Science and Society

McCain's pick for VP would be proof-positive that humans, in fact, are devolving!

we may not be evolving as much physically, but we will always continue to evolve mentally, morally, and emotionally (or de-evolve as the case may be!) LOL

I still believe we are evolving, albeit instead of biologically, we've shifted to electronic evolution. Looking at the advancement of the human race, instead of major breakthroughs happening every ten of thousands of years, it has shifted to nearly one every generation. There will still be evolution, just in a different sense.

And please keep cheap politics out of science. There's plenty of post already dealing with it elsewhere. No need to destroy the beauty of science with the bitterness of politics.

Is there anyone still believing the tale of evolution...? It is proved wrong, it goes against the scientific laws...! Come on kids...!

kind of like joe biden he has absolutely stopped evolving.

"Evolution" never ends.

It is a long-standing assumption that selection pressure is not as strong as it was when we were being eaten by lions (fairly obvious, really).

Genetic drift will always occur, even if "men are having children at younger ages." It is an interesting theory that it might lower the mutation rate, however.

I assume Jones would probably agree with all that, if you pinned him down, but that woudn't get him as much attention.

No longer facing challenges to our survival? There are still plenty of obstacles to our survival... terrorists, global warming, polluted water and air, predatory lenders. It's still a jungle out there. What necessary characteristics must we "evolve" to survive the challenges of our modern day?

raven: Thanks for supplying the URL - I needed a laugh at this point in my day. That report was clearly written to support a preconceived outcome. Every point it makes can be explained without the need to invoke some super-hot outside accelerant (note the strong but subtle suggestion of thermite). The author(s) overlook much simpler explanations, such as the spherical globules that can be formed when melted, but not boiling, lead is thrown skyward or has its base support suddenly removed.

As is often the case, when you set out to find "facts" to support your conclusion, rather than letting your conclusion flow from the facts, all manner of things are possible. I'm quite sure these same people firmly believe that the entire 9/11 episode was engineered by GeeDubya as a pretext for going into the Middle East to steal Arab oil.

Remarkable.

P.S. Have you noticed that the conspiracy buffs give GeeDubya credit for having enough intelligence to engineer the whole 9/11 attack, doing such a superb job that even now no one involved (there had to have been dozens in various occupations) has even hinted about the true cause. This presumes that not one of those involved has had second thoughts, or wanted his/her name in the news, or wanted to cash in on the most $$$$$$-worthy story in at least a thousand years!

P.P.S. These same people also tell us long and loud how stupid GeeDubya is. Which is it? Brilliant enough to stage this and get away with it, or too stupid to know which side is up? They can't have it both ways.

Cant people understand that evolution is just gods will... this is how you make a bridge between science and god... this its his will. The difficult things that must happen for evolution to take place are unexplainable right now... a bit of order and a bit of chaos to have the right balance its what god has been doing!! Order, chaos, randomness, destiny, luck... all make reference to GOD!

Fools...there was never any such thing as evolution in the first place! Duh!!!

The theory of evolution has been repeatedly proven to be false. Loaded with fabricated evidence of missing links. It is still taught in schools because the only other alternative is creationism, which leads to fights as to what religion is correct. So they take the simple way out. No God no fight.

I pity those who ridicule evolution. That one word explains the entire creation of our universe after the big bang. It explains the creation of our solar system, our planet, and all the lifeforms thereon. Evolution is the only theory we need.
Those who blindly believe the apocryphal bible are ignorant indeed.

Ah gee, what timeless scientific principle supports the wildly stupid theory that all matter that is and ever was suddenly sprang from pure nothingness, hung out for a long, long time, then "came alive", crawled out of water and eventually became horses, beetles, eagles, zebras, bobcats, elephants, giraffes, gorillas, butterflies, llamas...I could go on and on. Any sensient human knows that evolution is a silly, terribly unscientific farce. Grow up people!

Cue "if we came from monkeys, why do monkeys still exist?" in 5.... 4.... 3....

evolved from what - "crawled out of water and eventually became horses, beetles, eagles, zebras, bobcats, elephants, giraffes, gorillas, butterflies, llamas...I could go on and on." I'm sure you could go on and on, but could you get them all on an ark in a few days time?

