"Prehistoric civilization" is confirmed
Is Darwin's theory really being questioned?
When it comes to Darwin's "Theory of Evolution", I believe we are all familiar with the core concept of "natural selection and survival of the fittest", and in real life, we all have a deep understanding of the natural law of "the weak are stronger than the strong". "After more than a hundred years of popularization, the "theory of evolution" founded by the British naturalist Darwin has not only penetrated the hearts of people but also influenced the development of the times.
But the questioning of "evolution" has never stopped, since the very beginning of "evolution", and there are still many researchers trying to disprove it by all means. With the progress of science and technology, many "prehistoric civilization" remains have been found, and many scholars use this as the basis to find the "evolutionary theory" of the loopholes and put forward many conjectures and hypotheses.
I. Darwin and the "theory of evolution"
In December 1831, Charles Robert Darwin, a recent graduate of Cambridge University, embarked on a five-year voyage around the world aboard the British Navy ship HMS Beagle on the recommendation of his teacher. It was something Darwin did not realize at the time.
"From England, the Beagle sailed across the Indian Ocean to South America, across the Pacific Ocean to Oceania, and from South Africa across the Atlantic Ocean around the Cape of Good Hope, Darwin saw countless rare plants and animals, observed their traits and habits, and began to suspect that the world was not created by God in a week, but was the result of the long-term evolution of nature. He began to suspect that the world had not been created by God in a week, but was the result of a long evolutionary process in nature.
After twenty years of compiling data and careful consideration, the book "On the Origin of Species" was published in 1859, and the first edition of 1,250 copies was sold out on the same day. Darwin spent the rest of his life enriching and perfecting his theoretical achievements, unconcerned with fame and fortune, and creatively proposing many valuable academic insights, but it was "On the Origin of Species" and "Evolution" that established his status. "The theory of evolution".
The publication of Origin of Species marked the birth of the theory of evolution. The so-called "evolution" mainly refers to the interaction between organisms and the environment, the evolution of living things is not the whims of God, but the result of continuous adaptation to the natural environment, under the influence of different environments, organisms evolved different traits, can not adapt to environmental changes in the creatures to extinction.
"Evolution has had a profound impact on human society, not only in the field of biology, but also in a variety of disciplines, resulting in new research ideas, some of which are correct and some of which are wrong, but which do not dissolve the evolutionary significance of evolution itself. Engels, the "second violinist", listed evolution as one of the three major discoveries of natural science in the 19th century.
In 1882, amid countless praises and doubts, Darwin died peacefully at home at the age of 73, and the British people buried him in Westminster Abbey, next to Newton, the greatest scientific master in human history.
The difficult development of "evolution"
Since the birth of the theory of evolution, there have been many voices of doubt, mainly from religious people at first. The reason is not difficult to understand: the belief in God has been around for thousands of years, and no one does not believe in it.
"The most famous event was the debate at the Oxford University Museum on June 30, 1860, in which the opponents and supporters of evolution fought verbally against each other. -Dr. Thomas Henry Huxley, a member of the Royal Society, and standing opposite him was the famous Bishop of Oxford, Samuel Wilberforce, a representative of the Church.
Speaking of the Royal Society, this was also an epoch-making scientist who created several scientific cities that transcended the times. As a die-hard fan of Darwin, Huxley did not fully agree with Darwin's naturalistic views, preferring the early materialistic position, and the famous philosophical concept of "agnosticism" was Huxley's opinion, which shows his outstanding talent.
Huxley's most remarkable advance at the time was his exploration of the origins of man, which was so incredible to the people of his time that Bishop Wilberforce mocked it by saying that Huxley's ancestors were probably monkeys, yet he was a descendant of Jesus. Huxley bluntly denied this: he would rather admit to being a descendant of monkeys than believe that he was a descendant of liars.
Huxley spoke from the standpoint of truthfulness, and his great spirit filled the heaven and earth, winning the strong support of the people, directly making Wilberforce uncomfortable, so he made small moves from behind, causing Huxley's later years to be more or less depressed.
In 1989, when the Manchu dynasty opened its eyes to the world, the famous scholar Yan Fu translated Huxley's work and named it "The Theory of Heavenly Evolution", which became a classic of its time and inspired the earliest progressive thinking of the Chinese nation, and the famous phrase "the survival of the fittest" became a benchmark case in the Chinese translation field. The famous phrase "survival of the fittest" has also become a benchmark case in Chinese translation science, and is deeply rooted in the true meaning of "Xin Da Ya" advocated by Yan Fu.
The Hundred Schools of Thought in the New Era
With the continuous progress of human society, the once unparalleled religion gradually declined, and the belief in science began to become popular. During this period, the questioning of "evolution" still existed, and the voices came from a variety of sources, from rigorous scientific experts to claptrap folk magicians, to illiterate people who spoke out of shame, and of course, not least from the relics of the religious field.
The main argument against "evolution" is the claim that the so-called "evolution" is only a conjectural hypothesis of Darwin, and the existing evidence is not enough to prove that "evolution" is correct. There are not only many loopholes in the theory of evolution itself, but also various discoveries in the field of archaeology are constantly impacting the idea of evolution, and even completely denying and overthrowing the theory of evolution. The "theory of evolution" has many loopholes.
Many scientific researchers claim that the so-called "prehistoric civilization" existed before the emergence of mankind, which means that once creatures did not need to evolve to create civilization, the so-called "evolution" is completely absurd. And there are scientists explained that if "evolution" is true, then there should still exist a monkey that is turning into a human, but there is not.
The "evolution" theory has been questioned from Darwin's time to the present, and it is becoming more and more scientific and systematic, although there is not enough evidence to completely deny the meaning of "evolution", the emergence of many questioning voices, constantly enriching the "evolution" theory Although there is not enough evidence to completely reject the meaning of "evolution", the emergence of many questionable voices are constantly enriching the connotation of "evolution" and opening up the frontiers of human thinking.
The 2018 Nobel Prize in Chemistry was awarded to scientists from the United States and the United Kingdom for their research on the "directed evolution of enzymes", which is strong evidence for the theory of evolution. In 2014, Pope Francis publicly expressed his support for the theory of evolution, arguing that God's creation of man is also a form of evolution.
Summary.
There are also many rigorous theories about the evolution of life other than "evolution", each with its value, but somehow people always try to prove that "evolution" is wrong, just like many people try to prove that "The theory of relativity is wrong, or many people try to prove Goldbach's Conjecture by themselves, but their motive may not be entirely the pursuit of truth.
As long as it is based on the relentless search for the truth and reasonable criticism of "evolution" based on rigorous factual arguments, it is a good thing for the progress of human wisdom even if it does not overthrow "evolution". The real contribution does not lie in overthrowing the achievements of previous generations, but in standing on the shoulders of giants to open up a world of its own.
Einstein's "theory of relativity" has opened up the sky of modern physics for mankind, compared to Newton's "classical physics", which is a bit rough and one-sided. In contrast, Newton's "classical physics" is a bit crude and one-sided, but it is never the case that "classical physics" is wrong, and the same is true for the "theory of relativity", which is itself a product of historical circumstances and is only the truth of an era.
A truly great future is always being created, and we need to follow the direction of prevention guided by our predecessors to the end.
About the Creator
Sukkning
Science will give mankind's greatest gift is？ Is to make the power of humans believe that truth。
From Sanctions to Sunsets: Russians Find Refuge on China’s Southern Shores
As fireworks lit up the South China Sea on New Year’s Eve, an unusual group of revelers gathered along the palm-lined beaches of Sanya, a tropical resort city on China’s Hainan Island. Champagne glasses clinked, Russian pop music played softly from beachfront cafés, and families posed for photos under lantern-lit skies. Just beyond the horizon, however, lay one of China’s most sensitive military assets — a nuclear submarine base. For thousands of Russians, Sanya has become more than a holiday destination. It is a refuge from sanctions, political tension, and the unspoken judgment they say follows them across much of the world. A Tropical Escape From a Cold Political Climate Since the imposition of sweeping Western sanctions following Russia’s war in Ukraine, international travel has become increasingly complicated for Russian citizens. Visa restrictions, flight bans, frozen bank cards, and social stigma have reshaped how — and where — Russians can travel. Many say they have grown tired of what they describe as “sideways looks” in Europe and parts of Southeast Asia — subtle signals that they are no longer welcome, regardless of personal political views. China, by contrast, has maintained diplomatic ties with Moscow and imposed no sanctions on Russian citizens. Sanya, often called “China’s Hawaii,” has emerged as one of the most attractive destinations. With direct flights from Russia, visa-friendly policies, warm weather, and luxury resorts priced far below European equivalents, the city offers something many Russians feel they have lost elsewhere: normalcy. Why Sanya? Sun, Safety, and Silent Acceptance For decades, Sanya has marketed itself as a paradise of white sand beaches, turquoise waters, and high-end resorts. What sets it apart today is not just its climate, but its political positioning. China’s stance of neutrality — or strategic ambiguity — on the Ukraine conflict has made destinations like Sanya appealing to Russians seeking to escape geopolitics altogether. Visitors report feeling largely invisible as Russians, treated simply as tourists rather than symbols of a global conflict. Local businesses have adapted quickly. Russian-language menus are common, hotel staff speak basic Russian phrases, and travel agencies cater specifically to long-stay visitors from Moscow, St. Petersburg, and Siberia. For many, Sanya represents a rare space where politics recede into the background. New Year’s Celebrations Beside Strategic Silence The symbolism of celebrating the New Year next to a Chinese nuclear submarine base is not lost on observers. Hainan Island hosts one of China’s most important naval facilities, home to submarines that form a key pillar of Beijing’s nuclear deterrence. The base is heavily guarded and officially invisible to tourists, yet its presence looms quietly over the region. That Russians are toasting champagne nearby highlights the strange intersections of modern geopolitics. While Western capitals isolate Moscow, China offers both strategic partnership at the state level and personal refuge at the civilian level. For Russian visitors, the proximity to military infrastructure feels incidental rather than alarming. Many say they feel safer in China than in destinations where political tensions are openly discussed. Economic Migration Disguised as Tourism Although many Russians arrive as tourists, a growing number stay for months at a time. Some work remotely, paid in roubles or cryptocurrency. Others have relocated small businesses, IT services, or online consulting operations to Asia-friendly time zones. Sanctions have restricted access to international banking, but China’s alternative financial systems — and the acceptance of cash and regional payment platforms — make daily life easier. Sanya’s relatively low cost of living compared to Moscow or European cities further sweetens the deal. For middle-class Russians, beachfront apartments and resort amenities are suddenly attainable. What looks like leisure tourism increasingly resembles soft economic migration. A City Caught Between Tourism and Strategy Sanya’s transformation into a haven for Russians also raises questions for China. On one hand, Russian tourists bring much-needed revenue to a region hit hard by pandemic-era travel restrictions. On the other, the city’s proximity to sensitive military installations means authorities monitor foreign presence carefully. So far, Beijing appears comfortable with the arrangement. Russian visitors are seen as politically aligned, economically beneficial, and unlikely to raise security concerns. This quiet acceptance reflects the broader China–Russia relationship: pragmatic, mutually beneficial, and grounded in shared opposition to Western dominance rather than deep cultural integration. Mixed Reactions From Locals and the World Local residents in Sanya largely view Russian tourists positively, seeing them as polite, family-oriented, and generous spenders. Unlike mass tourism from some regions, Russians tend to stay longer and integrate more smoothly into daily life. Internationally, reactions are more complex. Critics argue that destinations like Sanya enable Russians to sidestep the social consequences of their country’s actions. Supporters counter that punishing individuals for state policy only deepens global divisions. For the Russians on the beach, such debates feel distant. Many insist they did not choose the war, nor do they control their government’s decisions. A Glimpse Into a Fragmenting World The sight of Russians celebrating the New Year beside a Chinese nuclear submarine base captures a defining reality of the 21st century: the world is fragmenting into parallel systems. As Western sanctions reshape travel, finance, and social acceptance, alternative hubs are emerging — places where geopolitics bend rather than break everyday life. Sanya is one such place, where palm trees and military submarines coexist, and where global fault lines are felt more subtly than elsewhere. Final Thoughts For Russians seeking warmth — both literal and social — Sanya offers a temporary sanctuary. It is a place where sanctions fade into sunsets, and judgment gives way to quiet coexistence. Yet the beaches of Hainan also remind us that no escape is entirely apolitical. Even paradise sits in the shadow of power. As champagne corks pop and waves lap the shore, the New Year in Sanya reflects a world where refuge, strategy, and survival are increasingly intertwined.
