Why do people think that Evolution is just a theory?, it's a fact.?

Question

The biological definition of evolution is "a change in allele frequencies over time." An undisputable definition.

As for transitional fossils, there are abundant transitional fossils of both the chain of genera type and the species-to-species transition type. There are documented speciations that cross genus lines and family lines in publications like; “The Phylogeny and Classification of the Tetrapods” Benton, M.J. 1988., or “Hooking Leviathon by its past.” Natural History, Gould, S.J. 1994. etc.

Evidence to support evolution, includes a wide range of observations throughout the fields of animal behavior, anatomy, genetics, ecology, paleontology, etc. To challenge evolution, you must challenge the evidence, not provide more dogma. The evidence must be proven wrong or irrelevant or that the evidence better fits another theory.

ICR/AIG has been trying for 25 years to come up with credible evidence to support creationism and they can't.

Why is "God did it" an alternate theory?

Hey wiseguy...

Kent Hovind has extremely questionable credentials and a not so hidden religious agenda. Hovind claims a masters degree and a doctorate in education from Patriot University in Colorado, which is accredited only by the American Accrediting Association of Theological Institutions, who provides diplomas for a $100 charge. They continue to offer correspondence courses for cash for credit. The school's catalog contains no listing of the school's faculty or their credentials.

Hovind has gone, in the course of presenting his offer, from promising money to anyone who can present any scientific evidence for evolution; to demanding scientific evidence of a “misrepresentation” of evolution covering numerous branches of science; to demanding proof beyond a reasonable doubt that ultimately, a supreme being does not exist.

It's a sham, and even ICR/AIG thinks he's a looney.

Hovind's claim is deeply deceptive, and you really cheapen your argument by quoting him.

Please people, stop confusing ABIOGENESIS with EVOLUTION.

Micro and macro evolution have nothing to do with how the universe started, or how the first cell appeared on the planet, Evolution only explains how multi-celled organisms came from single celled ones, and so on.

Stop making up your own definitions of evolution.

I've read your bible from cover to cover numerous times, could you at least open a science book that was printed in the 20th century, and do some reading rather than relying on someone's with a religious agenda's interpretation of the word "evolution"?

Whether you take your blind faith to the grave or not, make sure you know the real story, not just what someone told you.

A little reading outside the bible, may make your life on this planet a little more enjoyable.

Please people, stop confusing ABIOGENESIS with EVOLUTION.

Micro and macro evolution have nothing to do with how the universe started, or how the first cell appeared on the planet, Evolution only explains how multi-celled organisms came from single celled ones, and so on.

Stop making up your own definitions of evolution.

I've read your bible from cover to cover numerous times, could you at least open a science book that was printed in the 20th century, and do some reading rather than relying on someone's with a religious agenda's interpretation of the word "evolution"?

Whether you take your blind faith to the grave or not, make sure you know the real story, not just what someone told you.

A little reading outside the bible, may make your life on this planet a little more enjoyable.

Hey brother Michael, did you bother to read any of the info you posted?

IT'S ALL DATED BEFORE THE EVIDENCE I GAVE YOU, LOOK AT THE YEARS OF YOUR 'EVIDENCE' AND LOOK AT MINE!

Again, the ICR/AIG folks have tried for years to prove it wrong and cannot. All their/YOUR evidence is outdated by years.

Try again.

Hey Brother Michael again,

Yes, the fossil record is slightly erratic, but it's because erosion and the rarity of conditions favorable to fossilization. Also, transitions may occur in a small area, in a small population, and/or in a relatively short amount of time; when these conditions hold, the chances of finding transitional fossils goes down. However, there are still many instances where excellent sequences of transitional fossils exist. Some great examples are the transitions from from land animal to early whale, reptile to mammal, and from early ape to human.

Answer 1

Most people who disagree with evolution don't understand it correctly, and they go further as to not understand science itself.

A scientific theory is a tested and supported work in progress... it has enough evidence to be considered factual. People who use the theory excuse are confusing theory with hypothesis... they think because something is called a "theory" it means it's something someone just made up.

I've heard so many bogus arguments against evolution that just backs up the idea that people don't understand it... The funniest is the one where they say "evolution isn't real because I've never seen a hippo give birth to an elephant." Ignorance is a powerful thing... and complacency runs rampant.

