They agree that they do have missing information or have lack of evidence in some areas of evolution. Why is it so hard for the Evolution followers on here to admit the same thing that scientist readily state? In stead of saying " we don't have all the answers to Evolution" most on here claim it to be infalliable. Why do you continually do this when you know that there are some areas of evolution that are in question and other scientist agree?
2007-02-09 07:44:09 · 33 answers · asked by Stacey B 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They do have hard proof of evolution, therefore it is not infallable. They are not admitting that evolution is flawed or untrue. They are just admitting that they haven't figured out everything there is to know about evolution. Two very different things. Ex: We don't know everything about space, but that doesn't mean that it isn't real. We don't know everthing about dinosaurs but that doesn't mean that they didn't exist. We don't know everything about Jesus that doesn't mean that he didn't exist. We don't know everything about anything, but that doesn't mean that nothing exists.
2007-02-09 07:54:08 · answer #1 · answered by Pardon? 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I've never seen an atheist or a scientist here or anywhere say the theory was absolutely 100% finished and done, utterly complete.
Yes, there are still some details we don't know, even a few gaps. However, the overall field is pretty well settled in terms of its factualness, even if some of the details are still missing or there might need to be some adjustments as we get more data.
For example. I take a photograph of a hamburger. I glue it to some cardboard and put it through a jigsaw press, making 500 pieces. I give you only 450 pieces. You put them together -- will the fact you can't see the whole hamburger mean that maybe the picture's actually of a bowling ball? Now, you can't say there's no pickles on it... maybe a pickle is visible in one of those missing pieces. But it's still definately a hamburger, pickle or no.
This is the condition of the ToE. We can see the big picture, we know its there. A few pieces are missing, but none of them are large enough to significantly alter the overall structure of the theory.
2007-02-09 07:52:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sorry I wrote so much:
Okay, but I’m not sure you are really grasping the meaning of “when it comes to Evolution that they don't have all the answers”
You think this means that there is any doubt among scientists that evolution is fact? There isn’t. I would readily admit that there are still things yet to be discovers and every day we (humans) are making more discoveries.
I have never said evolution has all the answers and is complete. I have expressed it clearly more than once. This, of course, does not mean that since there are still questions to be answers that it is wrong or that some god just made us all. You’ll have to forgive me, but I follow facts and evidence, not fantasy and superstition.
2007-02-09 07:50:18 · answer #3 · answered by A 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
Most scientists agree that when it comes to Gravity that they don't have all the answers?
Most scientists agree that when it comes to the atom that they don't have all the answers?
Most scientists agree that when it comes to anatomy of cells that they don't have all the answers?
These people who believe in cell theory, atomic theory, and the theory of gravity must all be insane. Glad we have you to tell them.
Nothing is 100% but math. Evolution and gravity have enough evidence that the fact that they are true is not in question. We know that evolution is true, because we can see it in places like the fossil record. Just as we know atoms exist because we can see them with microscopes. The things that are being debated are the small exact details. Your ignorance of basic science has lead you to make the incorrect assumption that these scientific theories are less true because there is still debate. This may be hard for you to understand. Galileo could not explain the fact that the earth moved to the highly religious either.
2007-02-09 08:04:49 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
I think you'll find most who believe evolution will readily admit that not all of the pieces are in place. However, even given that the evidence that does exist is overwhelming convincing for evolution as fact. Will we ever know ALL the details of evolution? Probably not. That won't make it any less viable, rational, logical, or believable. What do creationist have? A flawed, editted, multi-translated, unscientific book written about 1,700 years ago that has absolutely no supporting evidence.
2007-02-09 07:57:08 · answer #5 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
You really don't understand science, do you....
When a scientist says "I don't have all the answers", that DOESN'T mean that they think evolution may be completely wrong. It means that the entire process of evolution has not been completely defined.
Geneticists don't understand the entire human genome, but that doesn't mean that our genes may ultimately not be the source of genetic disease.
Astronomers don't have a map of every star in the universe, but that doesn't mean that our Earth may not actually be orbiting our Sun.
Medical science is incomplete, as is the understanding of the body, but would you fail to see a doctor for pneumonia simply because you think that their lack of complete knowledge means that they don't understand your disease?
As one wise person once said: I'ts not what you don't know that gets you into trouble, it's what you know that ain't so.
When you look at a scientist that says they don't have complete information, that gives you no room to feel smug, thinking that they believe the entire theory might be proved wrong. It means they understand the theory, believe it true, and are working to fill the map, much as has been done in the human genome, which, by the way, isn't in the Bible either.
2007-02-09 07:52:12 · answer #6 · answered by Deirdre H 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Since there are tons and tons of questions with the origin of the species and how they got be the way they are, yes, there are lots of unanswered questions.
But at the same time, there are enough answers to establish that evolution is the cause of the different species, and that humans evolved from an early ancestor related to apes. That is basically proven. They have observed evolution.
But the problem is, people find the unanswered questions and thing that means that all the other questions are also unanswered. Then they use this logic to question evolution.
2007-02-09 08:05:35 · answer #7 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
This is a complete play on words. You ma'am do not know what you are talking about. We have proved it to exist, there are just TONS more stuff being found consistently that leads to a clearer picture and understanding. You see the thing is though, with evidence that we do have it still supports that darwins theory is indeed correct and the more we find the further it proves.
for a long time before DNA testing we thought the neandrathal man was our ancestors and when we tested it found out they were a completley different evolutionary species that died off...things like this hardly support evolution is infalliable. If anything supports it more.
2007-02-09 07:52:07 · answer #8 · answered by Sheriff of R&S 4 · 3⤊ 1⤋
The problem is most of the time it's being said to religious people who look at the incomplete record on evolution as proof that it didn't happen. Even if science doesn't have all the links and there is some debate about the processes, there is ample evidence to prove evolution beyond a reasonable doubt.
2007-02-09 07:50:40 · answer #9 · answered by Justin H 7 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Scientists disagree on many things. But the basic fact of evolution is the foundation of modern biology.
Dawkins' and Gould's disagreements on some of the issues are famous but they agreed on the theory as a whole.
2007-02-09 07:51:39 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