The real truth is that evolution is the best explanation to date. It doesnt bring the sillyness of creationism and doesnt harm any religion belief. And it does offer explanation for many things, it might be true or might not, or might need polishing... but it does explain a lot of things and much better than the bible... which I find that it tries to explain it on its own way... without any support!!! Now taht is silly

In the beginning God...

I can't believe people still believe in a Theory that has no proof what so ever. Humans didn't stop evolving because we never started in the first place. Name one solid fact or proof of evolution please, or are the facts still missing?

Jim Huneycutt - If by "missing" you mean "at your local library", then yes, the "facts" are still missing someone in that mysterious realm. Perhaps they're "missing" someone in the math and science section. I suggest you start your search there.

What were we gonna evolve to? Were we gonna sprout wings or grow gills? Stopped evolving...please! Let me guess, he was figuring this all out on public money...at least it was Englands money.

Jim Huneycutt - If by "missing" you mean "at your local library", then yes, the "facts" are still missing somewhere in that mysterious realm. Perhaps they're "missing" somewhere in the math and science section. I suggest you start your search there.

The increase in genetic mutations is increased by the soft life we ahve becuause people surive to breed who would have died young in a harsher world. So genes that would ahve died out naturally survive.
A more important evolution mechanism of our soft life is selective breeding. Beutiful people can find other beautiful people and athletes can find athletes. We will eventually evolve sub-species of models, actors, runners, swimmers, ball players, etc.

Kind of funny that some people have trouble accepting evolution of species, even though there is plenty of evidence for it, and yet have little trouble accepting the existence of a god, for which there is not a shred of credible evidence.

Yeah... those who dont support evoulution over the bible... are well... like in the dark ages: blind

While its not a perfect theory, its the best THEORY... meaning that its the best explanation to date, rather than Adam and Eve...

Prm, do you encounter terrorists on a daily basis? If so, how do you combat them? How often do they directly threaten your existence? Your argument is ridiculous.

Humans did not evolve from animals. We were made by God in his image read (Genesis in the Bible) and have a soul that lives for all of eternity. It would be impossible to evolve from animal to human and somehow "grow" a soul.

Lemurs were different 50 million years ago than today. Monkeys were different 20 million years ago than they were today. They stll exist because they found a climate that they could do well in. Apes were different 10 million years ago too. The changes are due to their environment. Humans are different now than they were 800,000 years ago too for the same reason.

In the beginning God created...
The natural age of death is the same now as it was is the year 1500! Check the books and records, I did. Check Genesis Chapter 8, verse 22, and you will see that Global Warming is a manufactured crisis. The Educational crisis is manufactured (In this case they, Socialist, created it). Wake Up America! You have been dumbed down.

I think humans will evolve - with all the electronics and communication through text messages, etc., I believe the next step in human evolution will be the loss of speech...

Jim Honeycutt, when was the last time you bothered to read a book on the subject of evolution? Or take a class? Have you EVER done it?

There are plenty of solid online sites that will answer your question. Just type in "evolution" and "evidence."

I agree with the poster who suggested that we are continuing to evolve mentally. New technologies require successful adaptation as much as physical environments do and will continue to do so. It may also be that humans are evolving in ways we cannot yet perceive in order to adapt to environmental changes and hazards, such as rising pollution levels. In the short term, these problems will have deleterious effects on many of us; but ultimately, nature may select for features that help some humans withstand those effects and pass on their genes.

The soft life we have today does not end evolution. It ends natrual selection, but there is still unnatural selection. People are able to find people to breed with who have the characterisics they want, so we are using selective breeding to make new sub-species (eventually).
You people who go to the bible for explanation of nature instead of science would be funny if you weren't so pathetic. You deny all the science that is inconvinient for your fantasy life.

Note from Ned Potter--

Hello to Wolf (and all others who've posted comments). In your comment at 2:04 PM you raise a good point on which, in fact, Jones has been challenged. Human beings in the past had lower odds of surviving infectious diseases, getting nutrition, being safe from predators, and so forth -- but it was not impossible for people to live to advanced age. Jones argues that such elders would have been honored, and their offspring (with or without mutations) would have been welcomed. Jones' detractors say he's exaggerating the importance of this pattern.

Kind of hard to end something that never happened.

Total BS. Humans will keep evolving. Maybe not physically since we don't need to survive in the jungle, but intellectually. Technological advances mean that humans need to constantly absorb more knowledge in each successive generation. Mental development also comes from better nutrition. We are in effect becoming smarter faster, although sometimes the opposite may seem true.

