Um.... it happens. I mean, I don't feel very passionately about it. Now when people DENY it, THAT'S when I get a little irritated.
2007-01-30 11:28:04
·
answer #1
·
answered by ZER0 C00L ••AM••VT•• 7
·
4⤊
1⤋
I think that evolution is obvious; the fact that fossils exist, that continually skeletons are being discovered that are the remains of creatures who no longer exist, that there is evidence of the extinction of species, to me is proof that life has undergone biological and physiological change over the epochs of the earth's existence consistent with evolution. I really do not understand how the self-identified "creationists" can deny or ignore all of the material evidence of evolution which has been uncovered by archeologists and anthropologists and is visible in the world's many museums of natural history. Taking an adamant stand regarding a belief does not, in fact, make that position defensible!
2007-01-30 22:28:05
·
answer #2
·
answered by Lynci 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
A brilliant theory to explain the observable evidence of speciation and mutation via the processes of natural selection and genetic drift amongst others. The cornerstone of all modern biology. A theory with excellent predictive power which has applications from medicine to nuclear engineering. About as established as the fact that day and night are caused by the rotation of the earth. Not under any serious doubt within the scientific community, but severely misunderstood by unacademically educated people who only refuse to accept it because their stone age book says different.
2007-01-30 19:30:51
·
answer #3
·
answered by Om 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
Doesnt anwer the question of where life came from.
God can answer that though.
I dont accept this view of macro evolution, it is true but
not on the scale many think, I believe it is only for the slightest
changes in things, like a birds beak growing like 1" longer to adapt to a changing food source.
2007-01-30 19:30:44
·
answer #4
·
answered by disciple 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
It is true, to an extent. Possible with a combination of something else, because there are some things that Evolution cannot explain.
2007-01-30 19:32:06
·
answer #5
·
answered by God Fears Me 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Define evolution.
Micro-evolution- yeah it happens alot. Lots of evidence for it.
Macro-evolution- in your dreams buddy. No evidence at all, and you know that's right.
2007-01-30 20:21:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Lovely 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
I accept evolution. I'm not super intelligent so I don't know all the if's, and's,and why's of it...but it makes a helluva lot more sense than creation.
2007-01-30 19:30:16
·
answer #7
·
answered by Stormilutionist Chasealogist 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
That all the discussions on it in religion and spirituality need to be moved to a science area of yahoo answers.
2007-01-30 19:42:50
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Evolution occurs within a species. One species doesn't turn into a totally different species. A frog never became a prince. The stories that people have used to explain evolution are like adult fairy tales.
http://www.godrules.net/evolutioncruncher/CruncherTOC.htm
Charles Darwin, always ready to come up with a theory about everything, explains how the "monstrous whale" originated:
"In North America the black bear was seen by Hearne swimming for hours with widely open mouth, thus catching, like a whale, insects in the water. Even in so extreme a case as this, if the supply of insects were constant, and if better adapted competitors did not already exist in the country, I can see no difficulty in a race of bears being rendered, by natural selection, more and more aquatic in their structure and habits, with larger and larger mouths, till a creature was produced as monstrous as a whale."—*Charles Darwin, The Origin of Species (1859 and 1984 editions), p. 184.
HOW THE GIRAFFE GOT ITS LONG NECK
The giraffe used to look just like other grazing animals in Africa. But while the other animals were content to eat the grasses growing in the field and the leaves on the lower branches, the giraffe felt that the survival of his fittest depended on reaching up and plucking leaves from still higher branches. This went on for a time, as he and his brothers and sisters kept reaching ever higher. Only those that reached the highest branches of leaves survived.
All the other giraffes in the meadow died from starvation (all because they were too proud to bend down and eat the lush vegetation that all the other short-necked animals were eating). So only the longest-necked giraffes had enough food to eat while all their brother and sister giraffes died from lack of food. Sad story; don’t you think? But that is the story of how the giraffe grew its long neck.
Picture the tragic tale: Dead giraffes lying about in the grass while the short-necked grazers, such as the antelope and gazelle, walked by them, having plenty to eat. So there is a lesson for us: Do not be too proud to bend your neck down and eat. Oh, you say, but their necks were by that time too long to bend down to eat grass! Not so; every giraffe has to bend its neck down to get water to drink. *Darwin’s giraffes died of starvation, not thirst.
So that is how the giraffe acquired its long neck, according to the pioneer thinkers of a century ago, the men who gave us our basic evolutionary theories.
Oh, you don’t believe me. Read on.
"We know that this animal, the tallest of mammals, dwells in the interior of Africa, in places where the soil, almost always arid and without herbage [not true], obliges it to browse on trees and to strain itself continuously to reach them. This habit sustained for long, has had the result in all members of its race that the forelegs have grown longer than the hind legs and that its neck has become so stretched, that the giraffe, without standing on its hind legs, lifts its head to a height of six meters."—*Jean-Baptist de Monet (1744-1829), quoted in Asimov’s Book of Science and Nature Quotations, p. 87.
"So under nature with the nascent giraffe, the individuals which were the highest browsers, and were able during dearths to reach even an inch or two above the others, will often have been preserved . . By this process long-continued . . combined no doubt in a most important manner with the inherited effects of increased use of parts, it seems to me almost certain that any ordinary hoofed quadruped might be converted into a giraffe."—*Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species (1859), p. 202.
Gather around and listen; we’re not finished with giraffes yet. There is even more to the story: "Once long ago, the giraffe kept reaching up into the higher branches to obtain enough food to keep it from perishing. But, because only those giraffes with the longest necks were fittest, only the males survived—because none of the females were as tall! That is why there are no female giraffes in Africa today." End of tale. You don’t believe it? Well, you need to attend a university.
2007-01-30 19:32:27
·
answer #9
·
answered by Martin S 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's a scientific theory that has withstood alot of tests.
2007-01-30 19:29:35
·
answer #10
·
answered by kit t 2
·
1⤊
1⤋