Evolution Vs Science Vs Modernity

It is hard to believe in some of the biological and fairy junks I may be saying here, but if you have read ordinary and advance biology, physiology, medicine, neurology, brain-science and human ecology, discrediting this essay will be simply difficult to do, because in it stand a very special attributes of modern day debate, and the crux of technology. Apart from having a scientific insight into what this essay is actually talking about, it has as well the vibe that makes the reader desires to gasped for more, and always being filled or consumed by so many questions.

There are many different life forms on earth. New species and different sub species are evolving each second as others die out; a visit to some of the rare jungles in Africa, around the rain-forest region of the Niger Delta axis, the Oshogbo peninsular, Dahomey basis, the Nile farms and others, a cruccial experiencer will never be satisfied with what his / her sees and the originality of the flow of life of both birds, insects, mammals and reptiles, all combines their melodies to make life in the rain forest more abundant, and more pleasing to passerby and those who are origins of these higher plateaus. Another journey can still be explored around the Caucasian polarization, the Indian Ocean, the Antarctica, the meditareania and the mongoloid aborigines. The lives of the Eskimos is another specimen to be studied, among them them the Latina Medusiolas, a ground of pure Indians above the Aswan Rivers in Canada.

In order to explain the origin of life, people have used the bible story of creation, some have used the African folk-lures, and others have based their traditional logic and lexis, while others came up with their own theories. Out of all those theories, the theory of evolution by Charles Darwin (The historian, the evolutionist and the Father of modern biological theories along with Mendel) seems to have the most supporting evidence to back it up. Evidence on earth suggests that single cell creatures are the ancestors of all life.

Yet the question I must ask is, are these really true? We can not excuse nor succumb to such theorem altogether, because we are not fools. Neverheless, knowingly and unknowingly we have support such claims of the genes, chromosomes, alleles and the host of other evolutionist logics and terminology, it is true, because empirically, it has been known to be applicable in many research since being controlled and uncontrolled, it has worked in modern day Agriculture, Biology, Medicine and Psychology. In law, Society, Politics, Technology, Space, science and humanity, evolution has tend to push our sense of justice in these areas without knowingly which other path to follow.

The scholars who thought about evolution, and those who have criticize it afterward have followed the same path, because even while those who criticize the law tend not to support it, or have an alternative clues to science and the re-establishment of Mendel's and Darwin's Laws , they have identical circumscribe to the relics of such mountainous argument posit by Darwin and Co.

These organisms slowly evolved into air breathing creatures when oxygen was created. Slowly, the as land discharged up, these creatures moved away from the water and on to land where they evolved legs and a strong back bone Mendel et al. The theory of evolution by Charles Darwin explained how life evolved from survival of the fittest, it provides a logical explanation of the evolutionary process these creatures took, and how human came to be. Evidence on earth shows that single cell organisms ever evolved to multicelled organisms and complex beings. If you look at old fossil records, the oldest fossils are all single cell creatures.

These simple creatures do not require oxygen to live. It took in energy from the sun and other energy sources (This explains the nitrogen circle and the Newton's 6th law of motion otherwise called the 10% law of energy conservation). Slowly as oxygen begins to appear on Earth, some of the organisms began to evolve lungs to breathe oxygen because when free oxygen enters the picture. Breathing is more efficient than drawing energy from the fermentation process that earlier microscope life used.

Other organizations that did not evolve lungs either died out or went down to defect depths of the ocean; Oxygen was first consider a pollutant by microscopic creatures, except on its corrosive form as combine with Hydrogen in liquid form (H2O – Water). (Evolution Pg. 36) Because of the free Oxygen those who did not change were killed. The evolution through natural selection and survival of the fittest shows that Darwin theory is correct. Due to the lack of oxygen within the ocean, fish slowly evolved to the condition of land. Due to the sudden increase in the population of fish and other marine organism. Due to the sudden increase in the population of marines' life, the oxygen level within the ocean decreased. Scientist believes that the lung fish evolved because of a lack of oxygen in the sea. The lung fish learned to rise from the sea and breathe in the oxygen necessary for survival. (Evolution evidence Pg. 38) As more land emerges and dry, rain collected and formed fresh water lakes and rivers. Some of the fish became stranded by the receding ocean.

