The best in arts & entertainment, news, pop culture, and your mom since 2002.

[Total: 102    Average: 3.8/5]
156 Comments - View/Add
Hits: 44718
Rating: 3.8
Category: Science
Date: 01/24/10 10:04 AM

156 Responses to National Geographic Weighs In On Darwinism [Pic]

  1. Profile photo of Fancys_Asst
    Fancys_Asst Female 18-29
    1780 posts
    January 22, 2010 at 6:00 pm
    Link: National Geographic Weighs In On Darwinism - Well, it looks like we know what side the respected National Geographic is taking. How long before a NatGeo protest?
  2. Profile photo of tkpb9381
    tkpb9381 Male 18-29
    293 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:09 am
    Hahaha thats awesome. Good for them. Standing up for science.
  3. Profile photo of goaliejerry
    goaliejerry Male 30-39
    4017 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:11 am
    Um, right.
  4. Profile photo of Ghostofme16
    Ghostofme16 Female 18-29
    386 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:12 am
    lol, so many hardcore Christians are going to see the cover and buy the mag....

    then they will be so disappointed...

  5. Profile photo of Gompers
    Gompers Male 13-17
    59 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:12 am
    im pretty sure this article is article is pretty old maybe 3 or 4 years
  6. Profile photo of joofro
    joofro Male 18-29
    548 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:14 am
    considering this is 6 years old.. there was no `natgeo protest`
  7. Profile photo of Pooptart19
    Pooptart19 Male 18-29
    2441 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:16 am
    I actually have this issue lol
  8. Profile photo of TheSharpest
    TheSharpest Male 18-29
    1767 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:18 am
    Well, that was straightforward.
  9. Profile photo of B-b-beccah
    B-b-beccah Female 18-29
    668 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:18 am
    awwww SNAP!
  10. Profile photo of ggolbez
    ggolbez Male 18-29
    1933 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:22 am
    I lol`d.
  11. Profile photo of KMeatPiLover
    KMeatPiLover Female 18-29
    129 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:22 am
    this is misleading, the article was actually all about how evolution is not wrong at all but people continue to disbelieve due to religion.
  12. Profile photo of Slmmhmmr161
    Slmmhmmr161 Male 18-29
    606 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:28 am
    I laugh at religious people and their "Opinions" on evolution. It doesn`t matter what you "believe", because evolution isn`t as low on the scale of knowledge as beliefs are.
  13. Profile photo of DanBo9000
    DanBo9000 Male 18-29
    19 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:35 am
    Stoic face salamander for the win.
  14. Profile photo of mervviscious
    mervviscious Male 40-49
    1793 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:41 am
    religion is funny cause it`s not true....
  15. Profile photo of banditwing
    banditwing Male 18-29
    50 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:45 am
    anything written in 98pt font must be true
  16. Profile photo of Osprey39
    Osprey39 Male 18-29
    1408 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:52 am
    This issue came out in November 2004...and it surprised no one. When it comes to scientific opinion, there really only is one side to this matter.
  17. Profile photo of LtFurpie
    LtFurpie Male 30-39
    1013 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:12 am
    There are no sides. Evidence of evolution is all around us. Uhm why can`t we accurately guess the appropriate flu shot each year? Duh, cuz it changes... Why do humans have the same number of hair folicles to our simian friends? (though greek women should bleach). C`mon, evolution (for the intellectual) is quite evident. Stop smearing your faces up a murderous insecure deity`s arse! Evolution doesn`t mean your god doesn`t exist. Stop ignoring science.
  18. Profile photo of Magicant
    Magicant Female 18-29
    277 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:17 am
    The words are really big so it has to be right :)
  19. Profile photo of Godzukis_Dad
    Godzukis_Dad Male 30-39
    211 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:18 am
    banditwing, Do you only tend to read the headlines? Usually the headline is a sneak peak and the actual information follows. :)
  20. Profile photo of Lelio
    Lelio Male 18-29
    51 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:19 am
    Wow. Bold.
    I respect their opinion, though they shouldn`t state it as a fact.
    People can voice their opinions as much as they want, but there`s not really any way to be sure.

    Also: It`s fine to be passionate about your beliefs, IABers, but realize that there is a point where you stop sounding intelligent and start sounding like a prick.

  21. Profile photo of BrimstoneOne
    BrimstoneOne Male 30-39
    2229 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:20 am
    religion is `myth making` run a muck
  22. Profile photo of GlooStikk
    GlooStikk Male 18-29
    1297 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:27 am
    lol this is silly
  23. Profile photo of GlooStikk
    GlooStikk Male 18-29
    1297 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:28 am
    btw brimstone, its "amok"
  24. Profile photo of ValeX
    ValeX Male 18-29
    27 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:30 am
    lelio, you`re an idiot.

    No way to be sure? Is there a way to be sure about anything?

    Passionate about beliefs? It`s not a `belief`, it`s SCIENCE. I`ll take sounding like a prick over sounding like an idiot.

  25. Profile photo of sandtalker
    sandtalker Male 30-39
    49 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:36 am
    I love how the religion of Atheism jumps on the evolutionary bandwagon to try to prove they are so smart!
  26. Profile photo of opiebreath
    opiebreath Female 18-29
    15774 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:36 am
    "People can voice their opinions as much as they want, but there`s not really any way to be sure."

    Then there`s no way to be sure about anything and everythign is speculation. But if we lived under those philosophical concepts then everything would need to be prefaced with, "In my opinion" and "if" and "according to," and nothing would ever get done.

    So yes. We assume some things to be true. We hold the idea that facts are real, and for practicality`s sake, we try and determine what they are.

    Welcome to science. It can be fun if you let it.

