Science: Evolution?

Question

I'm not an Evolutionist nor am I extremely religious. I believe in a creator, but sometimes I also question. So I mean no disrespect. I'm just wondering: Evolution is just a theory, but if you think about it, it's pretty believable. It's pretty believable in the way that Animals millions or thousands of years ago can be linked to the Animals of today. Would you say?

Also, for the Religious folks who aren't too thrilled with the idea of Evolution: Who is to say that God, our Creator, didn't create the world in the form of Evolution?

Adam & Eve? A mere mortal wrote that story, Not God. "Yes, But it's the Word of God." Ok, but again: A Mere Mortal Wrote It.

Of course it's a theory, but if you think about it, a very believable one.

Hey Thanks Gonzo. I actually need to pick up some books soon to read :)! I'll look for that one.

Answer 1

Evolution is a "theory" in the same way that gravity is. "Theory" doesn't mean "a mere guess or conjecture". A scientific theory is more than believable, it's an observable naturally occurring biological process.

A theory is an explanation of a set of related observations or events based upon proven hypotheses and verified multiple times by detached groups of researchers. One scientist cannot create a theory; he can only create a hypothesis.

In general, both a scientific theory and a scientific law are *accepted to be true* by the scientific community as a whole. Both are used to make predictions of events. Both are used to advance technology.

The biggest difference between a law and a theory is that a theory is much more complex and dynamic. A law governs a single action, whereas a theory explains a whole series of related phenomena.

The vast majority of people misunderstand what "theory" means in the context of science and will base their assumptions about evolution on their faulty knowledge. In truth, a theory is accepted as fact by the scientific community. It may be tweaked and made more elegant, but overall it doesn't change.

Answer 2

One of the problems today is that people misunderstand the word theory. They tend to confuse it with "hypothesis", which is an educated guess; an attempt to explain something. A hypothesis is tested, and when there is enought convincing evidence to support it, it then becomes a theory.

Many creationsists try to demean the position of Evolution by stating that it is only a theory. Quantum theory is only theory, but we use it to make LCD screens and solid state lasers. Atomic theory builds bombs and nuclear power plants. Still, these areas of science are theoretical, but have applications solid enough to have engineered applications.

Evolution, along with nuclear and quantum physics, is no longer a hypothesis. Most of what we hear in science is not hypothetical. One notable exception was cold fusion. That was a hypothesis that remains unproved. Those who peddle in junk science might refer to it as a theory, but that is an unwarranted elevation.

Evolution is a theory because there is sufficient evidence to support it. While we cannot make controlled experiments and double-blind studies, we can make predictions based on what we do know, and hope to find. We can state that if we see one creature, and an early predecessor, that an intermediary might have existed. When we find that in the fossil record, we can take that as further evidence that our theory is supported.

Because of this, evolution is considered testable where creationism is not.

Answer 3

The adam and eve story has forms originating from many cultures, Christianity merely borrowed it from celtic pagan culture.

People staunchly held onto the belief that the earth was flat long after there was substantial evidence showing it was round, but gradually after a few generations people accepted the theory, realising that it didn't affect their religeon after all. I think the same will be true of evolution, In a couple more generations, the Idea of a 10,000 year old universe will be history.

Answer 4

Non so many years ago there was a harsh discussion between Einstein and Bohr for some matters of quantum mechanics..

Well, Einstein did non want to accept the matters of quantum mechanics saying ''I cannot believe that He (god) plays dices with
the universe''....Te discussion went on without results when at last Bohr said to Einstein ''it is no up to you say to God how to make the universe...''

I am agnostic, that is a bit different from atheistic, and i think I can say to antievolutionists , I.D. proponents and the like: ''who are you to say how your god has designed the universe, i. e. whether or non evolution was part of the design ???'' Perhaps
becaure of words written on a scrap of paper where, among others is written that the Sun revolves around the Earth ???

Please try to reason....

