English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

There's a lot of stuff here, but please if you're in doubt just keep reading. It might be a little hard to follow but that's because these are scientists. I believe that's why most creationalists keep shutting out the evolution theory, because they don't understand it! They need to be more UP to date with current data. The evolution theory is a theory, and we learn more and more every day about it. Now a theory is not just a normal "guess" it's the best guess we have from the present day knowledge we have and has been repeatedly tested (hundreds of times) and blah blah blah. Anyways, here is a link you guys doubting the evolution theory.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

please read it completely and don't just stop reading because it's too hard. Just skip the section that you don't understand. I have many more scientific links if you want more. I'm just tired of people saying that there's no proof...

2007-01-20 14:55:21 · 4 answers · asked by bob888 3 in Science & Mathematics Biology

no it's not a question so i guess you could "report me," I was just merely trying to help all the people who always want to have actual scholarly sources for this subject.

2007-01-20 15:32:59 · update #1

4 answers

creationalists only disagree with a portion of the evolution theory, namely that there was no divine force present at any time to shape the evolution of species.

evolution has been proven, because its definition is, put simply, "a change in gene frequency in a population over time." this is due to natural selection and darwin's 5 principles: basically
1) Individuals in a species vary.
2) Some variations are heritable.
3) More individuals are produced than the environment can support.
4) Competition for resources occurs.
5) Individuals with favorable traits (and genotypes) will survive and reproduce. These traits will then be passed to the offspring

if people want to look at evolution, they need merely apply these principles to a change in the population. like the black plague. those with resistance survived and passed the resistance on to their children, which changed the gene frequency of the resistance gene in the population. ta-daa! evolution!

or they could take a look at the evolution of darwin's finches and iguanas on the galapagos or take a college bio class with a decent teacher.

2007-01-20 15:36:57 · answer #1 · answered by anniekel 2 · 1 0

Ah, stargate, you are incorrect.

You are trying to stack the deck by saying that ANY explanation of ANYTHING that assumes a process longer than a human lifespan is automatically "not a theory." This is nonsense.

By that definition it is impossible to develop ANY theory of (say) how mountains or stars form because we cannot "test" it or "observe" it. This is nonsense. Of course we can formulate a testable, observable theory of how stars develop because we can see millions of stars all in different stages of development.

The same exact thing applies to evolution (actually moreso, as some species evolve faster than stars develop). Yes, the evolution of a species like humans takes longer than the lifespan of a scientist to complete. But we see millions of species all in the process of evolution, including fossil species showing snapshots of this process, and modern species showing living examples of different stages of evolution. And we do have species with short generations for which we *can* see full speciation in a laboratory with in 3 or 4 years.

However Oswald, stargate has a point ... this isn't much of a question. It is annoying to have creationists post "questions" that are little more than a link to a web site, with no intention of actually asking a real question or looking for an answer. Those of us on this side of the debate shouldn't do the same.

2007-01-20 23:19:40 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 2 0

Problem is, by your definition, the long-term evolution theory is not a theory, as it's impossible to test or observe, considering its effects are only evident after thousands of generations.

Also, was there a question in all that?

2007-01-20 23:00:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 2

Have you, perhaps, noticed how the car has evolved from the old wagon like vehicle to a modern, fuel saving and slippery article of desire. Yeah, you are right... evolution is right amongst us.

2007-01-20 23:11:51 · answer #4 · answered by Willem V 3 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers