Just on the surface of things evolution is doubtful. Even the most superficial examination will show that it is an erroneous theory. Take for example hearing loss in the aging. Men are statistically more likely to suffer hearing loss than women. The onset of hearing loss in the aging begins at the high frequency ranges and as the loss of hearing progresses the frequency of sound waves lost lowers. Women speak at these higher frequency ranges, so men simply do not pick up the sound of their voices very easily. This is plain evidence of intelligent design!
On a more serious note, but none the less superficial, let us look at the extreme differences in climates that humans live in and question evolution on the basis of adaptive evolution. According to science we have been hanging around the planet for about 200,000 years. Eskimos live in an environment so cold, so harsh that only grass and bushes grow there. No trees or vines or any plants of that nature survive, but humans have been able to thrive, along with a myriad of other animals such as birds, bears, fox, elk, caribou and many others. It gets cold (-80 degrees Fahrenheit!). Other men live in climates that are equally hostile in the opposite extreme. Deserts get up to 135 or 140 degrees. There are swamps and jungles where it is so humid and teaming with every kind of life form, and high altitude environments that make it hard for someone who is not used to it to breathe. This is not even an exhaustive list of the different climates and environments men have lived and thrived in for many thousands of years, but the differences between the environments are tremendous. The theory of adaptive evolution asserts that as a population group arrives in a new environment the individuals that are best able to adapt through chance and gene mutation will survive and reproduce. 200,000 years is more than enough time to develop at least a little difference between men from the arctic and men from the swamp, but there is none. They are anatomically exact replicas of each other.
Other animals show slight differences though. Take bears for example. The hair of polar bears are specialized for their environment. The follicles are hollow tubes in which air is able to enter. The bear's body heat warms the air and helps keep the animal warm. Why don't Eskimos have hollow hair follicles? That would be a perfect adaptive mechanism to develop to suit the environment. Eskimos don't even have more hair than other people, in fact they have hair cover much less of their body that most Italians do, and Italians do not need that extra hair all over their bodies. The Mediterranean is a warm climate, so Italians would need less hair. It appears that evolution is working in reverse in these particular circumstances. How about peoples in high elevations? If adaptive evolution were true is it not reasonable that they would develop special lungs or special cells in their lungs to adapt to their environment? Alas, no such development has occurred, they are anatomically the same as those who live by the ocean. Traditionally the people who live close to the sea take much of their food from the sea, but they have not developed any special lung capacity or unique cells that allow them to harvest oxygen from water like the fish do. Why is that?
Questions like these make me question the validity of the theory of evolution. If men have been around for 200,000 years then why are we the exact same as we were even 2500 years ago? There should have been at least some new changes, but there has not. We know we are exactly the same because of the ancient Greeks and Egyptians. They knew human anatomy. They knew the same anatomy we know today. This view is very superficial, but it begs the question - is evolution a truly valid theory or does the scientific evidence make a judgement against it?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment