Is Darwinian Evolution correct if it is to exclude emotion from the purview of causation?

Which considerations, in your opinion, are missing in the Theory of Evolution propounded by Darwin and Wallace (though it provides radical and appropriate explanation for the consequences in the lineage of organism)?
(more detailed discussion : http://www.bhanupadmo.com)

2011-09-01T10:40:48Z

The link has failed/ no idea why/ bhanupadmo.com may be arrived through google search/ sorry

2011-09-01T10:56:12Z

http://www.bhanupadmo.com This link works not the above one

2011-09-01T11:00:12Z

Paul : Yes, That is the place to carry on the discussion to further details without any time constrain. Thanks for solving the link problem.

2011-09-01T11:38:48Z

PJ : The question invokes your sovereign intelligence for independent thinking in order to solve what the predecessors might have failed at.
PP : Clever, but how clever? At par with you or not? I mean replicators within you. Studies? Which studies? About consequential evolution or causal evolution?
Benjamin : struggle for recovery of emotion! Hardship does look non-emotive.

2011-09-01T23:48:37Z

(Attn all : The above link (site) has been cleared for 'anonymous comments' to continue discussions.)
Ratz : So how do we go about to establish the emotion-evolution connectivity?

Raatz2011-09-01T14:35:35Z

Favorite Answer

Evolution in NO way excludes emotions.

Anonymous2011-09-01T17:14:16Z

The Study of Genetics in the 1980's finally proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that evolution is real.

And the most fundamental thing that evolution is working with is the RNA molecule in plants, and the DNA molecule in animals.

Humans, plants, and all of life are simply those clever little replicator molecules "way" of keeping themselves replicating.

You are a giant living bag of protoplasm whose main function for existence is to protect those replicating molecules all locked up safe in every single one of your body's cells, and to reproduce for the purpose of continuing that replication process long into the future.

?2011-09-01T16:49:52Z

Your question is non-sequitur.

It doesn't include emotion because no scientific evidence indicates that emotion has anything to do with how organisms change from generation to generation.

Your link doesn't work.

"The link has failed/ no idea why/"

I see why. It included your closing paren in the link. I visited the link. It just restates the question.

?2011-09-01T17:19:20Z

Phrases like 'the purview of causation' almost seem to preclude the possibility of emotion anyway.