Does anything contradict Evolution?

Question

Any scientific facts that is?

This is directed to NON-creationism/ID believers.

Answer 1

There is no documentation that will dispute evolution other than religious doctrine, now understand that this is the same group that tortured and killed people for heretical beliefs, brought you the crusades, denied the earth being round or the earth not being the center of the universe. How many times do we over look reality in the name of FAITH. The geologic record, while incomplete is at least empirical and factual.

Answer 2

I go along with the fact that random genetic mutations in highly complex organisms can do a lot of damage for any good they do. These mutations are supposedly due to radiation but it is problematic. Despite this weakness, Evolution still explains the facts better than any other theory, such as Lamarck's idea that giraffe ancestors stretched their necks and passed this trait onto their progeny. In addition, any Creationism or Intelligent Design claims can be passed of as faith-based, and therefore are not science at all.

Answer 3

Consider the bat and its irreducibly complex sonar.

The transmitter and the receiver are separate mechanisms, but both have to work very, very well for sonar to be useful to the bat. If a bat had one or the other parts of the mechanism that are only "part way done", it does the bat no good, and would provide no competitive advantage for survival, as I understand the theory of evolution.

For purposes of discussion, suppose it took 10,000 gradual mutations for the whole thing to work at all. After 1,000 mutations, it is still useless.

My understanding is that Darwin himself admitted that a situation such as described would absolutely refute his theory.

Yet, my understanding is that the earliest bat fossils are fully formed ... there aren't 'links' ... as if "some one" has a sense of humor and enjoys confounding skeptics.

Works for me .

Answer 4

Evolution of what? Rocks? Planets? People? Arithmetic?

It's kind of hard for one fact to contradict another. In fact, it would be a very weird universe if that could happen.

Answer 5

Not that I know, but there are different schools of thought regarding how evolution progressed. The most popular probably being 'puncutated equilibrium' which argues that 'species will show little to no evolutionary change throughout their history. When evolution does occur, it happens sporadically (by splitting) and occurs relatively quickly' - read the wiki link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punctuated_equilibrium. It's quite interesting..

christo

Answer 6

There always are exceptions that can't be explained directly but that doesn't invalidate the general theory.

For example, the fossil evidence for early bats is very scarce. So you either say that bats evolved one day because God said so. Or you say that the jungle habitat of early bats meant very few specimens survived. I know which one I think is more likely.

Answer 7

No.

It's problematic. You'd have to find a species appearing, without any evidence of similar or ancestral species. The problem is -- we wouldn't know if this is really a creation event, or that we just don't have fossils from the similar or ancestral species that existed.

Answer 8

It is generally accepted that evolution is a fact. What is still not 100% certain is how evolution is acheived.

Answer 9

Irreducible complexity (IC) is the argument that certain biological systems are too complex to have evolved from simpler, or "less complete" predecessors, and are at the same time too complex to have arisen naturally through chance mutations.

Answer 10

no
please ignore the fact that my name is Idiot