  27. Profile photo of Neko_Sik
    Neko_Sik Female 18-29
    697 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:37 am
    whoa... I like that
  28. Profile photo of gamefreakhax
    gamefreakhax Male 70 & Over
    14 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:39 am
    wow
  29. Profile photo of The_tru_bob
    The_tru_bob Male 18-29
    181 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:41 am
    Evolution and Darwin`s evolution are two different things. A lot of Darwin`s theories are not accepted among modern scientists from what I`ve heard.
  30. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:43 am
    For those who would like to read it, here is the article. I`ve not read it myself but from a quick skim-through it seems really interesting, a good breakdown of the Theory of Evolution.
  31. Profile photo of DRxSATANx
    DRxSATANx Male 18-29
    321 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:49 am
    youve just now found this? i read this article almost a year ago, they make a bunch of points that really can be argued
  32. Profile photo of Tiredofnicks
    Tiredofnicks Male 30-39
    5097 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:55 am
    opiebreath: Stop writing what I`m trying to write better than I could write it!

    Jeez!

  33. Profile photo of Lelio
    Lelio Male 18-29
    51 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:55 am
    Oh, ValeX... I never said which side of the argument I took, now did I? I voiced an opinion (which didn`t necessarily apply to you), and you insulted me for it.
    Well, somebody is a little oversensitive, it seems.
    And you, opie. Let me first thank you for taking the more mature route in an argument. I apologize: I should have been more specific. While there are some things that people can definitely be certain about, I was stating that this is not one of them.
  34. Profile photo of hyybrucewayn
    hyybrucewayn Male 18-29
    203 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:56 am
    I`m sure I`m not the first person to say this in this thread. But let`s just get one thing clear.

    Evolution is real. If you don`t believe so, you are wrong.

    I`m not making any judgments on religion, faith, scientific method, or anything like that. The sky is blue, 1+2=3, babies come from sex, and humans share a common ancestor with apes.

  35. Profile photo of kairobert
    kairobert Male 18-29
    1623 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:00 pm
    It is so strange that some Americans think upon evolution as something contested.
  36. Profile photo of screaminbean
    screaminbean Male 13-17
    363 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:00 pm
    Lols. Well put, opie. Well put.
  37. Profile photo of Zerocyde
    Zerocyde Male 18-29
    3256 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:02 pm
    @opiebreath

    True, opie, but you don`t have to believe in true, "capital K" knowledge to live realistically. You can be a universal skeptic and still function. Look at Hume, he was an extreme universal skeptic, as in, he wasn`t even fully convinced that when he rolled out of bed in the morning that his feet wouldn`t just go straight though the floor, but he was 99.99999999999999% sure that they wouldn`t.

    I`m a universal skeptic, I don`t believe in full-on truth at all. 2+2 might not equal 4 for all I know, but I accept that to live in the modern world, the best thing to do is to follow the lines of logic that best fit in this modern world. I.E. yea, 2+2 is almost assuredly 4, and I will treat it as such, but I wont be so foolish as to claim that I absolutely, unequivocally, 100% know for sure.

  38. Profile photo of SilverThread
    SilverThread Male 30-39
    3431 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:13 pm
    I don`t know the extent of the truth, but other creatures have been in the process of evolution far longer than Prime Mates, why then haven`t we seen sign of reptiles that have evolved sophisticated civilizations and complex social hierarchies? Have they reached an evolutionary plateau?

    In light of the relatively short time that human beings have been technologically savvy enough to use tools, there have been many other creatures that have been in existence for a far longer period. Why then aren`t they more evolved than we?

    I believe in Evolution Theory, but I also believe it is only one facet of the whole truth of our existence. Certainly it discredits many of the creation myths but if those are taken in the context of metaphor the exact nature of our origin remains uncertain.

    If self awareness and intelligence are valuable evolutionary traits, why aren`t they as common as fur, teeth, and claws?

  39. Profile photo of LtFurpie
    LtFurpie Male 30-39
    1013 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:14 pm
    @zero: the value of 2+2 aproaches 6 for large values of 2. does that make the equation incorrect, no. So the bible teaches us that god is an insecure megolomaniac. (he repeatedly says to not follow other gods: insecure, megolomaniac.) So what other gods does he refer to. In a sense, he admits that there are other gods to follow. DOH! Either way, this has no scientific validity over the evidence of evolution.
  40. Profile photo of maedene
    maedene Male 18-29
    291 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:19 pm
    this was just a hook to get more readers
  41. Profile photo of Zekepunk
    Zekepunk Male 18-29
    22 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:19 pm
    This article is from a couple years ago. Where was I-A-B when it came out?
  42. Profile photo of brutalnewt
    brutalnewt Male 30-39
    111 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:19 pm
    I never understood how people could not believe in evolution when we have factually documented cases of it happening like drug resistant bacteria. Where do you think those came from if evolution wasn`t real?
  43. Profile photo of RyanHake
    RyanHake Male 18-29
    2690 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:21 pm
    Definitely not going to bother getting into this...
  44. Profile photo of roithm
    roithm Male 18-29
    44 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:22 pm
    I AM EVOLUTION!
  45. Profile photo of Genocyde
    Genocyde Male 30-39
    712 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:26 pm
    Darwin`s theory isn`t wrong but it also hasn`t been conclusively proven.
  46. Profile photo of rook187
    rook187 Male 30-39
    210 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:43 pm
    Don`t forget, those Global Warming Scientist proved the Earth was warming too...Oh wait. That data was falsified.

    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/hoax/

  47. Profile photo of StarDagger
    StarDagger Male 40-49
    1190 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:43 pm
    If you think the Earth is 6000 years old and created by a White Guy with a Beard in 7 days you are an idiot, and that is provable!
  48. Profile photo of Crawdaddy197
    Crawdaddy197 Male 30-39
    353 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:44 pm
    "I never understood how people could not believe in evolution when we have factually documented cases of it happening like drug resistant bacteria. Where do you think those came from if evolution wasn`t real?"

