What is missing from the theory of evolution

Again, you just described evolution that has been directed by traits in us that aid in our survival. These traits are now instinctual reactions inherent in us from birth but learned from those experiences which eliminated other people as we survived and evolved beyond their extinctions.The Instinct to Survive is the basis of our direction, and the path is the Almighty Reality that forever unfolds into the future.
As conscious man, Modern Homo sapiens has been directed by the collection of information and experiences which have formed a model of the external world we exist within.This model in our mind is one that corresponds with the Reality we encounter from birth.
The Model is what we can call Truth.
Truth is the Unconscious reservoir holding the memories from an experiential collection of insights and understandings about ourselves and our relationship with the other entity, this almighty Reality to which we must bow before.Truth is the Holy Spirit, the light of the world.
Truth is an entity inside us, already existing.We, who will acknowledge it as lord and the light into Reality, are capable of a personal relationship with this Truth.
Truth is our Christ and savior.

Our experience as a species has been to hold Truth invalid time and again.
We love the lies which agree with our heart so full of Feelings.The Feelings we have drive us blindly to ignore Reality, and the very Facts-of-Life which are the very beacons by which we could construct a model of the Truth.We saw the Age of Reason use Feelings as the rule by which to define Reality, assuming that what we thought or could think, was good enough argument that Nature ought abide and reveal itself as being so.Then, as part of the Age of Enlightenment, we discovered the Scientific Method.That method of revealing the Reality before us all was so devised as to produce the exact same empirical evidences for all men who would set up the exact same conditions as an experiment which illustrated a Fact of this Reality.By such means, by now, man has constructed a whole edifice of Truth using these planks as the building blocks.We now KNOW that a singular Reality exists for all men in spite of their diversity of a dozen or so perceptions of that reality which differ from one another to some degree.
We now realize that Truth is tangible and concrete, even mathematically analogous to our thinking.But we know more, that Truth is our personal savior in every way and the lies and fantasy worlds are for the insane..
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.God is all there is, ie; Reality itself... the whole external existence beyond our mind is the almighty God to which all life must bow: ...Truth inside our head, is the Holy Spirit, the image of God, is present inside our mind when our thinking correctly images the TRUTH, or the picture of Reality inside our mind.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

I am going along with Carl Jung and Freud on this, though I am sure you have a strong personal following yourself and you people will perfer to disagree with those two.Nevertheless,...Carl Jung:The Collective Unconscious is a storehouse of all the experiences of humankind, transmitted (genetically encoded, we now realize today), to each individual.
As the repository for all past experiences, it includes even our pre-human animal ancestry.
(Assumably through the genetic processes, though unknown to Freud and Jung at the time.)It becomes the primary base of a person's psyche, directing and influencing behavior.
It is the deepest and most inaccessible level of the psyche.Jung believed that a person accumulates and files all of his past experiences, so does humankind, collectively.Jung was supported by Freud in that Freud predicted our eventual discovery of what he called "Phylogenetic Memory."
Jung said, "the form of the world into which a person is born is already inborn in him, as a virtual image." (Jung, 1953, pg 188).

1) "The thing you need to know about" Experiment Psychology is that it is empirical and always starts with what is called a Hypothesis.A Hypothesis is an idea which occurs to a scientist because it seems to answer a number of unexplained observations.
It was once called Oscam's Razor, before the Age of Enlightenment.These Hypotheses ARE NOT, "in general... based on empirical evidence."The next step in the scientific Method when applied to Experimental Psychology, or any other field of scientific inquiry, is to find exactly that, some empirical evidence that the idea is credible.2) This evidence has been well developed by one of the most respect Physicists and researches who recently turned his interest to the subject of the Unconscious mind.Leonard Mlodinow wrote an extreemely interesting and valuable book explaining his observations and the evidence to which i refer:Subliminal: How Your Unconscious Mind Rules Your Behavior
Publication Date: April 24, 2012The whole discussion we have here gets turned upside down when we realize that we have a personal friend we have been unconscious to, one which actually "rules us."It starts to dawn on the reader that we are the visitor accompanying an ancient of ancient being locked inside our mind who has been here before for millennia after millennia.
This friend is that Third Eye so often represented in art and philosophical discussions."He" is the real "us" in the sense that our initial clean slate of the Conscious mind has merely been experiencing life as if a new born babe.Leonard Mlodinow, the best-selling author of The Drunkard’s Walk and coauthor of The Grand Design (with Stephen Hawking), gives us a startling and eye-opening examination of how the unconscious mind shapes our experience of the world and how, for instance, we often misperceive our relationships with family, friends, and business associates, misunderstand the reasons for our investment decisions, and misremember important events.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.

