In the main

In the main Page 1 of 3

This is just a quick bit paragraph that is hardly in the spirit of the rest, Just one paragraph…. Three to four billion years of horror. Animals eating each other from the start. Every minute of the day. Millions of animals eating each other. And worse. You can have the sun on your back one day then misery. But no more on that. It’s just that no thinking about life and existence could ignore it. I gave it a ten seconds thought that it could only be that we must have volunteered to do it and that when we pass away will say “that wasn’t too bad.” But then thought no one ever volunteer again especially if you couldn’t choose what you come back as and in which period of time it would be. Thing is though that it will soon be over. But no more..

This is more of sunny garden watching the nature sort of rambling. And no revelations anywhere. I have no beliefs or ideas on what it is all about. Am just wondering how the words natural selection and random mutations have seeped into our thinking to explain the ten toes and toe nails at the end of our feet, the eyebrows and eyelashes that surround the eyes and the skeleton that holds in and around it all the other body organs , parts, and chemicals galore , and how a thought can cause the heart to beat faster.

It’s that word evolution.

Found a fossil 30 years ago and recently looked it up to see what it is/was. It’s an oyster from the Jurassic period millions of years ago. Quite a common find. But it was a bit interesting and I’d heard that fossils show evolution of animals.

So went on Google expecting to see a nice order of fossils showing one animal turning into another. So far can’t see anything convincing at all. Just fossils of whole animals and then conjecture that that this or that animal evolved into another species of animal. So moved on to DNA and genes. That’s supposed to add more evidence of evolution. Problem is that understanding even the most simplified Google pages on what DNA and genes are and what they do and then to understand how they show that evolution of one animal species to another has occurred is even more complicated to understand.

commons.wikimedia.org Sneha G Gupta

It’s hard to understand how almost all scientists say that evolution using natural selection and accidental random mutations has occurred and the evidence is there. The evidence should be as clear as daylight. It’s not. There is no evidence at all. Just pure conjecture. There are no fossils to show that the fly above has relied on any evolutionary process. It would mean that an evolutionary process is in existence before the fly existed to allow the fly to evolve all of it’s body parts and it’s behaviours like looking to meet another fly.

Surely this guy or girl fly is a whole and has fantastic abilities that have never ever relied on our evolution conjectures. If we consider just it’s legs , we might say that the fly legs evolved. But legs allow an animal to walk and other animals have them too. Legs surely don’t need to evolve to be able to walk. That is essentially the rest of this. Legs and wings and hearts have never had to evolve , in my opinion of course.

Of course any following thinking would be about what is the evidence to show that whole animals like apes or monkeys turned into humans. That though is apparently not the case. That is what is in our thinking because it might have been an easy way to forward the idea that we evolved with the evidence in years gone by.
But any google search that we can now do today says that there was some other animal that turned into both apes and humans. That means that apes and monkeys didn’t turn into humans. Some animal existed before apes or monkeys or humans and some sort of divergence occurred that turned it into apes and monkeys and humans at the same time or over time.
It means that the present thinking is that we didn’t evolve from an ape or a monkey directly but that humans and apes and monkeys evolved from some animal before them that was a bit ape or monkey like. Don’t trust me , but it all seems based on no fossil evidence at all and because of the lack of evidence for apes or monkeys turning into humans there is now this new conjecture to account for it all. It’s not so much that it’s new , it’s newish because it isn’t well known. But there is very limited evidence to go on. I’d say none.

Hom