    Gawd did it. Didn`t you see the Family Guy episode that had Carl Sagan for rednecks? It explains everything.

  49. Profile photo of robotobunneh
    robotobunneh Female 18-29
    265 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:45 pm
    "Darwin`s theory isn`t wrong but it also hasn`t been conclusively proven."

    You`ve got to be drating kidding me, right? I guess tectonic plates haven`t been proven either, seeing as they`re "just a theory". Take a god damned science course.

  50. Profile photo of Crawdaddy197
    Crawdaddy197 Male 30-39
    353 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:45 pm
    "Don`t forget, those Global Warming Scientist proved the Earth was warming too...Oh wait. That data was falsified. "

    There is also a political agenda behind this.

  51. Profile photo of StarDagger
    StarDagger Male 40-49
    1190 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:45 pm
    If you likewise think that Climate Change is not real, you are an idiot.
  52. Profile photo of mystery08
    mystery08 Male 18-29
    160 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:46 pm
    The principles of evolution have been directly observed in the laboratory setting. We can make new species of bacteria and do it fairly regularly.
    I have meet people who believe in god with scientific degrees, but never in my life have i meet someone that didn`t believe in evolution with a scientific degree. The evidence is truly overwhelming.
  53. Profile photo of mystery08
    mystery08 Male 18-29
    160 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:49 pm
    StarDagger-
    I don`t believe in climate change. They say co2 is causing global warming but in the Precambrian period co2 levels were 12-14 times higher than now. We are worried about a 4% increase.
  54. Profile photo of Jackooza
    Jackooza Male 13-17
    15 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:53 pm
    great, let`s show something from november 2004, cause we don`t have anything better in 2010
  55. Profile photo of MacCanuck
    MacCanuck Male 18-29
    56 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:53 pm
    @SilverThread:
    You`re thinking of evolution in a very anthropocentric way. Evolution is not a progression towards an ideal, advanced form (us, according to the anthropocentric mindset). It takes you as far as you need to go in order to reproduce (there are trade-offs, but that`s a bit too involved for a comment section). Lizards don`t need to invent language and build cities because they`re doing just fine. Hell, amoebas have been around forever and they`re still single-celled. Simple is not the same thing as unevolved. The same can be said of non-sentience.
  56. Profile photo of indofosho
    indofosho Male 13-17
    107 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 12:59 pm
    I believe in evolution....so now what?
  57. Profile photo of Fatninja01
    Fatninja01 Male 30-39
    25420 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:08 pm
    educational! ummm...
  58. Profile photo of lukas1051
    lukas1051 Male 18-29
    3426 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:36 pm
    Lol, I love it. Very anti-climactic. Seriously though, in this age, you can`t deny evolution, and the sooner religion and it`s old fashioned radical ideas die out, the better. I`m not going to mince words, if you don`t believe in evolution, you`re wrong. I don`t understand how people can accept theories like gravity and atomic theory to be correct, but not evolution *only* because an ancient "magical" book says differently.
  59. Profile photo of unbanned
    unbanned Male 13-17
    999 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:39 pm
    tahts how they get ya
  60. Profile photo of SuperSmash
    SuperSmash Male 18-29
    3758 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:44 pm
    Do people really not believe in evolution? The whole debate seems to be a construct to create debate and, in this case, sell magazines. I know there are stats that show people don`t believe in evolution, but as Mark Twain said, "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." I`ve just never met anyone who really doesn`t believe in evolution.
  61. Profile photo of gothgirl69
    gothgirl69 Female 18-29
    423 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:47 pm
    @MacCanuck

    exactly!

  62. Profile photo of CrakrJak
    CrakrJak Male 40-49
    17514 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:49 pm
    Yes Darwin was wrong. His ideas were turned into the Eugenics movement that has killed millions of people. And it still continues to kill thousands of unborn children everyday.

    "If you can`t justify your existence, if you`re not pulling your weight in the social boat, if you`re not producing as much as you consume or perhaps a little more, then, clearly, we cannot use the organizations of our society for the purpose of keeping you alive, because your life does not benefit us and it can`t be of very much use to yourself." - George Bernard Shaw

    Don`t believe it ? - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgpaKkrZe...

  63. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 1:58 pm
    If you likewise think that Climate Change is not real, you are an idiot.
    StarDagger`s at it again! It`s called "the weather" SD and it changes all the time. Long & short trends that cause warming & cooling periods that have NOTHING to do with human activity. AGW is fake, myth, scam.
    Evolution`s a fact, what drives it is the matter of debate. Random chance! Says the Atheists. God`s Plan! Says the Intelligent Design folks.
    Creationists are the ones who hold on to the "created in 6 days" idea. Not 7 days StarDagger, wrong again, eh? *rolleyes*
  64. Profile photo of wereallboned
    wereallboned Male 18-29
    256 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:03 pm
    mystery when you live in a place that is going through noticeable climate change you will believe--i used to live in nyc which id say has an average climate--i moved to buffalo a few years back.
    in the past starting late december/early january it snows everyday, no sunlight, grey skies, etc for months straight
    this year my area has had maybe 3 days of snow since december, sunny days, and its 40 degrees as opposed to the usual 20 something--this was supposed to be an unusually cold winter according to the farmers almanac
    theres no real science behind what im saying but i wuld say that there is a climate change (even if its not related to industry/human activity)
  65. Profile photo of kitwatson
    kitwatson Female 13-17
    364 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:05 pm
    Hah. This is why National Geographic is awesome.
  66. Profile photo of EricWRN
    EricWRN Male 30-39
    590 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:25 pm
    I must be overlooking something stupid here, but for a long time half of the planet was covered in ice. It seems to me like there`s been a lot of warming and a lot of ice melting on this planet for a long time.
  67. Profile photo of MacCanuck
    MacCanuck Male 18-29
    56 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:25 pm
    @CrakrJak:
    The creation of eugenics based on an interpretation of Darwin`s ideas fueled by impure motives does not make the theory of evolution invalid. Saying Darwin was morally wrong (if that`s what you meant) because eugenics was a terrible idea is like saying that the field of virology is wrong because the knowledge gained thereby can be used to make dirty bombs. If you were saying that Darwin was wrong in the sense that evolution is not the mechanism for producing life`s great diversity because it spawned eugenics, that`s apples and oranges, my friend. Evolution is not a philosophy, eugenics is, and the latter has no bearing on the validity of the former.
  68. Profile photo of LazyMe484
    LazyMe484 Male 18-29
    10441 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:26 pm
    I used to respect National Geographic! I used to think they had meaningful content! DAMN YOU IAB!! DAMN YOU TO GRE`THOR!
  69. Profile photo of lukas1051
    lukas1051 Male 18-29
    3426 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:29 pm
    >CrakrJak

