The theory of evolution through natural selection describes how humans and other animals have evolved over a long period of time. Charles Darwin made a hypothesis based on the different pictures of the same animal that were found over the years. There was a slight change in its features, which brought him to the conclusion of how animals adapt over time. His theory began to gather more evidence when discovering fossilized “ape-like” bone structures, which gives great data to his theory that all animals evolve over time to adapt to their surroundings. There are many species that do not exist because they did not have the capability to move forward in order to survive. With enough evidence to prove this theory is probable, there was an effort made to prove that man-kind, or human beings, also adapted to the new surroundings brought forth. That being said, due to our ability to be different than any other species, we have evolved just like any other life form trying to survive. To support this claim, the fossils he found were believed to be a part of what we have evolved from, also to be supported with monkeys.
There is said to be a “middle man” in between his findings… but there isn’t enough evidence today to prove that humans have “evolved” because our DNA is so complex and doesn’t even come close to the DNA of a monkey. The conflict between Intelligent Design is that these theorists believe there was a purpose to human life and that evolution doesn’t fit because the DNA structure is so complex that natural selection could not have put together such complex DNA codes without the help of something to guide the molecules. Natural selection claims that each molecule is drawn to each other, but it still does not explain why they are drawn and how they function without an Intelligent Designer. Intelligent Design theorists are well aware that evolution of life is possible, but for human species Intelligent Design theorists believe that there must be a more complex reason behind the code in human DNA. The theory itself is very complex and there is really no way to collect data to prove this theory is not a theory. Intelligent Design seems more spontaneous and falls more in the lines of creationism. Unlike creationism, “God” is not said to be the answer to all of this process but maybe something more with qualities of “God-like” intelligence.
The Essay on Human DNA and Sexual Differentiation
There has with respect to understanding human evolution, thus far, hardly been any greater an academic marriage than that which has occurred between physical anthropology and genetics. For anthropologists the union has been particularly beneficial as DNA has been incorporated into the quest to understand human evolution. Some scholars have referred to this as the culmination of the evolution of ...
The possibilities range from their being a God structure or something of another realm that withholds the intelligence capabilities of creating man in “its” own image. Evolution is a very well analyzed theory. It has evidence that proves it to be true in the majority of its findings. Evolution by natural selection is complex in itself and is still able to be tested to prove itself. The education system is still teaching evolution, even though there is no fact of where humans come from, there will always be theories and students will always have an open mind in the scientific field of research if they choose to. Although it makes it difficult for some to wrap their minds around all this information; those who are believers of creationism may have a hard time understanding why things are said to be one way, then said to be another. Intelligent Design has only been brought up through the technology we have and how far more advanced our knowledge is about the world and life that surrounds us. The study of DNA and its molecular structure is far more beyond complex with its ‘missing’ codes. There are pieces that not even todays modern machinery can decode.
The Essay on Darwin’s Theory of Evolution
Charles Darwin and the Theory of Evolution Charles Darwin is widely known as the father of evolutionary biology. It is believed that no one has influenced our knowledge of life on Earth as much as he has. His theory of evolution by natural selection, which has unified the theories of the life sciences, explained where all the diverse living things came from and how they have been able to adapt to ...
Although Intelligent Design is fairly new to the public, it is something that’s been around for many years…only considered a theory not tested, basically an unfinished hypothesis. Now that we have the technology and ability to read the structure of DNA, it brought the hypothesis to the test. To many people, Intelligent Design may seem more emotionally understandable. Intelligent Design is the hypothetical thought that there may be “something” or “someone” far more intelligent in this universe to create such an organism, such as man. Many people could think of this very religiously, while others will explore the possibilities. With all of this said, teaching both evolution and Intelligent Design wouldn’t rule out one another if they were taught as one, (evolution) only involving animals and other species in its theory and Intelligent Design to the existence of humans. Students or people in general, will take in these theories as they will. Religion is very traditional and a way of life for some that these theories may not even faze them. Science and religion battle the same issue but are yet so different in topic.
They both thrive to know the existence in things and the beginning from which they started. They lack to connect their theories. And science is openly considered as “theories”, but those of religious beliefs will always think to be fact over any science “theory”. “Intelligent Design theorists believe that Religion should be seen as a metaphor other than taken literally, but Immanuel Kant (philosopher) believed that how we experience reality is dependent on the structure of our brain, which organizes and gives meaning to input from our senses” (Critical Thinking, pg. 371, Ch. 12).
This all amazes me on how science will go so far to prove itself. It’s hard to tell what could come next. With all of the different theories there are it’s hard for some to grasp on just on. “The scientific and theological enterprises [are] interacting and mutually illuminating approaches to reality.” (Arthur Peacocke, Critical Thinking, pg. 372 Ch. 12) I know that there is a lot of knowledge behind these scientists who believe that evolution or Intelligent Design is the right thing to be teaching. I know that evolution has a number of facts to prove itself, but I also know that Charles Darwin created artificial “fossils” that shows that humans did not evolve.
The Essay on Evolution Science
Will believers in Intelligent Design be able to embrace the incredibly promising and innovative solutions outlined in Luke Bawazer’s Tedtalk while rejecting Darwin’s theory? Yes. One will be able to believe in intelligent Design while embracing Mr. Bawazer’s ideals. It is easy to see that Darwin’s theory is not longer accurate as we learn more about life at a molecular level. Darwin ...
I also know that the Intelligent Design theory has its supporting evidence because its high technical quality machines that help interpret human DNA and show what pieces come from, cannot pick up a certain piece of chromosome. This shows that because there is that missing piece, which even the technology we have now cannot decipher, means there must be an Intelligent Designer out there. With my knowledge and all the information I’ve read, I believe that that there should be a serious thought over putting a new study of our “existence” in school curriculums. Learning a new way or origin other than the theory of evolution could cause an even bigger outrage than those of creationism beliefs. First there was major triumph over the theory of evolution and religious beliefs (there still are)… now it’s science vs. science.
I don’t see the point in battling one another when they could join their teachings together. Personally I don’t think that schools should teach evolution or Intelligent Design nor religion. I think it’s reasonable enough to introduce younger students to these theories, but teach them no. Trying to make students understand something they may have no desire of knowing should be left out of schools. I wouldn’t see the point in “teaching” these theories in schools until college level when the student has the ability to choose what they want to learn about. At that time students would have a better understanding of things and be able to reason more appropriately given the circumstances.
