|
|
|
|
|
|
Evolution: Fact Or Fiction
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certain years conjure up certain events in peoples' mind. 1963, the Kennedy assassination. 1929, the stock market crash. 1947, Jackie Robinson enters the major leagues as the first African-American baseball player. 1776, Thomas Jefferson writes the Declaration Of Independence. Just as all the years just mentioned are engrained in the public's conscience, so is the events of 1859. While most people could not indicate what actually occurred in 1859, their thoughts and beliefs have definitely been shaped by the 1859. In 1859, Charles Darwin published The Origin Of Species, in which he enunciated the theory of evolution by natural selection and applied that theory to human beings. Darwin even went as far as to say animals, plants, and man evolved mechanistically. After 1859, the world would never be the same again. Darwin's scientific research affected not only biology, but religion, sociology, philosophy, and politics.
Before Darwin and Alfred Russel Wallace, a scientist who also advanced the concept of evolution, the Christian church's theories on how life began were taken as the absolute truth. When church officials, backed by the Bible, stated that the earth was created in seven days by god, people generally believed. When church officials said god created all living things separately, with man being the crown achievement, the masses of faithful followers tended to believe it unconditionally. Darwin's publication of his theories gave the Church for the first time a formable opponent in how the world was actually created. It must be understood that Darwin did not originate the theory of evolution. By no means was Darwin the first scientist to write about the concept of evolution. There had been many who wrote about evolution. But their was a major difference between Darwin and earlier writers of evolution. While earlier writers had believed that evolution most likely occurred, Darwin and Wallace explained how it could occur. To the Churches' horror, many followers were reading a doctrine which clearly explained how humankind's origin and characteristics did not require the existence of a god for their explanation. Darwin's The Origin Of The Species was instant success and by the end of the century, Darwin's ideas were widely accepted by the scientist community, as well as by many laymen. At sometime or another, one contemplates on how humans arrived at their present state of being. For me, I base everything on logic and reason, which has led me to the conclusion that Darwin was correct in regards to his theories on evolution. I do personally believe that animals evolved from a more primitive state. I do believe that humans evolved from earlier hominids. I also believe humans evolved from other species, such as the apes of Africa. That is correct. From years of studying and analyzing, I have come to the conclusion that all living things have evolved into its present state and that we are still evolving. On the surface, even I have to admit that the theory of evolution appears far fetch. But the evidence is there. From the discoveries of Darwin to the discoveries of the Leakeys, the scientific community has provided us with a wealth of facts, while the religious community has provided us with faith.
On the surface, it is hard to imagine species evolving into another species, but one cannot deny the findings of fossil remains. The religious community contends that animals and humans look exactly as they appeared when they first walked the earth, but the fossil records clearly dispute this claim. The first hominids, human like creatures, were not homo sapiens. First, one must understand that the Earth is not 6,000 years old, but well over a billion years old. Evolution of species is a process that takes place over millions of years. Man went through a lot of different stages to evolve into the human beings of today, a process that took at least three million years. Modern man did not appear on the seen until about 50,000 years ago. Our knowledge of the first hominids comes from the findings of Lucy, or Australopithecus afarensis. This 1974 discovery intensified the debate between science and religion. But the findings were clear as Lucy demonstrated a species in transition. Those in the religious community dismissed Lucy as simply another ape because of the size of her brain, which was the size of an orange, but by no means was Lucy an ape. While Lucy did possess ape like features and a brain the size of ape, Lucy was definitely a hominid, which makes her one of man's early ancestors. If Lucy had the physical characteristics of an ape, as well as the intelligence, what actually made Lucy different from the apes that existed during her time?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If one has ever observed an ape walk, he or she will quickly notice that an ape walks on all fours. When an ape stands to walk, it can only do so for a couple of seconds. An ape lacks the ability to lock its knees, so walking upright for long periods of time is extremely painful for apes. But Lucy did not have that problem. While examining Lucy's fossil remains, the researchers discovered that Lucy's knees were able to lock and pelvis had fully adapted to the upright stance, which means Lucy walked upright like humans. This has led many researchers to conclude that the first major event in the evolution of man was the development of bipedalism, which means two legged walking. About 6 million to 4 million years ago as we diverged from the apes, bipedalism was the first significant modification separating the great apes from our ancestors. Another important feature of Lucy was the size of her femur in comparison to her humerus. The humerofermoral ratio for Lucy was 85, compared to 72 for humans, and 99 for chimpanzees. In other words, humans have shorter arms compared to their legs than chimpanzees, and Lucy falls clearly in the middle. The scientific importance of Lucy must not be overlooked. Lucy was showing clear distinctions from the other apes about four million years ago and her physical qualities signaled that she was closer to us than the chimpanzees. Lucy was definitely a high ape with a human looking body.