    1. Darwinism and the theory of natural selection, and eugenics are barely related, I fail to see what that has to do with anything, let alone disproving his theory.

    2. Regardless of the relationship between Darwinism and eugenics, it doesn`t disprove his theory anyway.

    3. You can`t cite a YouTube link as a source.

    4. You certainly can`t cite a broken YouTube link as a source.

  70. Profile photo of snottydyck
    snottydyck Male 40-49
    695 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:38 pm
    this is a news flash???
  71. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:44 pm
    rook187 - that link relates to Piltdown Man, it has nothing to do with climate change.

    And incidentally, Piltdown Man was a hoax which lasted for 40 years, was a single piece of falsified evidence, and was almost exclusively contained within the field of archaeology. The theory of evolution has lasted over 150 years, covers countless thousands of pieces of evidence, and accurately predicts elements of biology, paeleontology, biochemistry, anthropology, chemistry, archaeology etc etc etc. They are orders of magnitude apart.

    5Cats - any atheists who say "Random chance!" as you put it do not understand evolution. Evolution is not a random process. It is non-random selection of random mutations.

    Crakr - that`s a ridiculous accusation. Darwin was not advocating that we become involved in genocide. He is no more responsible for eugenics than Newton is for ballistic missiles.

  72. Profile photo of MrYouKnow
    MrYouKnow Male 13-17
    1081 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:52 pm
    I`m still surprised when I hear about someone who doesn`t think the theory of evolution is true.
  73. Profile photo of keith2
    keith2 Male 30-39
    2591 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 2:55 pm
    everyone knows gawd did it, along with his sidekick, jeebus.
  74. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:09 pm
    @almightybob1 I was mostly refering to the initial source of life, which all evolution comes from, waaaaay back. Also the `directions` evolution takes along the way. I know there are may factors which determine survival of the "most fit" (for their environment) not simple chance.
    Also it reamians to be seen if being smart helps your species survive or not. If we go extinct in 1000 years then the answer would be "nope!" lolz!
  75. Profile photo of ukulelemike
    ukulelemike Male 40-49
    129 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:11 pm
    Darwin himself admitted that certain things would disprove his theory:
    1: lack of any intermediate species fossils. There should be millions, yet none have been found.
    2: The cell disproves Darwin, supposing, as he did, that it was simple in structure, yet has proven to be not only impossibly complex, but irreducibly complex, as well
    3: the eye is also irreducibly complex. The cell, the eye, and some animals specifically defy a slow, progressive evolution.
    Also, you can`t count out the archaeological errors, and say they have nothing to do with evolution, as it is the fossils that, in most ways, supposedly prove evolution. That so many have been wrong, or falsified, even hidden away, is a serious chink in the evolutionary armor.
  76. Profile photo of CapnAwesome
    CapnAwesome Male 18-29
    236 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:11 pm
    I liek to think that god got things moving, evolution-wise, and science took over from there.
  77. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:16 pm
    @almightybob1 I was mostly refering to the initial source of life, which all evolution comes from, waaaaay back. Also the `directions` evolution takes along the way. I know there are may factors which determine survival of the "most fit" (for their environment) not simple chance.
    Also it reamians to be seen if being smart helps your species survive or not. If we go extinct in 1000 years then the answer would be "nope!" lolz!

    Ah right, that`s a separate field called abiogenesis. It doesn`t really fall under the theory of evolution. Just thought I`d mention that, and yeah I agree with your last point - it could be our intelligence that ends up ruining us!

  78. Profile photo of madest
    madest Male 40-49
    7378 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:17 pm
    Only fools deny science for a fairy tale.
  79. Profile photo of repression
    repression Female 13-17
    89 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:25 pm
    lmao. this made me laugh.
  80. Profile photo of NOFX14
    NOFX14 Male 18-29
    1141 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:35 pm
    There are people who try to argue against Darwin`s theory of evolution by saying that "OMG see the word THEORY is in it". But, news flash, theory to the common person means something much more different in comparison to how a scientist uses theory. We say theory when explaining a "conspiracy theory", something which simply hasn`t been proven. But in truth a scientific theory is something that has been backed by immense data and experimentation. Theories are considered as something more close to confirmed, and not merely an idea.
  81. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:41 pm
    ukulelemike, that post is so full of fail I feel like you should get an award or something.
    Anyway, a point-by-point rebuttal:

    1. Here is a long, but incomplete, list of transitional fossils. There are thousands and thousands. Your claim here is simply ignorance.