Since evolution is a lie to start it is not possible to draw any reasonable conclusions based on it. Or, you can say anything you want about it, which will only be another lie. All things were made by the LORD God Almighty.

Evolution theory or what-have-you is a direct insult to my intelligence.

earth humans were created by other alien humanoids from other worlds...2012 11:11..the return of our creators...evolution of humans is a myth

Evolution is a lie. We were created by God alone.

The fact that the conscious soul inside the body and the temporary body itself are two different things suggest that bodily evolution is not that important, because all life here is destined to die, no matter how well it has evolved to survive! God set off the bang, and designed evolution just so we (the pure but fallen souls)can eventually come to the conclusion that a devotional service attitude combined with true spiritual knowledge is the ticket out of this temporary world. I'm going home, what about you?

You know what? Who cares if someone believes in Evolution or not. If we continue to argue about it then what good is there to be done? Can't we all just accept that other people believe and don't believe the same things? No ones forcing anybody to accept evolution or religion here. Choose what you believe in and leave it at that. There is no purpose in arguing, there has never been a resolve.

So, when god made Adam and Eve, they obviously knew how to walk and talk, since they did and no one taught them outright. This means god put that knowledge in their memory at the point of creation. If god can (and did) create people in a single day, and put memories in their head so that they could function on this new earth, who's to say that god didn't create earth last week, and make all of us yesterday and put in the necessary memories of speech, computer interface, and the face of your deceased grandmother (who never actually existed) so that we can function on this week old planet?

I would have to disagree that Western man has stopped evolving, perhaps it is a matter of semantics, but I rather prefer the connotation of adaptation over evolution as a progression/regression cycle. As for those species that fail in adaptation will simply perish with the regression of nature.

As for the evolution and Christian religion arguments, both arguments are figments of the imagination of Western man. Neither heaven nor hell exists, we are not separate from the natural world as it is or from the constant influx and flux of change in the greater universe.

As for the past, present and future, we are slowly adapting to change of our environment, until the day we cannot adapt to something greater than our own survival capabilities, then we simply perish.

No evolution? I guess the earth is not over 4 billion years old. In the beginning man had dinasours as pets? Adam must have had a good time naming all those dinasours. Oil and coal were created in 6,000 years? Earth is the center of the universe and everything moves around us every 24 hours? 71 generations from Jesus to Adam. Using my family we have had 4 generations in 100 years. That would make another 80 generations since Jesus. Your DNA can be traced back millions of years. You can go to the Grand Canyon and see that Earth has been here a few million years. Of course if you don't belive science I guess you can say anything and be correct. The bible was written by people who had no idea how our solar system works or even the existance of all the continents on Earth. Since God talks to all religious people, how come God does not tell them the same thing?

CommonSense,
It does matter that these bible thumping people are using old fairy tales to suppress science. We cannot be competative in the world if our sceince is hindered by ignorant people living in a fantasy world.

How convenient...

Who said that Christians don't believe in evolution? Obviously we do, the human race started with Adam and Eve so obviously there has been some adaptation and evolution going on.

Threeriverscrossing... how do you know that our DNA can be traced back millions of years? We've already discovered that carbon breaks down faster the older it gets so c14 dating could have missed the mark by millions of years.

What shear nonsense! As I understand it, according to the evolutionists mutations occur randomly. The only reason for a path perse is that the stronger mutations, leading to better survival win out. He is arguing that there aren't the mutations bercause men are having offspring later in life,BUT when all these mutations were going on lifespan was much shorter which means that men had offspring YOUNGER - certainly before 50 ---they did not last that long. hmmmmm.....
I see that his Phd truly means piled higher and deeper.

David

Actually, a great many Christians agree with biological evolution as well, because there is nothing about Christianity that says you have to close your eyes to the real world.

furycole

Well, he was actually saying that he thought men were having children earlier in life. But you are right that doesn't make sense. As people live longer, we can almost guarantee that they will, on average, be having kids later in life - because there is more "later" to work with!

I don't think anybody's proved Evolution yet. So it's kinda hard to prove non-Evolution if there's no Evolution. It's still a theory, and not a very good one. They don't have the missing link: they don't have any links. Which monkey did we come from? We didn't. I have more respect for the Big Bang than I have for "evolution" because evolution seems to be pure fiction, to me. The Big Bang is a teensy bit different. Scientists think there was a Big Bang because the universe is moving outward. I think that's a huge leap in conclusions, but at least it's truly based on a scientific observation.

