: "It is undoubtedly difficult to speculate on what many gradations structures have been perfected (...).
Although in many cases it is very difficult to speculate on what transitions bodies have reached their current state! "
Darwin was never able to prove his theory, this heavy responsibility rests with its successors.
It is hoped that research will be done to achieve the discovery of this endless forms of transition. Today, 140 years later, is what his successors have found what Darwin expected?
The answer is no. Darwin's theory is still not a certainty.
It remains the dominant theory because it is the least bad theories at the moment. (even though many elements put to evil.)