    2. Irreducible complexity has been debunked so many times, I`m just going to give you this standard response.

    3. See above, but since the eye is such a creationist quote mine (no doubt you`re thinking of the line "absurd in the highest degree" from Origin of Species, right?), I`ll direct you to this Wikipedia article which

  82. Profile photo of Willowpuff
    Willowpuff Female 18-29
    2220 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:41 pm
    Haha, that`s brilliant.
  83. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:43 pm
    ...which has a lovely illustration of how the eye could have evolved.

    Also note that in nature, eyes of all those degrees of complexity can be found, as well as eyes more advanced than our own. You can follow the evolution of the eye through some types of fish as it progresses just like in that diagram.

  84. Profile photo of MacCanuck
    MacCanuck Male 18-29
    56 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:49 pm
    @ukelelemike:
    1. The lack of intermediate forms would be a huge problem...if such a lack existed. Your argument indicates a straight-up lack of information that seems to be prevalent in anti-evolution arguments. Look up Ambulocetus and Basilosaurus. Heads up: they`re transitional forms between terrestrial mammals and whales.
    2. The assertion of irreducible complexity has never been proven. Take liposomes: not alive, just selectively permeable lipid membranes that have a very basic form of metabolism. And viruses: not really alive either, simple protein shell around RNA. Complex cells have evolved via endosymbiosis.
    3. They eye is also not irreducibly complex. It started out as collections of photosensitive cells and has evolved independently several times (a squid`s eye is kick-ass, but very distinct from ours. Same with reptiles).
    Finally, archaeological errors (by which you seem to mean fraudulent finds) are not as common as you seem to think. Piltdown
  85. Profile photo of MacCanuck
    MacCanuck Male 18-29
    56 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 3:49 pm
    (continued)
    man was a hoax, sure, but we found out about it. It in no way disproves the existence of the dozens of other fossil homonids, some of which eventually led to humans (eg. Homo habilis, Homo heidleburgensis, Homo erectus).
  86. Profile photo of slayer50515
    slayer50515 Male 18-29
    988 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:04 pm
    "Only fools deny science for a fairy tale."
    I don`t think "fool" is a strong enough or precise enough word to display their promotion of idiocracy.
  87. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2284 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:07 pm
    @ MacCanuck

    You`re almost entirely correct, but irreducibly complex systems DO exist. They are predicted by evolution. It`s just that there are intermediary forms before it becomes such a delicate, yet intricate system.

    For instance, your body is an irreducibly complex system. Take out nearly any organ like your heart, or stomach, or colon, and you will die.

    But, that`s not really a fantastic example because one can argue about the appendix, or if you lose an arm--but still. The body is a system that is interdependent, and even the mind is an interdependent system.

    Anyway, you`re pretty much spot on, but the term irreducible complexity came from people from the evolution camp, and they twisted it into meaning something entirely different in the creationist camp.

    Don`t reject it...

  88. Profile photo of aleclourmier
    aleclourmier Male 18-29
    86 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:16 pm
    Have you noticed... how people who believe in creationism tend to look the least evolved?...
  89. Profile photo of SarahofBorg
    SarahofBorg Female 18-29
    3564 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:23 pm
    Really now, nobody would respect NatGeo if they didn`t support evolution. Is this supposed to be a surprise?
  90. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2284 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:24 pm
    What is the least evolved? lol if we go by straight up genetic material the amoeba beats us hands down a couple fold. I recently learned that simple trout have 102 chromosomes I believe. We have only 46.

    Evolution is not a contest of how much material something has. It is about success if you want to talk about it in the strictest of terms. What survives and what doesn`t. The end. If we nuke ourselves and roosterroaches survive, what would a sentient being assume once it comes to this planet after we`ve irradiated it?

    Cockroaches appear to be extremely well adapted to that particular set of circumstances, and thus survived .

    Evolution is not teleological, or hierarchical like others have illuminated.

  91. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2284 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:24 pm
    C0CKroaches.
  92. Profile photo of SarahofBorg
    SarahofBorg Female 18-29
    3564 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    Oh and also Darwin was wrong on a few details, but mostly for lack of information attainable at the time. Much of what he didn`t understand has been corrected. So yeah, to answer the question, Darwin was wrong sometimes.
  93. Profile photo of MacCanuck
    MacCanuck Male 18-29
    56 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:26 pm
    @SPrinkZ:
    I get ya. I was using the term in the context of anti-evolutionists, i.e. that a certain structure is so intricate that it could not have evolved by intermediate steps.
    Didn`t know that the term was originally coined by the non-crazies to mean something very different. Learn something new everyday.
  94. Profile photo of FlameOfUdun
    FlameOfUdun Male 18-29
    1222 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:27 pm
    By the very definition of science, you can`t point at evolution and say it`s true.
  95. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:41 pm
    By the very definition of science, you can`t point at evolution and say it`s true.

    I assume by this you mean that nothing is ever said to be 100% correct, because there is always the possibility that new evidence may emerge the next day which disproves something.

    Technically you are correct, but the Theory of Evolution has reached the point where there are so many nines after the 99.99999999999% certainty that for practical purposes we can say it is true, in the same way that we would say it`s true that gravity makes things fall towards the centre of the earth.

  96. Profile photo of Elle1987
    Elle1987 Female 18-29
    519 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 4:51 pm
    I assume by this you mean that nothing is ever said to be 100% correct, because there is always the possibility that new evidence may emerge the next day which disproves something.

    Technically you are correct, but the Theory of Evolution has reached the point where there are so many nines after the 99.99999999999% certainty that for practical purposes we can say it is true, in the same way that we would say it`s true that gravity makes things fall towards the centre of the earth.

    Yeah.. what he said...

