Basically gpiss's link is a simplification of the theory, so don't expect too much from it. The theories aren't exactly set in stone too, and is still under study.
But that's the point of science and study. They are constantly evolving. Theory is the result of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. You come up with an idea, someone else comes up with something else, and everyone sees if it can be repeatedly proven under observable conditions. And even if the results prove one set of theory over another, they are still open to being tested and disproved for something else.
You're not going to get this in religion. Anyone who doesn't believe is a heretic. Even if there were a continuation from the original idea, not everyone is willing to make the change. From the tanakh, to the bible, to the quran.
So when anyone read's gsonique's link on darwin. Remember scientific theory is always just theory. Every other observation is built on top of another. The article tries to discredit darwin in so many ways, but really it just fails to understand the process of exploration. The same way some people think that science is a static thing.
And just attacking a person because of what he thought as a child is really low.
But that's the point of science and study. They are constantly evolving. Theory is the result of thesis, antithesis and synthesis. You come up with an idea, someone else comes up with something else, and everyone sees if it can be repeatedly proven under observable conditions. And even if the results prove one set of theory over another, they are still open to being tested and disproved for something else.
You're not going to get this in religion. Anyone who doesn't believe is a heretic. Even if there were a continuation from the original idea, not everyone is willing to make the change. From the tanakh, to the bible, to the quran.
So when anyone read's gsonique's link on darwin. Remember scientific theory is always just theory. Every other observation is built on top of another. The article tries to discredit darwin in so many ways, but really it just fails to understand the process of exploration. The same way some people think that science is a static thing.
And just attacking a person because of what he thought as a child is really low.