Annie

There is a massive amount of scientific evidence for biological evolution. The fact that you do not seem to be aware of it, does not mean it isn't there. No serious biologist questions the fact of biological evolution.

It's still the same tired old drawing of the monkeys, it's been that way for 50+ years already and not one ounce of progress on proving it. They found a skull in Africa that they think *might* be part of the chain but they haven't proved it. Biological Evolution: yes, I know that germs morph into new germs. Happens constantly. But in order for Evolution to work, the morphing has to IMPROVE itself along the way and I don't think I've ever heard of any improvements that happen naturally, of their own accord. It's all been downhill, for a long time. Those of us who were born in the 40's and 50's have seen a huge decline in human "evolution", because there are soooo many children now who are damaged by autism, Obsessive Compulsive disorders, and much more. We didn't see any of this when we were kids. Why is it happening now? We're changing: but not for the better. We have the ability to go downhill. That's not evolution.

We still have reasons to evolve. Our lungs will change to deal with the air and our bodies will change to deal with radiation as the planet changes so will we. We are tied to the planet and the universe and we will change with it. Maybe you will not see it as it will be ever so slow but it is happening.

With enough population there will always be survival pressure to direct evolution. In societies, such as Western Europe, where there is no population pressure, evolution will be directed by traits that increase the chances of people having and raising children which in long run should result in the return of population pressure.

Annie

I agree that the little drawing is rather outdated. That is not the picture of human evolution we have now.

Now that scientists have found MANY different human skulls in Africa, it is clear that there were many branches in the the family tree, and often more than one species was living at the same time.

Science does continue to progress, whether you are aware of it or not.

According to President Bush and his little sister Sarah Palin, there was no evolution, so there cannot be a devolution either, allthough Bush and Palin definately prove the opposite.

This is hardly a new idea. Anyone that has put any thought into it already knew this.

Evolution depends solely on producing offspring who in turn reproduce. What you do after the reproductive years has no impact on evolution. Today virtually anyone can reproduce successfully.

So the evolutionary trend is solely toward those who have a lot of children.

Perhaps so (I agree). But the new evolutionary pressures may come from society and institutions as determinants of which member of the gene pool are well-adapted enought to dominate.

Can 1 person give me 1 hard fact that can even point towards evolution? Just 1 is all I'm asking.....none of the books I've ever read had anything other than theories, none of which have supporting evidence. Is there anyone that does have something that hasn't been written about yet?

I get a kick out of the people who pretend to not believe in evolution. I guess Noah put pairs of millions of species on that tiny little boat. I would love to have a pic of that.

Christians are no different from people of any religion. They all believe that every other religion's beliefs are ludicrous, but their equally ludicrous beliefs make perfect sense.

Science on the other hand presents physical evidence to support theories that can change over time. Good scientists are not rigid and do not insist that they are right about every thing, but instead constantly seek more clarification.

Issues such as the Big Bang, evolution, etc. are scientific theories based on physical evidence, but their descriptions do change with more study.

Despite all the questions we still have about the universe, there is zero reason to believe there is or ever has been a god.

Hard to stop doing something we never started to do in the first place.

"But the new evolutionary pressures may come from society and institutions as determinants of which member of the gene pool are well-adapted enough to dominate."

Perhaps, but they do not currently exist in developed societies. Dominance and evolution are two distinct matters. A 'minority' of the gene pool can and often does dominate a society. That condition should not alter who continues to reproduce at the greatest rate.

Jimmy Ricardo

You could start with the new summary that the National Academy of Sciences put out recently. It is on their web page, and gives a very straightforward review of most of the basic evidence. Ned has linked to it here before.

Cory:

Evolutionary forces are cetainly at work in certain nations, especially in war-torn African nations where surviving to reproduce is a dicey matter.

Bugg

True, dominance does not necessarily lead to more offspring, but it can. I think wealthy people often have more kids because they can afford it, but many poor people seem to as well, so I don't know how that averages out.

