Now that genetic science is so advanced, why do people still believe in evolution?

Because the theory of evolution itself is in line with the theory of genes, and it is precisely because of the continuous evolution of people that genes are gradually improved, I think there are some similarities between genetics and evolutionary theory.

It is precisely because genetic science is becoming more and more advanced and will also become an important area of the Fourth Industrial Revolution that the theory of evolution is increasingly proving to be correct.

(I've talked to a lot of anti-evolutionists and found that they all have one thing in common: selective blindness.) )

They are just at a loss in the rapid development of society and technology, looking for a little spiritual support. Anti-evolution can be compared to religious sentiments, except that such sentiments only pale and pretentious. To put it bluntly, it is paranoid opposition, regardless of the latest discoveries and theoretical basis, and even the theory of evolution is not clear, it is almost like setting a target for yourself.

Speaking of evolution, I am not surprised by the ridiculous argument that there is no fossil basis, just conjecture, pseudoscience, and theology, but he does not come up with his own opinions and methods, and he sprinkles and rolls around the whole process to change the topic, ignoring those strong evidence. I just want to say: such an anti-evolutionary theory, you think it is very good"Science""Rationality"......You don't even have a corner of evolution, or selective blindness.

If it weren't for the influence of the emotional and humanistic thoughts, and then **** the selective blindness, and learn about the basic knowledge and the latest scientific discoveries about the theory of evolution, they would have been evolutionists a long time ago.

You only see what you want to see, but you actively ignore what you don't want to see. Taking 10,000 steps back, the theory of evolution cannot explain all the phenomena of life activities, but how much can creationism and agnosticism explain? I'm afraid I can't even reach a fraction of the evolutionary theory.

Can medicine cure all diseases? Can astrophysics answer exactly everything about stars? If you give up exploring and researching just because of these things, you can't tolerate the slightest problem, and you overturn the existing cognitive concept just because of a phenomenon that cannot be explained"Always right"The conclusion that will not change?

That kind of science is no longer science, so what do we need science for? What do you want to modernize?

Evolution is by no means it"No credentials"It has been tested by the academic community for more than 200 years, but it cannot stand up to the public"Think about it"。Ha ha. It's not that we don't have a basis, we have a basis, provided that you understand it without subjectivity.

If you take it seriously, you will see how reasonable the theory of evolution is.

I don't believe in either the Bible or Darwin's theory of evolution. But I prefer to believe that the origin of all living things stems from some kind of intelligent creation. Perhaps wisdom itself is accumulated and evolved, just as human wisdom is accumulated and evolved.

I believe that the living body is the creation of wisdom, because it is complete and systematic, and the existence of the living body manifests the existence of intelligence. In life, we can know that the TV set did not evolve from the picture tube TV to the LCD TV, but was made by man, but the human wisdom has evolved and developed, so the wisdom itself will accumulate and evolve. This wisdom may be the wisdom of electrochemistry.

Some people may like to call it God, but I believe it is electricity. Our origins may have been the creation of electrochemistry.

Because there is one fundamental question that the theory of evolution cannot explain, that is, must human beings have a origin? It is very difficult to convince people to say that some theories are basically taken for granted without actual evidence, and they are basically not completely believed by rational people. In fact, in this respect, the theory of evolution is essentially the same as the other two creationisms.

Because the history of human beings is too short, according to the theory of evolution, biological evolution is measured in hundreds of millions of years, and our current level of technology cannot provide absolute evidence for the theory of evolution.

We support that there may be ten questions that cannot be explained, and that we deny evolution that will have ten thousand questions that cannot be explained! Evolution also needs to "evolve", it's science! The theory of evolution is the closest to the truth of all the theories about "where we came from"!

The least worthy of refutation is extraterrestrialism, theology! Every minute the earth is dying out and being born, are aliens and God sending a steady stream of creatures to the earth? Here I will find a random question from the "10,000 questions" and ask those who oppose evolution to answer, and if there is a reasonable answer, I will believe in God from now on!

People who believe in the superstitious theory of evolution think that they are science, and attack others in the name of science, people are people, animals are animals, humanity is humanity, and animal nature is animal nature, and if people follow the law of the jungle of the jungle, it will lead to constant wars in the human world.

Because of ignorance, many ignorant people think that the theory of evolution says that man is a monkey. Evolution has never said that man is a monkey.

It's not that they don't believe in evolution, it's that they don't believe that humans didn't evolve from monkeys, and as a result, many people don't see it clearly, and some don't understand it. Just beat the questioners into an "evolutionary questioning group"! I believe in evolution, but I don't believe that humans evolved from monkeys.

Because there is no complete evidence that humans evolved from monkeys.

People have their own aspirations, and their IQ, EQ, opinions, and patterns are different, so it is normal for some people not to believe it.

This is the most realistic example of "three people into a tiger". Darwin himself didn't say that this theory was completely proven, he relied on some so-called Chinese and foreign brick propaganda, and then the textbooks kept advocating that the theory of evolution was correct, and then everyone said that it was correct, so please come up with a full set of evidence, pay attention, a full set. Darwin himself said that the evidence of the intermediate transition period had not yet been discovered, and in his later years he himself denied the theory of evolution.

I don't know why people who believe in evolution should look at the data selectively.

People with the ability to think independently despise the monkey cult, there is no science at all, it is just a lie serial, the believers are ignorant, the fanaticism is similar to the domineering and cult believers, the theory of evolution is a modern version of heliocentrism, it is only a matter of time before it falls, and it will not be long, because science is getting more and more advanced, and there is no room to make up stories.