1) I guess if the hypothesis is discarded because no empirical evidence can be found to support it, you would de facto have a good argument against, in regard to thereafter being science.2) But I was referring to the first step in what is calld The Scientific Method.The investigation of some observable phenomenon or anotber always begins with an idea, one that my have been brain stromed along with a number of others.When we look back at accepted sciences, we always find this first step present, followed by the experiment that thereafter follow and support what was initially a mere suggestion.Do we agree on this or will you google scientific method and check me out?3) You need to read the book I recommended above.
There has been a great deal of work done especially using MRI technigues to study thinking by "seeing" what lights up inside the brain.excerpt:Your preference in politicians, the amount you tip your waiterall judgments and perceptions reflect the workings of our mind on two levels: the conscious, of which we are aware, and the unconscious, which is hidden from us.The latter has long been the subject of speculation, but over the past two decades researchers have developed remarkable new tools for probing the hidden, or subliminal, workings of the mind. [/B]The result of this explosion of research is a new science of the unconscious and a sea change in our understanding of how the subliminal mind affects the way we live.

Hi Mr RAZD,I would add more to the concept of the Unconscious mind as an active agent in our decision making process which sort of transcends the Ages, and unknown to us, "Rules Your Behavior" as a species.I would suggest that we consider the Collective Unconscious mind which unlike our own Unconscious mind, is god-like and technically immortal since the Collective Unconscious does NOT die, but remains with the Living where it had been before our birth and will continue to exist after our death.This reminds me of the amazement expressed by Adam Smith when he marveled at what he called The Invisible Hand of Economics, wherein prices adjust, almost instantaneously, in regard to Supply and Demand without any evidence that communications had been involved at all.I would add the hypothesis that the power of the Collective Unconscious mind extends to one person's Unconscious communicating with an others, as if they were whales talking through Oceans by a communications medium still unknown to us.This of course would explain clairvoyance and such extra sensory phenomenon that has been wonder at and investigated in every generation through out History.There has been evidence that this is possible stemming out of encephalographic research about brain waves. They have been able to record brain activity without actually making conductors contact on the skull.
There are electromagnetic waves emitted when we think.
These waves will not disappear once they have been produced, but will travel as does the light from a source after the source has been turned off.It would seem possible for resonance to occur when large numbers of people are on the same page of thought, for instance.This makes me think about the religious concept of power in prayers.

1) With all due respect, Mr RADZ, you are agreeing with me here in that such Hypothesis IS as I said, Science, de facto it is part of the Scientific Method to which I referred.As a hypothesis, in may await some experimental proof in order to move ahead in accord with that Scientific Method, but, nevertheless, it is still within the realm of th discipline as I had stated.i.e.; you now correct yourself here.
Right?2) Your second point, which is your mere opinion, one of your own making, states that: "Key here, imho, is that it is not a scientific theory until these four steps have been done, and the hypothesis proves useful in predicting new knowledge. Not having done any experiments that test the falsifiability of the hypothesis means it is an untested or untestable hypothesis. An untestable hypothesis (as we have here) means it cannot be scientific hypothesis that generates predictions."This of course would deny the credit to Democritus for having hypothesized the Atomism we took so long to discover evidence in its support as an Atomic Theory.I am apparently more liberal than you, holding that ideas that seem to have merit continue to be science Hypothesis however slow the discipline may prove to be in substantiating them further.3) I do not disagree because it is not important beyond supporting my initial claim, that a Hypothesis is without evidence in every case until such evidence makes the idea an acceptable Theory.My remarks had been in rebuttal to criticism of the hypotheses of Freud and Jung, and the attempt to denigrate those ideas simply because they were, then unsupported by enough evidence to transform those ideas in a Theory.\[B\]My responses here are all directed at those foolish denigrating comments made about those first early steps into modern Psychology.
Those posters fail to ridicule and dismiss those ideas now better understood and supported by harder evidence.Re: "Again, we see that the scientific theory is a tested hypothesis that produces consistent positive results, and again we see that the hypothesis rests on cases of objective empirical evidence where the derived hypothesis is known to be true.

​

Do you agree with this?
Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.Edited by kofh2u, : No reason given.