Dominance usually leads to your offspring doing better, but not nessarily more of them.

aliens created blueeyed adam and eve -

Researchers in Denmark have found that every person with blue eyes descends from just one "founder," an ancestor whose genes mutated 6,000 to 10,000 years ago. Before then, everyone had brown eyes

gee... a single simple cell is comprised of myriad interdependent organelles that cannot exist independently outside of the protective cell wall and all working precisely in sync to provide the vital functions for the continued existence, and good of the whole cell as well as it's reproduction... but how did they all get there? inside this well designed machine? when these organelles could not exist alone? Only a moron believes in evolution...

Well, I am a christian and I see absolutely no dissent between evolution and christian belief. The creation stories (yes stories, because there are 2) in the bible dissent much more among themselves. In the first there are animals before humans, and in the second there is human before animals. (Just read the first 2 chapters in the bible and you will see). So there is no purpose in the creation stories of the bible to be scientific.

The two accounts of creation deal with two very seperate events... if you look back at it you will see that one is a creative process encompassing all of the spirits (in God's image) of all men and women who will ever live while the other is a description of the forming of a physical body from the elements to house the already created spirit and soul...

Bubby:

Evolution often means nothing more than a change in the gene pool. I can produce that in the lab in a matter of months by subjecting insects to some pressure (e.g., exposure to a level of insecticide that kills most but not every individual). In an infinitesimally small time (evolutionarily speaking) I can produce a population, most of which, is tolerant of that insectidice.

there is a difference between adaptation via resistance/tolerance and outright evolution which supposedly manifests new and not yet existing genetic data... adaptation is merely the individual and it's descendents honing and amplifying existing traits while allowing other un-needed ones to become latant or disappear completely. There is no such thing as upward or positive mutation... mutation always results in the destruction of DNA data not the creation of entirely new traits...

ChristianKirk:

I know a lot of people try to find compatibility between Christianity and science. As a former very active Christian and church leader, I know the struggle. But as a scientist as well, I cannot find any compatibility.

Without the Bible as an authoritative source, what is the basis of your beliefs? Please do not respond with "faith" as so many do. Faith is just another way of saying "I am going to believe this although there is no evidence for why I should."

I'm not dissing you. I'm sure many people are attemtping to reconcile these matters.

"There is no such thing as upward or positive mutation... mutation always results in the destruction of DNA data not the creation of entirely new traits..."
---------------------------------------
That is ridiculous.

@ Kirk

? an exact timeline in creation? where do you see that?... You yourself sound like a literalist... I could easily make the same counter-claim that while you wish to have latitude for incorrect interpretation regarding some points... you wish to be rigid on one that you cannot back up... One who reads what is essentially a spiritual book from a stictly physical perspective does not see that spirit always preceeds physical manifestation... If one believes in God and reads the Bible with discernment (not the same as maleable personal interpretation) then everything becomes quite clear. The spirit was created before the body was formed... the Hebrew meanings of the original verbs is further proof of this...

@ Bugg

What is ridiculous is believing that the intricacy inherent to the complex machinery that comprises a cell could come into existence on it's own...

@Bugg: Well, of course the bible is an authorative source. For example when Jesus was struggling with pharisees because he and his friends were working on the field on sabbath day - Jesus said that people were not made for sabbath but sabbath was made for people (Marcus 2,23-27). This sentence is fundamentally important on reading laws and rules inside the bible.
In that matter I see the bible as an authorative source. For me the bible is no dead book filled up with outdated laws, rules and restrictions. For me, the bible is also no scientific book. There is no right to press god inside one's own kind of reading the bible. God is more, and the bible is telling that to everyone, even in the two different creation stories - there is a reason why they dissent each other. It is like "Hey reader! You are not reading a scientific magazine!"

Evolution is unguided. We can do a better job.

@Bubby: You wrote:
"If one believes in God and reads the Bible with discernment (not the same as maleable personal interpretation) then everything becomes quite clear."

Well, that is rediculous. I could say exactly the same to you... but I won't do that because I am not in the mood of abusing the spirit and the bible for my own rhetorical games. I believe you feel under pressure at the moment and therefore you didn't really want to exalt yourself. So we better forget about that.
Well, I have to leave anyways... have a good night.

CaptainKirk:

We diagree. But you make your points well.

Bugg

It is true that a literal interpretation of the Bible is incompatible with science, but that is just for fundamentalists. There are many people who can still have faith in God without having to ignore the world around them.

