All I would like to know is who and why decided that the theory of evolution is advanced in any form. It is just a theory and a very humiliating one: it says that my ancestors were monkeys. I truly believe that if one believes that once upon a time we came from God or someone who is smart, intelligent, lovable… it will make one a better person. Far better. And that is more important than all sciences and theories in this world together. And it is not only the theory of evolution that counts in the same direction:

The progress of the human kind will not be brought by a bright mind, yet a pure heart. A pure heart has a bright mind. The opposite belief is a grave omission of the latest civilization. And if it's so then better be we are God's children otherwise no one else could help us there where we are all heading so blindly and so mindlessly. Or it is already too late…

Aperisic wrote:

All I would like to know is who and why decided that the theory of evolution is advanced in any form. It is just a theory and a very humiliating one: it says that my ancestors were monkeys.

To be more accurate, the theory of common descent predicts that modern monkeys and Homo sapiens have a common ancestor.

This seems to have been borne out by recent research: chimpanzee and human DNA is 96% identical, according to an item in the journal Nature, in August 2005.

But there are a few differences, e.g. in the genes that relate to sexual reproduction, brain development, and the sense of smell.

(So good news for chimpanzees...)

MrP

Nona The Brit wrote:

1) Evolution doesn't say that we developed from monkeys/apes. 2) The word 'theory' when used in a scientific context, for example 'Darwin's theory of evolution' or 'Einstein's theory of relativity' has a different meaning to 'theory' used in general life. The scientific use of theory means 'a collection of connected scientific facts as we currently understand them'. The scientific 'hypothesis' is similar in meaning to the general use of 'theory'. A hypothesis has to be tested before it becomes a theory.

Whatever, a dolphin wouldn’t change my point. The theory or concept or hypothesis proven and unproven, it is not that important for what I want to say. The truth is always beautiful.

What I do want to say about the troubling point in the theory of evolution - it is not that we have technically a common design to many other creatures in this world.  This idea is actually very pleasant and it had been new.

The troubling point is in the belief that the development had happened on its own, by chance, by exhausting all others more or less temporary possibilities.

My point is that the Universe is not irresponsible.

MrPedantic wrote:

Aperisic wrote: The troubling point is in the belief that the development had happened on its own, by chance, by exhausting all others more or less temporary possibilities. Now that's the part of the theory of evolution that appeals to me. It's the knowledge that when I fill a bucket with water, it will inevitably find its way out through the pinhole in the side. MrP

Precisely, the theory says that the water is able as well

• not to pass at all
• to start and stop
• to start for some time and then go back
• to start and go back with all possible regular and irregular patterns
• to start to pass infinitely slow
• to exit at the speed of light
• and all other possibility that you can imagine.

Even if it is so there is no way we can prove it. There is only one theory Ergodic theory that says that if we allow for a sufficient time the system will pass through all its possible states.

First, the time that is needed for the Universe to pass through all its possible states is far larger than 13.7 billion years. Second, there is no theory that says that these states are passed in any particular order that would support the claim that anything could even resemble any kind of development. Actually though the system can pass through all its states, if let undisturbed it passes to its most probable state and that state is the state of chaos.

And if we are the accident of the Universe then why we are talking about anything at all? Why we want to understand anything when there is nothing to be understood. I am then just a passing fluctuation so who cares what I am saying (if there is anything like saying).