  97. Profile photo of duffytoler
    duffytoler Male 40-49
    5195 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:04 pm
    Religious people, lol! Now they will be placing IED`s at Nat Geo and shooting people like they shot that abortion doctor and... ugh. Not that funny. Religion seems to mainly be so that "believers" don`t feel so bad about murdering other people. They tell themselves everyone has an immortal soul, so when they kill you they think your soul sprouts magic fairy wings and just flies away.
  98. Profile photo of 5Cats
    5Cats Male 50-59
    33142 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:12 pm
    that`s a separate field called abiogenesis
    Aaaa! I see. Learn something new every day, eh? Here at IAB, lolz!
  99. Profile photo of eclsage
    eclsage Male 18-29
    92 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:18 pm
    Now I concur with every one here that Arkansas is a funny state but this debate is tired and long ago needed to be put to rest. I think every one should show more humility in their life and always seek knowledge.
  100. Profile photo of ohthedrama
    ohthedrama Male 30-39
    162 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:24 pm
    @duffytoler: BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Careful there, someone might take offense.
  101. Profile photo of MAlb3d
    MAlb3d Male 18-29
    58 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:27 pm
    @FlameofUdun: Um, by the very definition of science, actually, yes you can. Especially since, right now, in labs, scientists have been watching the effects of evolution happen in real time for years now (see http://www.sciencebuzz.org/blog/scientis... for just one example). That sounds like conclusive, positive results of a tested hypothesis to me. Case closed.
  102. Profile photo of Pilanus
    Pilanus Male 18-29
    675 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 5:42 pm
    Um, Nat Geo taking sides with science... this is surprising, how?
  103. Profile photo of fattpill
    fattpill Male 30-39
    255 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:24 pm
    AHH the RELIGION of science. THey should change the name to contradiction not science or what ever suits your feelings not science. Just change it to match your hypothesis. Science is as much of a religion as any religion out there.
  104. Profile photo of Agent00Smith
    Agent00Smith Male 18-29
    2581 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:24 pm
    Hahaha. Who knew National Geographic had such a dry sense of humor?
  105. Profile photo of Agent00Smith
    Agent00Smith Male 18-29
    2581 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:30 pm
    "AHH the RELIGION of science."

    That kind of ignorance is amazing to me. Explaining the difference between science and religion to an idiot is impossible.

    But I`m going to attempt it... here goes... science doesn`t make you believe you are going to suffer eternally in a firey pit if you don`t believe it.

  106. Profile photo of eKarnage
    eKarnage Male 18-29
    21 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:41 pm
    Anyone that believes in evolution is dumb. A book that has been translated and modified over thousands of years is definitely more trustworthy than a theory based on an overwhelming amount of data...
  107. Profile photo of xxPinkxx
    xxPinkxx Female 18-29
    3829 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:44 pm
    lol the "religion of science"
  108. Profile photo of sunsetxluv22
    sunsetxluv22 Female 13-17
    414 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 6:52 pm
    LOL
  109. Profile photo of SuperSmash
    SuperSmash Male 18-29
    3758 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 7:38 pm
    Science is not biased, but scientists are. Not in this case though.
  110. Profile photo of LazShissou
    LazShissou Female 13-17
    29 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 7:44 pm
    Are you serious, eKarnage? I`m asking before I rant like poo here.
  111. Profile photo of ChickenVomit
    ChickenVomit Male 18-29
    29 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 8:04 pm
    Keep your poo in LazShissou
  112. Profile photo of Zaneo
    Zaneo Male 18-29
    32 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 8:13 pm
    @LazShissou

    It`s a little harder to understand on the internet... but we do still use sarcasm....

  113. Profile photo of SarahofBorg
    SarahofBorg Female 18-29
    3564 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 8:17 pm
    "But I`m going to attempt it... here goes... science doesn`t make you believe you are going to suffer eternally in a firey pit if you don`t believe it."
    But it does say you`re probably going to die in some form or another if you completely ignore it. Heck, if you don`t believe in science, than how the heck do you explain the internet your posting on? Everyone on the internet believes in science to some degree because their lives depend on believing empirical evidence.

    And eKarnage, the bible still says the world is flat. You find me the edge of the earth and I`ll believe your silly little book of fairy tales. The bible is just a collection of metaphoric stories meant to guide people through inspiration, not direct and literal rules.

  114. Profile photo of JimmytheMed
    JimmytheMed Male 18-29
    46 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 8:26 pm
    Evolution is like the big bang theory. A lot of it makes sense, everything`s moving apart and it`s slowing down etc etc. Only problem is the formation of galaxies relies on a matter that is not only invisible but is undetectable by any means other than it simply HAS to be there. So either this matter exists because it has to for science to be right or there`s more powerful forces then just us at work. Fact is we weren`t there at the beginning and we probably never will know for an irrefutable fact what happened unless we run into aliens that live mad long or we run into G/god(s)/esses
  115. Profile photo of vanillabear
    vanillabear Male 18-29
    174 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 8:53 pm
    @ SarahofBorg

    "the bible still says the world is flat."

    to the contrary actually, nearly 2,700 years ago, at a time when the so-called learned men were speculating about the earth’s being flat Isaiah wrote “There is One who is dwelling above the circle of the earth.” (Isa. 40:22)

  116. Profile photo of OrangeCrow
    OrangeCrow Female 18-29
    1199 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:00 pm
    I have to say, I`m getting really tired of iab`s posts lately. =/ This is in no way entertaining, it`s just posted up to have people arguing in the comments for no real purpose. It`s annoying.

    Bleh... And yet I don`t think I will be able to find anything like iab. -_-; I wish I was more internet savvy.