It seems to me that athiests are the least imaginative people on the planet, and to be a good scientist you have to think creatively, imaginatively. For example, the big proton basher in Switzerland. One of their claims is that they might discover other dimensions. I don't actually think they believe that, I suspect it sounds good for marketing reasons but maybe I'm wrong about that. However, it did get me to thinking: what do they MEAN when they say "other dimensions"? We know what 2 dimensional is. And we know that 3 dimensional is far better than 2 dimensional. So what is 4-D or 5D or 6D? 18D? What if there ARE other dimensions that we can't see with our vision or hear with our hearing? We know that birds and bugs and animals seem to be able to perceive things that we can't: what is it that they see? or hear? How can athiests be so cotton pickin' sure there is no God, when over 50% of the people in the US say they've had assistance from angels, and they have no doubt about that? Who's the bloke that says there's not a shred of evidence there is a God? That is definitely LIMITED thinking, and in fact, it's TUNED OUT thinking, in my opinion. Refusal to consider all alternatives. Possibly missing what's totally obvious because of wanting so badly to keep God OUT of the equation. Athiests are so adamant, so quick to say that God is impossible. Too quick, if you ask me. It's not even logical. They trust the severe limitations and errors of science rather than consider ALL possibilities that are before us. I think the only TRUE objective scientist also could and should consider God as a potential part of the equation. Since science does not yet understand what makes up LIFE, what it is and where LIFE comes from, I don't think it's yet time to rule out God. Personally, I think LIFE comes from the dimension where God is. I think that God's dimension surrounds us and observes us. I think MOST people acknowledge how near it is, and wonder about it. I think MOST people have even seen glimpses of that dimension and have experienced helpful intervention from it. This isn't New Age garbage that I'm talking about, it's in the Bible. And I don't think that any truly honest scientist who is searching for real honest answers will have any conflict with the Bible. Because the Bible doesn't SPELL OUT how God did all this, it only says that God definitely had a hand in it. The book of Genesis holds CLUES, not answers! Some scientists believe that all matter may essentially be made up of SOUND. That makes me laugh because the Bible says, "God said, "Let there be Light, and there was light." So God made all these things with words alone. Sound. John 1:1 says that, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were made by Him..." So, that would be very amusing if the proton smashers discover that SOUND is the essence of all things.

You people have a serious misunderstanding of the time scale of evolutionary processes! The five skeletons at the head of this article cover roughly 5 million years of the evolution of primates. The so-called "comforts" of Western Civilization have only been around for a century or two at the most.

This is not to say that we do not change over time (which is the definition of evolution). Anybody who has checked out a collection of suits of armor from 500 years ago will clearly note that very few modern men are small enough to fit inside of those suits of armor. But is that just changes in nutrition? Or is that evolution? Or is nutritional change one of the drivers of evolution (cause and effect style)?

The so-called "common ancestor" of all humans alive today is back somewhere around 250,000 to 500,000 years ago. In other words, humans as a distinct species have only existed for about 500,000 years worth of the about 5 million years worth of primate evolution illustrated at the head of this article. We won't be able to say with any clarity that there has been a change in evolutionary forces affecting humanity until we have a period of at least several 10s of thousands of years of records available to us for study.

It is frankly quite likely that humanity will self-destruct within the next 500 years (or less), either through nuclear war, pandemic disease, climate catastrophe, or some other disaster. It is a virtual certainty that Western Civilization, which was founded in roughly 800 CE by the Emperor Charlemagne, will cease to exist as a viable cultural construct long before another 500 years goes by.

Oswald Spengler wrote his book "The Decline of the West" almost a century ago. In that time, The West has continued to decline, largely along the lines predicted by Spengler. Civilizations exist for far too short of a period of time to affect something as long-range as "evolution." The data just isn't there to make that kind of an argument.

Does anyone know as of yet the challanges of today on the ecomomy? What'S is the fix on that as of yet?

The problem I have with their theories about mankind: they've never found even one of those skeletons in that progressive lineup. We have lots and lots of skeletons of dinosaurs, but early man isn't showing up anywhere. It's mostly all lizards: very big ones. Where is everybody else: Evolution of all and any of the rest of the living species? Just a buncha huge lizards and the wooly mammoths. Adding millions of years to the puzzle still doesn't fill in any of the gaps. Actually, we could say, WHAT GAPS? There's nobody in the queue at all. If Evolution is a fact, I would think there would be evidence and proof galore, but it's simply not there. The lineup of little Monkey-Men doesn't exist. And we can't fi