Answer 2

Some of the answers you are getting represent what we are up against.
The first and biggest misunderstanding is that a lot of people don't realize that evolution is considered an observable fact. Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection is an attempt to explain this fact in conjunction with the enormous speciation on this planet, which is also an observable fact. The questions that Darwin had were along the lines of: Why can I change a mutt into a spaniel? Why can a finch change its physical structure to adapt to its environment? And so on.
Of course there is no credible scientific challenge to Darwinian Theory as an explanation for the diversity and complexity of life on earth. So what?
The theory says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of God. People might argue about what sort of supreme being would work his will through such a seemingly haphazard arrangement, but that is not the same as denying that God exists in the first place.
There is this notion that events or conditions we experience have a cause, possibly a supernatural cause.
Human reasoning is plagued with logical problems that include over dependence on authority, overemphasis on coincidence, distortion of the evidence, circular reasoning, use of anecdotes, ignorance of science and failures of logic. Whatever these traits may say about acceptance of religion, they have a lot to do with public misunderstanding of science.

Answer 3

Like just about everything we know in science, evolution is a theory. However, it's not "just a theory." Think about chemistry. We have atomic theory, but the idea that matter is made from atoms is still a theory, not a fact. This means that atomic theory is so credible that it can be used to predict the outcomes of experiments. The same applies for evolution, which helps us predict how germs evolve. Flu vaccines, for example are based on new, evolved versions of the same pathogen. This leads to another theory: germ theory. We know germs cause diseases. We've seen them through microscopes. We even know how they transmit diseases, but germ theory is still a theory. Evolution is a theory, but calling it "just a theory" is a terrible understatement.

DEFINITIONS READERS MUST KNOW REGARDING SECOND PARAGRAPH

Microevolution - Evolution resulting from a succession of relatively small genetic variations that often cause the formation of new subspecies.

Macroevolution - Large-scale evolution occurring over geologic time that results in the formation of new taxonomic groups.

As for the definition of evolution you gave, it is accurate, but it fails to distinguish between microevolution and macroevolution. Many creationists have no problem with the concept of microevolution, but the idea of macroevolution is incorrect in their minds. The issue some people have with evolution is the idea that a group of organism could evolve so dramatically that they become a new species. The problem is that macroevolution has never been observed during recorded history. (The process takes more than a few lifetimes.) Personally, I think there's sufficient evidence to conclude that macroevolution has occured in the past, but not everybody is going to accept an idea that goes against what he/she was taught to believe.

By the way, since creationism and ID involve supernatural involvement, they are not scientific ideas. Science only deals with the natural world.

Answer 4

The only factual part of Evolution is that things do evolve. Things DO change... but other elements such as everything starting as a single cell organism, then some form of equatic life, and then lizards became birds, apes became man etc etc is all theory. The age of the earth, how life began, what killed the dinosaurs and things like that have never been proven and different theories of these get debated among scientists all the time. The theories that make it to the text books are the ones with the most scientists in favor of them. But you can't watch a program on Evolution or read a book on it that doesnt say things like "theory" or "many scientists believe that" or "It is thought to be" because none of their theories of evolution have been proven.

Answer 5

wow. so who is the one who said that the world was formed by a small dot thing exploding?
and life was formed from a single celled organism?
Were they there to see the stuff take place as to write it down and declare it fact... or is that just another excuse as to how the world was created and nothing like God exists?
Its not a fact my dear it is a theory. The just assume and use so called 'evidence' to come to that conclusion doesn't make it a fact.
Just like medicine, it will never stay the same. there tests and proofs of a cure always changes.
LEt me tell you. Read the Bible to find out more.
'In the Beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God'
John 1:1

Answer 6

Evolution is a scientific theory, which means there is considerable evidence for it, and it's the best explanation for the observations and experiments. It's "The smoking gun." It's not the "Law of Evolution" because the fossil record isn't perfectly complete -- thus, there will always be some unanswered questions about Macro-Evolution.

>> Why is "God did it" an alternate theory?
Intelligent Design isn't a scientific theory. It's a speculation or conjecture. There's no direct evidence for it. None. Zip zero zilch nada bupkiss.

Answer 7

I have always followed evolution - it answers all the questions of the variations you see, the fossil record and such. And to further compliment those facts there then once it became possible to study DNA and trace lineage through mitochondrial DNA, compare it with other species and use a know rate of mutation to see when they diverged and further prove and enhance the knowledge of how evolution happens. But in the long run it really doesn't matter how you can present these facts that are connected in all branches of science when people just refuse to believe anything that isn't written in a certain book.

Answer 8

Actually, evolution is not a fact its a theory. That's why its commonly refered to as the theory of evolution. As a theory it does have very strong pervasive evidence to support it but it still remains just a theory.

Answer 9

I blame it on the fundies infiltrating every realm of government and pushing their agenda into our educational system. This has caused a general ignorance among our society on topics that seemingly refute religious dogma.

Answer 10

Because it is, macro evolution hasn't been proven. Creationism is an alternate theory, just not a scientific theory.