Many fish that became stranded died because they were not able to adapt to the new environment; those fish needed salt water to lived died. But some adapted to their environment. (Evolution Pg. 38) The lobe fin fish was another evolutionary path fish toke to avoid the lack of oxygen in the sea. Fossil record shows that lobe finned lung fish took another evolutionary path. (Microsoft Encarta Pg. 2) The lobe fin fish was almost capable of leaving the water. It only needed more muscles in the joints to be able to lift it self up, because of this many people believe that the lobe fin fish was the ancestor of early reptilian creatures.

The different evolutionary paths the fish have taken show that life changes in responses to different environmental conditions. Fossil records in South America and Africa especially in those Ijaw community areas, reveal that there are many sub species of the human race. The fossil of Neanderthal man was discovered shortly after Darwin published his book on evolution. The Neanderthal man was considered to be an ancestor of mankind because of the size of the skull which suggested that it had a small brain.

The sloping forehead is also an indication that it is an ancestor of the human race. Not long after the discovery of the Neanderthal was found in the 1890's. This fossil was called the Java Man; the Java Man was not considered the missing link between humans and apes. (Evolution Pg. 102) The Java Man was too much like normal human to be the missing link. The missing link is a fossil of a creature that is in a transitional state between it original form and it new form. (Ie A dinosaurs with feathers) With the discovery of Lucy in South America it was concluded that Human were likely descendent of the Ape family. The unique thing about Lucy was that skeletal structure was almost complete. From the bones, scientist can tell that Lucy was about three and a half feet tall and weighed about sixty pounds. (Evolution evidence Pg. 48) Lucy looked like a human from a far but up close; Lucy still had the appearance of an ape. With the discovery of many different fossil of the Homo family, it certain that human did evolve from an ape like creature.

In the creation story it said that God created everything in 7 days. It can not be used literally but still does not provide enough information about creation to explain everything. The creation story can explain how the first creatures were formed but that is about the only logical thing in the story. The existence of God is debatable and thus the creation story does not have any solid proof to be a valid theory. The creation story also says everything was created in 7 days but evidence shows that the earth is ever changing. There are many contradictions between the Creation story and the Earth. For example. We know for a fact that life on earth changes overtime in response to the ever changing environment.

The creation story could have been used to help further develop Darwin theory of evolution. The creation story does not explain how life evolved from survival of the fittest, it does not provide a logical explanation of the evolutionary process these creatures took, and what happened before life exhausted. Evolution can not explain certain aspect of how life came to be. There are many scientists that disagree with Darwin views on evolutions.

The reasons that scientists disagree is because they think the fossil record shows that there were 'jumps' in evolution that Darwin's idea does not explain. (Science: Biology Pg. 167) The jumps does not occur often but is still there. The fossil record was considered inaccurate by some scientist since it shows the natural selection side of the story. The other scientists say that the major changes, macro evolution, that bring about new species come in 'jumps'. (Evolution & Creation Pg. 148) The jumps theory does not have enough evidence to be widely accepted, however is still consider one of the major theory in how life become so diverse on earth. Creation and intervention are all non valid theories of how life came to be on earth.

Evolution is the only theory that has major evidences to back it up. The question of which theories is correct is base upon opinions of others. Evolution no doubt did occur and that is the reason why there are so much diversity of life on earth. Human and other modern day creatures all show characteristics of creatures in the past. The main reason people reject evolution is because they do not believe they could be related to more primitive creatures because they are inferior. The theory of evolution is the best theory for life on earth and without more evidences suggest other wises, it will most likely be a fact instead of a theory.

Since Evolution has known its roots and time, let us as Africans check if such logic and theory over time has been true. If they were even correct in the first place or if philosophically they owe any significance to modern day science, if what is happening nowdays does not alter the change or the argument. I believe beyond all reasonable doubt that, if Darwin, Mendel and all their crew were alive, they would have resort to other techniques of provicing their theory, because inductive, all these theory has not locus standi in the scheme of scientific inquiries. It is of this view that I have done my part in researching so many clauses which is contained in the study of evolution. If we as Africans can concentrate our energy towards finding what is truth, through some rare archives, which I took the pain to research, could help us in telling the world how controversial, and how overwhelming the theory of evolution were and was in our modern time.

I think I have said enough in this article.

  • Partner links