  117. Profile photo of vanillabear
    vanillabear Male 18-29
    174 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:04 pm
    In 1999, National Geographic magazine featured an article about a fossil of a feathered creature with a tail like a dinosaur’s. The magazine declared the creature to be “a true missing link in the complex chain that connects dinosaurs to birds.” The fossil, however, turned out to be a forgery, a composite of the fossils of two different animals. In fact, no such “missing link” has ever been found. End of story.

    I really do love reading the National Geographic, I just don`t agree with everything they say. Science in the end will never have all the answers :/

  118. Profile photo of Omphaloskept
    Omphaloskept Male 40-49
    181 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:14 pm
    @vanillabear

    Erm, circles ARE flat -- you must be thinking of a sphere. And while ancient Hebrew had a perfectly good word for sphere, it did not get used in the Bible in reference to the earth`s shape.

    Furthermore, even if some fossils are forgeries, there are plenty of links between dinosaurs and birds; end of story is the appropriate sentiment, but you`ve misread the conclusion...

  119. Profile photo of yayforme
    yayforme Male 18-29
    156 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:15 pm
    "This is in no way entertaining, it`s just posted up to have people arguing in the comments for no real purpose."

    Is arguing in the comments not a legit way of entertainment? XD

  120. Profile photo of dljudo92
    dljudo92 Male 18-29
    485 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:17 pm
    vanilla, a circle is a flat, 2-dimensional surface. try again
  121. Profile photo of Omphaloskept
    Omphaloskept Male 40-49
    181 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:17 pm
    ...and hey! Why is a five year old NatGeo cover story just now showing up on IAB?
  122. Profile photo of mallowman
    mallowman Male 18-29
    40 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:19 pm
    @ vanillabear: "circle" refers to a 2-dimensional object: if the bible was saying the earth was a globe (3-dimensional), it would have said "globe." Taking a basic geometry course may be to your advantage.
  123. Profile photo of SuperSmash
    SuperSmash Male 18-29
    3758 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:52 pm
    "This is in no way entertaining, it`s just posted up to have people arguing in the comments for no real purpose."

    "Is arguing in the comments not a legit way of entertainment? XD"

    I agree with yayforme. Often, the comments are much more interesting than the posts and commenting is the main reason I come to IAB.

  124. Profile photo of bklynusa
    bklynusa Male 30-39
    216 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 9:59 pm
    shopped.
  125. Profile photo of BunnyNaku
    BunnyNaku Female 18-29
    5224 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:00 pm
    ....
  126. Profile photo of StarDagger
    StarDagger Male 40-49
    1190 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:05 pm
    I love listening to the Xian morons roll out their silly antiquated concepts ON THE INTERNET!!

    I hope the Rapture is going to happen, a world without Xians would be a great one, maybe you could take the Fundie Muslims and Capitalists as well!!!

  127. Profile photo of vanillabear
    vanillabear Male 18-29
    174 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 10:06 pm
    @ Omphaloskept

    The original-language word translated “circle” at Isaiah 40:22 may also be rendered “sphere.”

    @mallowman

    Certain Bible translations read, “the globe of the earth” (Douay Version) and “the round earth.”—Moffatt

  128. Profile photo of OrangeCrow
    OrangeCrow Female 18-29
    1199 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:04 pm
    Yeah I didn`t mind it at first, but it`s just gone to the point of becoming boring and unoriginal to me. Everyday now I expect a retarded post meant to spark up "lolepic debates" on here, and I see the same kind of posts over and over. Eh, I just think this isn`t a site even meant for debating, considering that I could go to a more elaborate forum meant just for that. -_-;

    Anyway... <_<; Have fun, guys. lol

  129. Profile photo of greenspark82
    greenspark82 Female 18-29
    365 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:11 pm
    *yawn*
  130. Profile photo of xXxNatexXx
    xXxNatexXx Male 13-17
    135 posts
    January 24, 2010 at 11:56 pm
    well that did not entertain me one bit good sir! i`d kindly like my not-even-half a second back.
  131. Profile photo of davymid
    davymid Male 30-39
    12140 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 12:31 am
    I agree with yayforme. Often, the comments are much more interesting than the posts and commenting is the main reason I come to IAB.

    Me too, brother. Me too.

  132. Profile photo of ajr2006
    ajr2006 Male 18-29
    943 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 3:23 am
    "we probably never will know for an irrefutable fact what happened unless we run into aliens that live mad long or we run into G/god(s)/esses"

    Is that so? Then we better tell those persistent scientists to stop it with those super particle collider

  133. Profile photo of Seastone
    Seastone Female 18-29
    612 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 6:24 am
    Even if they succeed with the LHC, it doesn`t necessarily mean there is/was not a god of some sort in the universe. It could mean that that god created physics to suit his whims and mortals playing with it is something he doesn`t consider a threat, or it could mean scientists are incorrect. The god might have been the spark that started off the Big Bang and evolution. Who knows? We`re not going to know until "the end," whatever it is, so we might as well just get along. We might all be wrong.
  134. Profile photo of dramaeco
    dramaeco Male 18-29
    305 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 7:45 am
    Not to get into a debate, but I would have assumed that this would be National Geographic`s stand.
  135. Profile photo of crazymonkey2
    crazymonkey2 Male 18-29
    3 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 8:12 am
    "I agree with yayforme. Often, the comments are much more interesting than the posts and commenting is the main reason I come to IAB."

    That`s a really good way to look at things.

    And I also agree that religious people (Christians) have pitted themselves against evolution wrongly. The two aren`t mutually exclusive.

    Also, I disagree with everything you--yes you, the person reading--this say. hah. My arguing skills are unmatched in this galaxy.