------------------
For the response after mine.
It is a wrong belief to say that human descend from apes: they descend from a common ancestor an this is quite different.

For the argument ''why there are not other ''humans'' '',
the response is tha there were the neanderthalians that became extint 20000 years ago, they too descending from a common ancestor.

Answer 5

There are different views on evolution even among atheists themselves,some Christians too have some belief in it.
I do not suscribe to the main theory though that leaves out the rational input of an intelligent Creator,to say that things evolved of themselves is an offence against intelligent reason.
Man did not evolve from Apes,we are two different species,what evolutionists tend to overlook is the fact that God created man and all other life to subsist on the earth and being of the earth we all share certain characteristics,Plants grow continually towards the life giving Sun and we too share this simple plant nature,but we are not said to have evolved from plants,Animals being a higher lifeform than plants have not only their ability to grow but have greater abilities,they can use simple intelligence to mate and procure food,and so they are more advancedthan plant life.
Finally we humans have both these attributes but we are the highest form of life in that we can reason and use language,we can love and we can above all feel our spiritual essence within us.
So God in creating us gave us all these qualities of which some are common to all other life forms,this is why we have a kinship with other forms of life but cannot suggest that we evolved from them.
Yes it is a primary condition that to see this clearly and accept it we first have to believe in God and the rest falls easily into place and with good reason,God made the Angels first who outside of Himself are the highest form of life,then He created us the second highest form of life and then animals,fish birds etc and then down to plants and trees and at the bottom rung of the creation ladder the single cell creatures and so on.
Finally what is plain sense to me is that if you Put the Creator God into the eqation then it is foolish and futile to explain creation from the bottom up,much more sensible and logical to explain it from the top down,bottom created things cannot aspire to Angels or Men.

Answer 6

well evolution, i had always wondered about that, how is it possible that humans only gained the knowledge to be more advance then any living thing in this planet? i am a person of belief but if you think about it, how did we become like this, science said we came from primates, bible says we came from adam and eve. i often wonder, if we came from primates, then why... havent they evolved like us? why is it that we only have 1 species? human species? hmmm and in the bible writtings, when you say " the clouds broke, raging thunders appear, eyes of bright lights", what does that tell you in modern day writtings? of course we would say, that must be an airplane landing! in biblical writtings, that would be a winged beast fire eyes like fire! O_o, the question here is that.. how is it possible for that kind of technology to be in an age where even a toaster wasnt invented yet O_o.. so many questions, so many conclusions, from my guess is... we are a unique species, something different... maybe something alien... O_o, heheh im getting all sci-fi now ^_^ nice question.. i really enjoyed answering it thnx ^_^

Answer 7

Two concepts fundamentally flaw evolution. First, there is no fossil record showing empirical evidence of evolution jumping from one species to another. No record found in the millions of bones discovered. Second, even the author of evolution could not articulate the development of the eye and called it a "black box" which he could not solve.

Think about that last one for a second. Cells, through some random mutation, become sensitive to light, form a perfectly angled lens, inside a perfectly shaped sphere, which happens to connect to the brain, which interprets light into images -- perfectly. And all that, by complete chance.

Answer 8

"In science, a theory is a proposed description, explanation, or model of the manner of interaction of a set of natural phenomena, capable of predicting future occurrences or observations of the same kind, and capable of being tested through experiment or otherwise falsified through empirical observation. It follows from this that for scientists "theory" and "fact" do not necessarily stand in opposition. For example, it is a fact that an apple dropped on earth has been observed to fall towards the center of the planet, and the theory which explains why the apple behaves so is the current theory of gravitation."

Answer 9

A theory is based on known facts. The best theory is one with the least number of assumptions. Sure evolutions has some problems but Creationism has too many assumptions for my liking.

Answer 10

we have proven that evolution CAN happen, in fact, any time weve recorded any genetic mutation in any living thing, thats evolution. we have proven that it can happen, but did it? are you expecting us to supply the answer to that question? it would make headline news if we could supply you with an answer to that question.