acadian
You seem to have a misconception about how change occurs.
The Herring Gull is native to Eastern North American and Western European shorelines. In Europe there is another species, the Lesser Black-backed Gull. It doesn't interbreed with Herring Gulls. As you travel East along the Arctic shorelines, slowly the LBB Gull changes, it gets lighter in colouration. Now take one of these from any point and it will breed if released into another population say 1,000 miles away. But by the time this small, tiny change in local population's characteristics gets all the way back round to Europe, it (by this point the Herring Gull) is so different it does not interbreed with the LBB Gull, the species it descended from.
Replace miles with years, and maybe you can see better how it works. There are no half dog, half goats. No one said there were. But using both similarities in the bones, fossil records and genetic comparison we can see that once there was a species that rather changing into another ONE changed into two (it's happened loads), and that the two seperate gene pools of dogs and goats originated from the gene pool of a common ancestor. Little, tiny changes.
You also are looking at it like current species are destinations. They are not. If the enironment changes, so will they. Your descendent in 1,000,000 years could maybe ask the same question, not seeing you as a 'half whatever he is, half homo erectus, yet we would be the mid-point between the two even if we didn't fit your descendent's misconception about what a half/half actually looks like.
Like tetra points out, we are fully evolved from our point of view, and so is any strain of bacteria. T Rex was fully evolved when it was around. Then things changed and it evolved some more (as some had a characteristic which meant they had more babies survive, so those charates prevalied) so whatever it became (if it became anything else) was then fully evolved for the new situation.
skyking
Please read the definition of the word 'theory' and reconsider what you have written. We're not being mean.
How can he make the claim the person has deceived his mind.
Because there is no proof of anything else having caused the experience, because there are viable physiological and psychological explanations for such experiences, and because this means that the most likely explanation is (no evidence vs. viable explanations) the person's mind has been deceived.
Scientific method old boy. You don't have to like it or play by its rules, but as every single technological device or medical treatment you use was made by that method, mores the pity. It works. And if you don't 'play by its rules', don't expect 'us' to give credit as 'we' accept the scientific method's validity.
Think; Dawkins has said if evolution was disproved he'd not believe in it. That is how science works. A good theory will displace worse theories, even if those who've used the old theories are rather attached to them.
Why do you think scientic books get re-written!? Why scientific knowledge gets out-of-date unless refreshed!?
And you say such people are CLOSED minded? How in god's sweet name do you figure that out?
LOADS of stuff 'we' believed about the paranormal, about the Bible, about the Qu'ran, choose you the goat-herd blog of your liking, is now known to be indisputably WRONG.
Do people stop beleiving in those books, or in the same sort of rubbish as before? No. Because they don't use the scientific method.
Good scientists (of their day) used to believe in phlygoston and the ether. As soon as better theories came up, the old ones lost all credibility very rapidly.
Science will totally re-draw its paradigms if someone comes up with evidence to require it. Religion and belief in the paranormal BY THEIR VERY NATURE will not totally re-draw their paradigms even if the evidence requires it.
Believe what you like.
