Is there scientific prove that the theory of evolution is wrong

Is the theory of evolution wrong. Can we prove evolution of species scientifically as false or a lie

Charles Darvin, the first man to understand evolution of man changed the way how much we understand the world.


Charles Darvin

You keep reading articles on the net that evolution would be a lie. that evolution is wrong. And that this would all be a wrong theorie that could be easily proven wrong. Well evolution is taught in shools and that has a reason. It is a “theory” that really nobody can doubt who looks at the scientific proove for evolution. So trust that it is scientifically provable that evolution is true. And all these people who write such nonsense on their blog that evolution would be false should rather go and read about it first. It is not at all a matter of speculation. So all these anti evoltion articles all come up with the same arguments and are deeply pleased with themselves because they believe that they found out what nobody else thought about. While actually their arguments are the same stupid arguments everybody comes up with who does not care to really inform himself about the facts. Lately I had to read an article from a young girl who seemingly thought to be the center of the world and she hurled out the same stupid arguments and then always finished her arguments with sentences something like: Ha Darvin that makes your whole theory collapse. Darvin is a scientist of world renown and that does not just happen by accident that you become such a celebrated researcher. His theories are true and very well thought about. And they changed how we think about the world. That is genius. And now we come to the wrong arguments against evolution of species. No, evolution of man can not be scientifically proven wrong. It was scientifically proven right.

1. If we evolved from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?

Evolution does not say that we evolved from monkeys. The theory of evolution of the species states that we and the monkey evolved from the same animal. Which is a kind of monkey and man like animal. Evolution of the species states that we and the apes are relatives. And not only evolution states this by the way, modern genetic analyses of the genes of humans and monkeys absolutely scientifically prove that this is true. Monkeys and we are relatives. Well you may not imagine monkeys transforming into men. that would be stupid, of course no animal “transforms”. It is so that animals get children, and these children look like a mix from mother and father animal. And mother and father animal give their looks to the child animal by a “code” inside the cells. There is a long string inside each cell that can be read like lets say the information on a hard disc. And this string or cord “tells” the cells of the animal or human in which form it has to grow. And no I am not making this up this also is a thing that science works with for a long time. That is what I mean with people should read first before they write. These things can be seen under a microscope, there is like no doubt about these things. And this string is called DNA. It is a code that can be read by the body and tells the body in which form to grow. Sounds fantastic, but is absolutely verifiable. So basicly the children always look similar to the parents because they get a mixed DNA from mother and father (in the sperm and female egg). But if an error occures in copying these information strings, the DNA, then the body is build up according to this changed information in a now different way. That is called a mutation, a mutation is a transcription error when the DNA is copied. That can give the new animal problems of course but it can also be unproblematic or even helpful. So lets say all children of black cats are also black cats as it should be, but then a mutation occures and through a transcription error a white cat is born. And lets say these cats live in a snowy environment and there are predators, animals that eat these cats. Now suddenly the white cat has a better chance to survive, because it is harder to see it because it is white in a snowy environment. So chances are that this cat lives longer and so has more chances to reproduce, get children. Well since the transcript error in the DNA that let the body of the cat grow to be white is what is in the cat thats why the children of this cat will be white. Or lets say grey because the cat mates with a cat that is still black and the children look like a mix from mother and father. But generally the child-cats tend to be more white. And these whiter cats have a better chance of surviving the game of chance that prevails in nature. Like are you eaten or not. And that is what Charles Darvin calls the survival of the fittest, where fittest means the best prepared for the given environment. Like in our example a white cat in a snowy environment. That the child-cat was white was only accidental. And since even a white cat can be eaten the survival of the white cat also is a thing of chance. But statistically the white cats in the snow will be less eaten and therefor have more children. That is the reason why in the snowy environments of today there are white animals. evolution of speciesthis all happens by chance  and the elimination also goes by chance. So even better prepared animals can still become extinct because it is a game of chance if an animal is eaten or not, but statistically, that means generally the better prepared animal will be the one surviving better. But that does not mean that from this moment on all black cats have to disapear. You see that what this spawns is a multitude of similar animals that live parallel to each other. So thats why not all monkeys have to be gone. Species live parallel all standing up to the game of chance between being eaten, eat and reproduce. So thats also why there are different kinds of monkeys and that is also why there are differend kinds of human forms.theory of evolution of men The black human form was better capable of surviving in hot Africa, the white human form was better able to survive in the more northern regions. That is the reason for the bigger noses of black people this nose can better deal with warmer air, whereas the nose of white people can better deal with colder air. Thats why there are still apes, we are akin, we have the same ancestors, but it is of course not that apes “transform” into humans. If one different child is born the parents and brothers and sisters still remain on the planet and also get other children. So that creates different animal types.

2. If we evolved from blacks people, why are there still blacks people?

We did not evolve from black people. That sounds as if white people would be better. No. We are very closely akin. All human forms do carry only very little difference in their DNA. It might look like a big difference but genetically we are very similar. Very, very similar

3. I can not imagine that I come from the sea

Well look, you do not come from the sea. You are a land living species that has been a land living species for a long time. So also your grandparents do not come form the sea. But if you search for leftover animal bones then you see that the animal of which you find bones can be arranged in lines where the child animals after long itmes look like their parents but slightly different. Because of these mutations. So there is a chain of animals, And one of these chains ends in the human form we have. And the first animals of these chains where fish like. So of course you do not come from the sea. But a species long time ago was swimming in the sea and throug millions of years of mutations now we are here. So our ancestors, but very long a ago ancestors where indeed fish like. Sounds unbelievable but is absolutely true. Of course you really have to see that millions of years are a long time, to understand that the way from fish to human in very small changes is possible.

4. Animals have not become intelligent

So since animals are not getting intelligent that speaks against an evolution. But look that is just what we are talking a bout here, that some animals, we became very intelligent.

5. Some things are still unexplainable

Ok. Some things about the world we find out scientifically are asking for even more evidence to clarify things even more. That clarifying things is never a bad thing is true. Those people who find this out about evoulution are fellow men. And they are so to say many. I want to say that the evidence of these ongoings called evolution is really indiscussable if you see the findings. And it is not against God (Dao) if you might think so, to learn how his creation works. I am assured that we will find things in Gods universe that we can less explain. It is not our duty to run against scientific things. Lets say these “God does not exist experiments” like the electrical current put to your brain already creates a feeling of spirituality, you should doubt them. Because as long as we do not understand how the universe really works in things like ourselves then it is stupid to say that you have prooved like God (Allah) does not exist. But these scientific things like, humans where absolutely shurely monkey styled before and developed into modern humans by means of changing kids in mutations. That is stuff we believers shurely have to embrace. God (Ishvara) if you so want is grace. So we do not defend what was believed in the past. Actually we do not have to defend things to much at all, because this is about how far can we get and not about how far we can get others. And in this situation it is like, really nobody cares, there are so many fossiles that every person who seriously looks at this thing comes to the conclusion that the so called “evolution of species” is just absolutely right.

It is a good example of that we should also not be to fast with decisions about higher things.

6. No animal just evolves and changes his form

So it is not about form changing. It is about children happen to be different through transcription errors. And that running over a very long time, and that with the factor of being eaten or eat and reproducing. which Darvin calls for us the “laws of natural selection”, menaing the game of chance of being eaten or not and of being able to find food or not, and in the long run to be able to get children and pass on the new DNA body building information that each animal has.

7. Scientists still need to prove evolution

That is absolutely ultimatly just wrong. Evolotion of species and so evolution of man is the thing that you yourself would consider if you saw the findings. I am shure of that.

Is it wrong to believe in evolution

Science or religion which is wrong or right?