  136. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2284 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 8:27 am
    Vanilla bear...what are you talking about? we`ve found intermediary`s between dinosaurs and birds--in fact, we are certain now they are from the same line, or pretty damn certain.
  137. Profile photo of SPrinkZ
    SPrinkZ Male 18-29
    2284 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 8:28 am
    Also, Christianity and evolution are definitely mutually exclusive. I don`t think that God is inclusive in the theory of evolution AT ALL. In fact, God is not used in one instance of the theory of evolution.
  138. Profile photo of almightybob1
    almightybob1 Male 18-29
    4290 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 9:21 am
    Well, it depends on how you believe God was involved in life on Earth. If you believe he made everything exactly as it is, then yes, evolution clearly shows you are wrong.

    On the other hand, if you believe that God seeded microbial life on earth millions of years ago, and then evolution took over, then there`s no contradiction there - although it raises interesting theological questions, like why homo sapiens would be apparently so favoured by a god who didn`t even make them.

    That whole thing is more the topic of abiogenesis, the study of life arising from non-life. We don`t know exactly how life initially arose on earth, but we do know from the Miller-Urey Experiment that under certain conditions life CAN arise from non-life.

  139. Profile photo of Thorna_Kate
    Thorna_Kate Female 18-29
    237 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 9:32 am
    Darwin was right. Get over it.
  140. Profile photo of la_da_scouse
    la_da_scouse Female 13-17
    9 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 9:36 am
    also - as the daughter of a very catholic man, who is also fair scientific about things, if you want to believe God created us, you can trace it waaaayy back, as noone knows the reason the Big Bang happend in the first place. This was the solution i was always given as a small child
  141. Profile photo of Nurcowski
    Nurcowski Male 18-29
    264 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 10:00 am
    I remember reading this article when it came out a while back. I saw the question, opened to the right page and started cracking up. It`s not like Nat Geo to be so blunt, but I suppose they wanted to be clear on this one ^__^

    Also, Seastone said, "We might all be wrong." I must say that I find that notion more comforting than the idea of any one belief/religion being right.

  142. Profile photo of duffytoler
    duffytoler Male 40-49
    5195 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 10:59 am
    What do you expect National Geographic to say, "ALL DONE BY MAGIC" or something?
  143. Profile photo of LameName
    LameName Female 18-29
    238 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 12:35 pm
    Why is this i-a-b material? This is just stating the damned obvious
  144. Profile photo of mosthead
    mosthead Male 18-29
    95 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 12:51 pm
    This won`t bode well for creationist museum ticket sales.
  145. Profile photo of lerie
    lerie Female 18-29
    1265 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 5:41 pm
    I don`t see the problem. I support the phrase that goes something like "God is who, Evolution is how".
  146. Profile photo of Peveo4589
    Peveo4589 Male 18-29
    430 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 6:59 pm
    Wow what a gimmicky way to sell magazines.
  147. Profile photo of cman7721
    cman7721 Male 18-29
    618 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 8:13 pm
    yuup. especially after the man who dreamed it all up disregarded it later in life. whatevs.
  148. Profile photo of shieldbash
    shieldbash Male 30-39
    23 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 9:56 pm
    Sorry cman, but Darwin never disregarded his theories. What your little mind is probably referring to is the false claim that Darwin repented on his death bed. This is a false claim that was laid to rest by Darwin`s wife (who was very religious) and children who were actually there.

    For those who keep saying the "theory of evolution" you need to work on your terminology. Evolution is a fact of nature. Evolution means that there is a "change in gene frequency over time". This happens each and every time an organism is born. The theoretical part is in describing the mechanism by which evolution occurs. Darwin`s theories of Natural and Sexual selection are the most rigorously tested and scientifically validated of these theories. For anyone who claims that Darwin was wrong I beg you to please stop taking modern antiviral and antibacterial meds, as without the theory of NS they would have never been invented. That will have an added effect of killing-off your stupid

  149. Profile photo of Rman1201
    Rman1201 Male 18-29
    247 posts
    January 25, 2010 at 10:46 pm
    Didn`t disregard his theories - and even if he did it would be irrelevent. Its not the Church of Latter-Day Darwin, its a scientific theory. He`s just one man that happened to get the ball rolling, and since that idea the evidence has continued to support the theory, trial after trial. His ghost could come to life and say he made it all up and it wouldn`t matter, science is based on observations, not mere ideas without evidence.
  150. Profile photo of TxTnViolence
    TxTnViolence Male 30-39
    197 posts
    January 26, 2010 at 9:00 am
    A strange idea; that dust would give birth to us. Do you ever stare in the mirror and think, "what the drat is going on here?"
  151. Profile photo of ImTakingOver
    ImTakingOver Male 18-29
    388 posts
    January 26, 2010 at 11:19 am
    Technically, Darwin WAS wrong about a few things, but evolution really is a fact, and the evidence is overwhelming.
  152. Profile photo of gothmo
    gothmo Female 18-29
    1324 posts
    January 26, 2010 at 10:56 pm
    "Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind" -Einstein. Whether we came from apes is questionable to me... But evolution is fact.
  153. Profile photo of kakashi68
    kakashi68 Male 18-29
    20 posts
    January 28, 2010 at 8:32 pm
    Anyone who doesn`t understand that evolution is as real as they are (but definitely not as stupid) needs to kill themselves. If you catch my genetic drift.
  154. Profile photo of Dradan659
    Dradan659 Male 13-17
    276 posts
    January 30, 2010 at 6:18 am
    "Technically, Darwin WAS wrong about a few things, but evolution really is a fact, and the evidence is overwhelming."

    It is NOT a fact, and while i believe in Evolution, it is still just a theory

  155. Profile photo of last_ninja
    last_ninja Male 18-29
    610 posts
    February 3, 2010 at 5:00 pm
    i agree. Darwin was, and always will be, right. but it`s Tesla who has my heart. i <3 sexy mad scientists

Leave a Reply