It's Ironic that "Darwinistic evolution" as it is seen now, is missing out on the consciousness factor because the 'random-adaptation' model is only a fraction of what Darwin proposed. He would be 'kicking in his grave' if he was to witness a segmented narrow view of this 'random mutation' linear perspective some people would interpret, and cherry-pick in his name.
I believe when you consider the 'consciousness factors' such as perception, desire, and love's effect on epigenetics and its coherent and purposeful DNA changes it is even 'scientifically' obvious there is more to it than 'non-intelligent randomness'! Looking at the radical ability of species to adapt extremely quickly (faster than the mainstream model allows) such as flying squirrels' quick wing development and the appearance of new species on fossil record relatively instantaneously. This does not even consider the morphogenetic field factors, entheogenic plant-consciousness neuro-symbioses (Stoned Ape Theory), 'hundredth monkey principle', Biophoton Communication, and genetically encoded heliophoton theory. So the polarization b&w of people's opinions on "Darwinistic evolution" vs "Creationism" is somewhat disturbing and un-creative.
.
.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25012712
Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!