The theory of evolution by cumulative natural selection is the only theory we know of that is in principle capable of explaining the existence of organized complexity.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I'm interested in complexity, in the mathematical sense, as well as the idiomatic sense. The idea of emergence - that it's possible for complex patterns to arise out of many simple interactions - is fascinating.
The proof of evolution lies in those adaptations that arise from improbable foundations.
The study of evolution is an evolution in itself.
Evolution is a process of constant branching and expansion.
The theory of evolution, like the theory of gravity, is a scientific fact.
The theory of evolution is totally inadequate to explain the origin and manifestation of the inorganic world.
We are glorious accidents of an unpredictable process with no drive to complexity, not the expected results of evolutionary principles that yearn to produce a creature capable of understanding the mode of its own necessary construction.
I have been interested in phenomena involving complexity, diversity and evolution since I was a young boy.
The real problem with natural selection is that it makes no intuitive sense. It is like quantum physics; we may intellectually grasp it, but it will never feel right to us.
There are good reasons why natural selection has become widely accepted as an explanation of evolutionary development. When applied to mammals and other large animals, it fits perfectly. But we cannot assume that all evolutionary steps arise from selection, particularly when looking at smaller animals.
No opposing quotes found.