Besides Lucy there have been many other discoveries of man's ancestors, which include Australopithecus anamensis, A. africanus, A. boisei, Homo rudolfensis, Homo erectus, H. neanderthalensis, and many others. Instead of describing each genus or species characteristics and how they are related to man, which would take up too much time, I would like to present a philosophical question. If homo sapiens did not evolve from the apes or hominids outside of our species, then, why didn't the life force that created everything simply create homo sapiens from the start instead of creating Australopithecus anamensis, java man, Peking man, Neandertals, and many other hominids that existed before homo sapiens. What creationists want everybody to believe is that the life force set in motion the evolution of hominids and then decided to create a totally new species separate from the other hominids. But, we know that homo sapiens are not that much different genetically from chimpanzees and other hominids, especially the hominids within the same genus. According to DNA and protein matching, we now know that the DNA structure of chimpanzees and humans differs by just over one percent. Moreover, biochemical testing clearly shows that when species from different orders are compared, the differences in their DNA structure is greater than when species within the same genus are compared. Meaning, if our DNA structure is closely related to the chimpanzees, then, our genetic makeup is even closer to the hominids that lived before us.
|
|
Moreover, the different physical characteristics of human beings should be a clear indication that evolution is a fact rather than fiction. Darwin explained in his writings that there were many reasons for why evolution occurs, with geographic isolation being one of those explanations. According to many paleontologists, populations of the same species often become separated by barriers. When this isolation occurs, the flow of genes between populations stops. Without the flow of genes, the two populations can become different from one another. One reason for differences arising among the two populations is that different adaptations will evolve through natural selection due to the different environments. For example, it has been proven beyond doubt that the first hominids were from Africa. It is also safe to assume that these hominids had similar physical characteristics. Eventually, many hominids would venture off into different parts of the
Eventually, many hominids would venture off into different parts of the world, becoming separated by natural barriers. This separation would soon lead to the different physical characteristics that developed among various groups of people. For instance, the hominids that remained in Africa maintained a dark complexion while their noses remained rather broad, but the hominids that ventured to areas known as Europe today, developed a lighter complexion and the colder climate eventually led to a narrowing of the nose to help better adapt to the environment. By the mere fact that human beings are not one color with common features is evidence that man did evolve.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For those who still proclaim that evolution represent pseudo science, resent findings by paleontologists and man's understanding of the DNA structure is proving Darwin's case. For instance, defenders of Darwin have proclaimed that the modern day birds have a strong relationship with reptiles, such as the dinosaurs. For years, paleontologists often theorized that the scales of various reptiles eventually turned into feathers over millions of years. Many creationists have condemned this thinking as ludicrous. But, in the latter part of the year 2000, Chinese scientists discovered a well preserved fossil of a bird like creature from the dinosaur era. The scientists were able to distinguish flight feathers, down feathers and the primitive and scale-like tail feathers. It must be understood that modern birds' feathers have branches along their entire length, right to the stem. The tail feathers of this prehistoric bird are elongated and lack branches nearer the stem. At the base, this particular bird clearly had elongated reptile scales and bird feathers near the ends. The findings in China seem to support the theory that feathers evolved from reptilian scales that grew longer and then became specialized with hollow quills and other features for different uses.
While this finding prove that feathers most likely evolved from reptile scales, a more recent finding may possibly prove that birds themselves evolved from dinosaurs. In the same region, Chinese farmers found a well preserved 2.5 foot long fossil of a dinosaur. The fossil record indicates that dinosaur belonged to a group of dinosaurs called theropods - two-legged predators with sharp teeth. This discovery has been particularly important because it showed the feathers were attached to the dinosaur's body. According to scientists, this finding makes it indisputable that a body covering similar to feathers was present in non-avian dinosaurs. Moreover, the discovery also clearly shows that theropod dinosaurs and birds hare about 100 anatomical features, including a wishbone, swiveling wrists and three forward-pointing toes. Paleontologists findings have also shown that some sea animals evolved from land mammals. Fossils recently excavated suggest that cetaceans (whales, dolphins, and porpoises) evolved from a land dwelling animal, the mesonyx. This particular mammal had wolf-like features and once roamed many primeval continent coasts. Other scientists have concluded that cetaceans evolved from another type of land mammal with hooves.
Whatever the case may be, modern cetaceans are all descended from land mammals. This would explain why the cetaceans are different from sharks and other fish. Whales and dolphins are warm-blooded like other mammals and have lungs, where as other sea animals have gills and are cold-blooded. We could go forever on how various animals and hominids evolved, but that would take forever. From my research of the evolutionary process, it is clear that evolution is a fact and those in the religious community need to face this fact instead of hiding behind a shield of ignorance. This essay was not meant to disprove the existence of a god, but to show that whoever created this vast world, also set in motion the evolutionary process that includes man. It is ludicrous to assume that man is separate from all living things through the miracle workings of a god. Man is one with his natural surroundings. So what if man evolved from primitive beings. Does this make man's accomplishments less significant? This is a spiritual awareness that we should be proud of, not ashamed of. Knowledge and science has been the religious communities greatest enemy, but it does not have to be. As impossible as evolution seems, the fossil records show that the impossible is possible. Species can evolve from other species.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For more information:
Straight Talkers
Email: enavy@straighttalkers.com
© Copyright 2008 Straight Talkers Site. All Rights Reserved.
|
