NewScientist says Darwin may have been wrong
Posted: 09 Feb 2010, 13:04SCEPCOP Forum
Scientific Committee to Evaluate PseudoSkeptic Criticism of the Paranormal
https://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/
NewScientist says Darwin may have been wrong
https://www.debunkingskeptics.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=909
Page 1 of 1
Posted: 09 Feb 2010, 13:04Re: NewScientist says Darwin may have been wrong
Posted: 10 Feb 2010, 08:29Interesting article....University of Illnois Urbana always messing around with the theories of evolution, lol. There was another finding I think from the University fo Illinois about evolution happening a couple hundred thousand years in an instance instead of bite by bite evolution. I might have the context of it wrong when I find the study I'll post it.
Re: NewScientist says Darwin may have been wrong
Posted: 10 Feb 2010, 14:29They have changed the theory of evolution a lot since Darwin. Mostly by adding more detail, such as DNA. This could be just another example of a change.
This is common in science. As we find more information then theories change. One good example is the periodic table of elements. As new elements are discovered they are added to the table. Several rows have been added since it was first done. This does not make it wrong. In the same way, Darwin has not been shown to be wrong, even if the link is right. They have just added in more detail.
Another example is that Newton's three laws are only approximations. They cannot be used to accurately predict the orbit of Mercury. That could not be done until the start of the 20th century.
This is common in science. As we find more information then theories change. One good example is the periodic table of elements. As new elements are discovered they are added to the table. Several rows have been added since it was first done. This does not make it wrong. In the same way, Darwin has not been shown to be wrong, even if the link is right. They have just added in more detail.
Another example is that Newton's three laws are only approximations. They cannot be used to accurately predict the orbit of Mercury. That could not be done until the start of the 20th century.