After all, for 5,000 years, the rulers of China have been ruling by feudal superstition. This kind of thinking has long been ingrained in people's hearts. Even now, superstitious ideas are also superstitious in rural areas and other places in our country.

Because of the indiscriminate reports, scientists just suspect that many species are different evolutionary branches of the same origin (famous humans and ancient apes), and then after a while, it inexplicably becomes a skepticism of evolution, and then a bunch of Scientology science popularization conclusions superstitious divisions and religious superstition organizations deny the theory of evolution on this ground, and the authoritative superstitious divisions of Scientology are torn up with them, and if you really understand science, you know that they tear up meaninglessly.

The theory of evolution is as unreliable as the creation of man by the gods. Cross-species evolution is inherently flawed. Superstitious belief in evolution is as ignorant as superstitious belief that God created man.

The lack of evidence, and the questioning of science, I think is a good thing, for the development and progress of humanity.

Creationism was preached for centuries before the theory of evolution was born.

In the same way, there is also the theory of the horizon and the center of the earth.

Newton's laws are falsified by the theory of relativity and quantum mechanics under microscopic conditions, and there is a conflict between relativity and quantum mechanics.

Even the textbook laws of gravitation and conservation of energy lack the evidence to make them compatible.

Therefore, we understand the world only a little bit, and we also need to have the spirit of questioning and challenging the existing science, but the purpose of this spirit is to promote human progress, and we cannot question the theory of relativity just to promote creationism again, like some groups.

Like strange theories, the more bizarre the more interested, a considerable number of people have this psychological tendency, in the era of the popularization of evolutionary theory, anti-evolution theory is undoubtedly the most bizarre.

Psychological reasons are also very important, believe in evolution, people and animals are on the same ladder, and people who believe in God actually believe in humanism, God also serves people, you do good deeds he blesses, do bad things he punishes, and you can go to the kingdom of God or something when you die, the foundation is that talent is the first ladder.

The reason why human beings can be called the top of the earth is because of continuous exploration and questioning, and the theory of evolution may be the closest to the real inference, but the fact is not the inference.

First of all, there is a problem with this title, not that I don't believe it, but I don't fully believe it, because there is more than one loophole that scientists still can't explain, and they are also puzzled, and there are limitations in human vision, just like the previous geocentric theory, heliocentric theory, when you look back and see how ridiculous some of the ideas of the predecessors are, but in their time, in their eyes, it is right, unquestionable.

Many of the contents of the theory of evolution are only conjectures and are only partially correct, such as: natural selection, survival of the fittest. But if a person is a monkey or an ape, it's a bit funny.

Before talking about evolution, I think.

Lamarck proposed that species can change, and that the stability of species is only relative. The reason for the evolution of organisms is the direct influence of environmental conditions on the organism of organisms. It is believed that under the direct influence of the new environment, the habits of organisms change, some organs that are often used develop and increase, and the organs that are not used often gradually degenerate.

It is believed that by continuously strengthening and refining adaptive traits in this way, species can gradually become new species, and these acquired traits can be passed on to future generations, so that organisms can gradually evolve. It is also believed that adaptation is the main process of biological evolution.

For the first time, Lamarck understood the dynamics of biological evolution from the aspect of the interrelationship between organisms and the environment, which provided a certain theoretical basis for the emergence of Darwin's theory of evolution. However, due to the limitations of the level of production and science at that time, Lamarck oversimplified the direct effect of the environment on organisms and the process of passing on traits to offspring when explaining the causes of evolution, and became an inference that lacked scientific basis, and erroneously believed that organisms were born with a tendency to develop upwards, and that the will and desires of animals also played a role in evolution.

Overall, Lamarck's belief that the will of animals can determine the direction of evolution has been overturned by Darwin.

Personally, I think that although Darwin's theory is not 100% accurate (for example, it cannot explain the Cambrian explosion of life), it still has a certain degree of scientific validity for now. Genetic variation is random, and a large part of the genetic variation of an organism depends on the environment, which is called "survival of the fittest". It is the environment that determines the evolution of life, not the will of living beings that determines evolution.

Liaoxi Rehe to find out.

And the theory of evolution.

It does not conflict with your hypothesis genetic experiments. Genetic experiments, like evolution, are hypotheses that cannot be proven or completely falsified. The difference is that the theory of evolution has a little more evidence to increase its credibility.

Times are constantly changing, even if everything has a primitive blueprint, at least the current Erha must still be different from the blueprint.

Finally, various organisms have their own options for obtaining information. Human speech is similar to that of bats in the same way that humans hear elephants speak infrasound. Humans think snakes look at infrared light as if it were nb, and other animals think that humans and birds can distinguish between colors.

I'm afraid these are just right, just like we chose *** payment instead of NFC, which is also very low cost (and the merchant's mobile phone bang, inconvenient for a dozen tables can also be solved, and *** brand is not much different).

It has been proven by history that humans evolved from apes. Thinking that all living things are genetic experiments, how do apes experiment with their own genes? Science can be questioned, but it must be based on theory and actual data, and cannot be imaginary.

Personally, I believe that the theory of evolution is inherently imperfect, and it needs a large amount of evidence of fossils of excessive species. The theory of evolution can be one of the hypotheses of the origin of species, but it is not a very correct theory.

Evolution can only be a local or small adaptation to the environment, and cannot explain the relationship between individual species. I still feel more and more that the theory of evolution is unreliable, and I feel more and more that man is created or created by himself.