By Muhammad Hassan6 days ago in Earth
Myanmar Junta Holds Second Phase of Election Widely Decried as a ‘Sham Exercise’
If you’ve been following Myanmar’s political turmoil, you probably heard the news: the military junta just held the second phase of its general election, and once again, critics are calling it a “sham exercise.” From the United Nations to human rights organizations, almost everyone outside the junta is dismissing this vote as a carefully orchestrated performance rather than a genuine democratic process. Let’s take a closer look at what happened, why it’s being condemned, and what this means for Myanmar’s future. A Military-Run Election in a Nation at War On 11 January 2026, voters in certain parts of Myanmar lined up at polling stations to cast their ballots in the second phase of the election. This phase covered roughly 100 townships across 12 states and regions, part of a three-phase plan that began in December 2025 and will conclude in late January. Sounds orderly enough—but here’s the catch: large areas of Myanmar are still controlled by armed opposition groups or trapped in active conflict zones. In many townships, voting didn’t even happen because it was too dangerous. For millions of citizens, the idea of participating in this election isn’t about choice—it’s about survival. So, while the junta presents this as a return to political normalcy, the reality is much messier. This vote is happening amid ongoing civil war, instability, and widespread human suffering. Who’s on the Ballot? And Who Isn’t One of the biggest issues with this election is who is allowed to run. Aung San Suu Kyi’s National League for Democracy (NLD)—the party that won a landslide in the 2020 election—is banned. Suu Kyi herself remains detained on politically motivated charges. Many smaller opposition parties have also been barred from participating. Rebel groups and youth movements have refused to take part, calling the vote illegitimate. This has left the military-backed Union Solidarity and Development Party (USDP) as the clear front-runner. In the first phase of voting in December, the USDP already secured nearly 90 of 102 contested seats, which is a strong indicator that the outcome of the overall election is practically predetermined. In short, this is less an election and more a political tool for the junta to cement power. The Junta’s Playbook For the military, these elections serve multiple purposes: Legitimacy: By holding elections, the junta hopes to claim that it has public support. Control: With opposition parties banned, the military ensures it dominates Parliament. International Image: They want the world to see a functioning democratic process—even if it’s staged. But the global community isn’t buying it. The United Nations, human rights organizations, and most Western governments have condemned the elections as neither free nor fair. Key issues include: Widespread political repression Absence of meaningful opposition Election laws that stifle dissent Unsafe conditions for voters UN Special Rapporteur Tom Andrews even warned that the elections “cannot and should not be recognized” internationally. Voices from the Ground: Fear, Frustration, and Exclusion For everyday citizens, voting is complicated. Many are intimidated or fear retribution if they don’t comply. Others live in conflict zones or have been displaced, making voting physically impossible. Ethnic groups and youth activists are particularly vocal about rejecting the elections. For them, the vote is a tool to marginalize minority communities and entrench military rule. Meanwhile, ordinary voters express mixed feelings—some participate out of hope for peace, others because they feel they have no choice. The reality? The election process is fragmented, forced, and disconnected from the lives of most Burmese citizens. International Reactions: Mostly Negative Around the world, reaction to Myanmar’s elections has been overwhelmingly critical. The UN, Western governments, and human rights organizations argue that the polls are designed to prop up an authoritarian regime, not reflect the will of the people. Civil society groups in Asia have also condemned the election, urging countries not to recognize the results. The junta’s international supporters, however—countries like China and Russia—may continue diplomatic engagement, making it harder to isolate the regime completely. The key takeaway? While the junta may claim legitimacy, global acceptance is far from guaranteed. Looking Ahead: What Happens Next? The final phase of voting is scheduled for 25 January 2026, and it’s expected to follow the same patterns: military dominance, restricted opposition, and contested legitimacy. If the junta consolidates power through this election, it will likely form a government that appears “elected” on paper but remains authoritarian in practice. Yet the ongoing civil war, international criticism, and domestic opposition suggest that Myanmar’s road to stability is still far away. For observers inside and outside the country, these elections are less about democracy and more about power. The military hopes to create a façade of legitimacy, but the reality on the ground tells a very different story: one of fear, division, and a population yearning for genuine representation.This blog version is more readable, flows naturally, and keeps the key facts intact, while meeting Vocal Media’s style of a narrative, accessible, and conversational article. If you want, I can also add a sidebar timeline showing all three phases of Myanmar’s 2025–26 elections to make it extra engaging for readers. It would fit perfectly for a blog format. Do you want me to do that? Conclusion Myanmar’s second-phase election may look like a step toward democracy on paper, but in reality, it’s a highly controlled, military-managed process with limited participation and credibility. With opposition voices silenced, ongoing conflict, and millions of citizens excluded, the so-called vote is widely regarded as a sham exercise. For the people of Myanmar, the future remains uncertain. While the junta may claim victory, the country’s deep political, social, and ethnic fractures mean that true democracy and stability are still a long way off. This election is a reminder that sometimes, the act of voting alone doesn’t equal democracy—especially when freedom, fairness, and choice are nowhere to be found.
By Muhammad Hassan3 days ago in Earth
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.