What I am advocating is to put aside prejudice (rife in this forum) and with fresh eyes look to Nature to understand evolution.
Nature develops life through identifiable systems and processes but we choose to explain the evolution of life as the result of arbitrary cosmic events and chromosomal abnormalities. But this is not how Nature works - look at how a plant grows, how a baby gestates, how a butterfly forms - in each case the development of life is part of a system with transformative stages - just like our fossil record. Does this not make you curious?
Hi Vanessa, I have read your posts and, im my opinion, they are intelligent, cognent not encumbered by the ideological assumptions often made by the conventional evolutionary determinists. While there are random adapative changes resulting from natural selection, this does not explain the whole theory of evolution.
I recommend you read James A. Shapiro's "Evolution, a view from the 21st century". Shapiro is a professor of Microbiology at the University of Chicago. His book is a summary of the papers he has written in the past and most of those papers can be accesed from his web site at the Univ of Chicago.
You appear to have composed your post by taking an introduction to evolution, cutting it into separate words with scissors, and then drawing them blindfold out of a hat. The consequence is that while the words may sound very science-y, the sentences themselves are meaningless.
I was not trying to give a definitive definition of evolution. I think Vanessa got my meaning. Sorry my post went over your head.
When we're talking about academic stuff like evolution, mutation, natural selection, etc., often times people who are not well equipped in these areas can't tell the difference between confidence from years and years of education and experience and ego from studying the bible and faith in god.
I agree with you and I hope you will try and discern the differences you are talking about, and I hope you will try to become well equipped in these areas.