Is Evolution the only logical explanation for our Species?

Question

I understand that evolution plays an important part of microbiology and other macro organisms, but what other theories in the biological science field has come up to counter Darwin?

Please don't confuse this as a religious question

Answer 1

Evolution is observed. Evolution by natural selection, the theory, has no coherent competitors. Genetics and evolutionary theory have been synthesized since the 1930's. Before that there were competitors, genetical competitors, but they have been refuted and natural selection is on par with the theory of gravity and the heliocentric theory. It is only considered otherwise out side of biology and science in general, by those poorly informed or delusional. For instance, many geneticists at the beginning of the 20th century were died in the wool Lamarkians; they believed in acquired traits, as they would not accept natural selection as the driving force of evolution, As I said, those days are over and the theory can only be sharpened in detail. Go here for further facts on this subject.

http://www.talkorigins.org links from here.

Answer 2

> Is Evolution the only logical explanation for our Species?
No. But -- it is the best explanation, and is supported by considerable evidence.

> what other theories in the biological science field has come up to counter Darwin?
None that are respected these days, and certainly none that have the status of "theory."

Answer 3

What do you mean by “logical”? Do you mean a self-consistent explanation? Something that might have happened no matter how farfetched?

Evolution by natural selection puts together the observations from cosmology, astronomy, physics, chemistry, mathematics and ALL of biology ranging from whole biome ecology to the molecular level into a logical, self-consistent explanation of how life works. There is no other explaination because that is what a scientific theory is. We call it the theory of evolution by natural selection because that is the best available model to explain life.

What else has been proposed?

There’s the super-intelligent space alien hypothesis. All life in every niche of earth’s biosphere, from deep sea vents to mountain tops, to miles below ice caps and stony crust was put there by beings from another planet. Of course that presents the problem of how the space aliens arose.

The other hypothesis (and the one most people believe) is magic. Some all-powerful being willed it so. It’s self-consistent but not very satisfying to answer everything by saying that it’s the will of (Zeus/Ra/Odin/Yaweh/Allah/L.Ron Hubbard). Again, one just puts off the creation problem by introducing another, what created the all-powerful being? Science is not a popularity contest and devout followers of religion are sensitive about their beliefs. But religion is based on the supernatural. It has no answer based on the study of natural law.

Answer 4

Evolution is an observation that organisms change over time. The theory, Natural Selection, explains that these changes occur due to mutations in the genetic code being selected on by nature.
Some changes survive to reproduce and pass on their genes, and some do not.

I am sure there are other logical answers. Panspermia is one.
But they do not fit the evidence, and are not accepted by science because of that.

Answer 5

Yes, evolution is the only logical explanation for which there is clear evidence.

I think the title of the 1983 book by Theodosius Dobzhansky answers your question quite eloquently - "Nothing in Biology Makes Sense Except in the Light of Evolution", American Biology Teacher vol. 35 (March 1973)

When non-biologists talk about biological evolution they often confuse two different aspects of the definition. On the one hand there is the question of whether or not modern organisms have evolved from older ancestral organisms or whether modern species are continuing to change over time. On the other hand there are questions about the mechanism of the observed changes... how did evolution occur? Biologists consider the existence of biological evolution to be a fact. It can be demonstrated today and the historical evidence for its occurrence in the past is overwhelming. However, biologists readily admit that they are less certain of the exact mechanism of evolution; there are several theories of the mechanism of evolution.
Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
by Laurence Moran
Copyright © 1993-2002


Let me try to make crystal clear what is established beyond reasonable doubt, and what needs further study, about evolution. Evolution as a process that has always gone on in the history of the earth can be doubted only by those who are ignorant of the evidence or are resistant to evidence, owing to emotional blocks or to plain bigotry. By contrast, the mechanisms that bring evolution about certainly need study and clarification. There are no alternatives to evolution as history that can withstand critical examination. Yet we are constantly learning new and important facts about evolutionary mechanisms.
- Theodosius Dobzhansky

Today, nearly all biologists acknowledge that evolution is a fact. The term theory is no longer appropriate except when referring to the various models that attempt to explain how life evolves... it is important to understand that the current questions about how life evolves in no way implies any disagreement over the fact of evolution.
- Neil A. Campbell, Biology 2nd ed., 1990, Benjamin/Cummings, p. 434



...evolution is a theory. It is also a fact. And facts and theories are different things, not rungs in a hierarchy of increasing certainty. Facts are the world's data. Theories are structures of ideas that explain and interpret facts. Facts don't go away when scientists debate rival theories to explain them. Einstein's theory of gravitation replaced Newton's in this century, but apples didn't suspend themselves in midair, pending the outcome. And humans evolved from ape-like ancestors whether they did so by Darwin's proposed mechanism or by some other yet to be discovered.
Stephen J. Gould

The honest scientist, like the philosopher, will tell you that nothing whatever can be or has been proved with fully 100% certainty, not even that you or I exist, nor anyone except himself, since he might be dreaming the whole thing. Thus there is no sharp line between speculation, hypothesis, theory, principle, and fact, but only a difference along a sliding scale, in the degree of probability of the idea. When we say a thing is a fact, then, we only mean that its probability is an extremely high one: so high that we are not bothered by doubt about it and are ready to act accordingly. Now in this use of the term fact, the only proper one, evolution is a fact. For the evidence in favor of it is as voluminous, diverse, and convincing as in the case of any other well established fact of science concerning the existence of things that cannot be directly seen, such as atoms, neutrons, or solar gravitation ....

Any other explanation for life would be ILLogical.

Answer 6

people did no longer evolve from apes. From the source hyperlink: If people developed from apes then why are there nonetheless apes? people did no longer evolve from modern-day-day apes. fairly, people and apes share a trouble-free ancestor that gave upward thrust to the two. This trouble-free ancestor, whether no longer same to trendy apes, grew to become into very almost unquestionably greater apelike than humanlike in visual attraction and behaviour. quicker or later -- scientists estimate that between 5 and eight million years in the past -- this species diverged into 2 diverse lineages, considered one of that have been the hominids, or humanlike species, and the different ultimately developed into the African super ape species residing at the instant.

Answer 7

No, it's a confused question. Evolution is not only not the "only logical" explanation for life, it isn't even a logical anything. Rather, it is contradictory and always changing. There are MANY problems with it, giving rise to "punctuated equilibrium," which means things are stable for a while ("equilibrium") which spans of time are "punctuated" by jumps in development. This is handy because it explains the utter lack of transitional fossils in the record. Ya see, Darwin knew there was no proof for his theory, but on his deathbed stated his confidence that they would be found. A billion fossils later and they are not found. Archeopteryx? A fully-formed bird. Dinosaurs to birds? No fossils exist showing this (despite what you saw on "Jurassic Park.")
For those who hold with Darwin's decree that there be no jumps (which "punctuated equilibrium" has many of), there is external input: meteors to alien craft landing primitive life here, which life then flourished and evolved. This is why everyone went gaga over the "Martian" meteorite found in Antarctica. But our roving team of reporters on Mars is reporting back that the Red Planet is D-E-D dead. Lots of geologic activity, but no life.
The third method is God using evolution as His method. The problem with this one is that it angers BOTH sides.
So, there you have it. Pick your poison.

Answer 8

Considering what a monkey wrench we put into nature - Aliens? I know how it sounds, but it is not logical to me how nature can be so perfect and people destroy it instead of being a productive part of it.

Answer 9

Yes. Unless you beleive that aliens were here.

Answer 10

Evolution is not a theory. It is a hypothesis at best.