Do you have actual PROOF of evolution?

Question

hold on - what you are about to say is theory!!!
i want actual proof - not the thoughts of a scientist - PROOF!
not one fossil that you've been told resables an ansestor - PROOF!

Actual factual beyond doubt proof

and dont just say the proof is everywhere - i want actual proof

this is hilarious evolutionists everywhere have no proof!!!

I haven't mentioned god, i haven't said i belived in creation - all i wanted was some evloution proof not based on the THEORY of some scientists - no one has so far given me any

Darwins work was all based on Theory - he guessed what he thought could have happened - alot of you follow a man who made some guesses - you aren't too bright are you!

PS this is fun

To all you people trying to insult my intelligence
the official title of evolution is...

'the THEORY of evolution'
no if you can prove it to me and yes show me some evidence i'll be glad to admit that my dig and you is incorrect.
now if your way of telling me i'm wrong is telling me i'm stupid and my mind is closed all you've done is cemented the fact that you really actually have no concrete evidence.

To all you people trying to insult my intelligence
the official title of evolution is...

'the THEORY of evolution'
no if you can prove it to me and yes show me some evidence i'll be glad to admit that my dig and you is incorrect.
now if your way of telling me i'm wrong is telling me i'm stupid and my mind is closed all you've done is cemented the fact that you really actually have no concrete evidence.

To all you people trying to insult my intelligence
the official title of evolution is...

'the THEORY of evolution'
now if you can prove it to me and yes show me some evidence i'll be glad to admit that my dig at you is incorrect.
now if your way of telling me i'm wrong is telling me i'm stupid and my mind is closed all you've done is cemented the fact that you really actually have no concrete evidence.

ps i like to repeat myself

mental note "easiest way to get insults on yahoo answer - ask evolutionists to prove evolution"

Some of the most respected scientist studying the universe and earth and all its creatures ahve been so amzed with the accuracy of for example (tilt of the earth, distance the earth is away from the sun, the way all the planets in out solar system hold the earth where it is etc etc ...that they have said and i quote 'it is inconceivable that these things came about by chance'

sorry kumar v,
you've not proved anything, you've told me about similarities in DNA, but isn't it true we have similar attributes to other familes of animals not just chimpanzees? animals and humans are made out of similar materials which doesn't mean they evolved, thank you for your answer but it still appears to be based on theory, i don't believe you have ever watched evolution occur

development is different to evolution

A child delops skills whilst growing up
the child isn't evolving
you people are hilarious - still none of you are able to accept the fact that evolution is a theory!!!!
i pity your small minds

Answer 1

That is why it is the theory of evolution and not the fact of evolution. The very definition of a theory is that it is possible to be disproved. However, the "evidence" does seem logical.

Answer 2

Many people learned in elementary school that a theory falls in the middle of a hierarchy of certainty -- above a mere hypothesis but below a law. Scientists do not use the terms that way, however. According to the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), a scientific theory is "a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that can incorporate facts, laws, inferences, and tested hypotheses." No amount of validation changes a theory into a law, which is a descriptive generalization about nature. So when scientists talk about the theory of evolution -- or the atomic theory or the theory of relativity, for that matter -- they are not expressing reservations about its truth.

In addition to the theory of evolution, meaning the idea of descent with modification, one may also speak of the fact of evolution. The NAS defines a fact as "an observation that has been repeatedly confirmed and for all practical purposes is accepted as 'true.'" The fossil record and abundant other evidence testify that organisms have evolved through time. Although no one observed those transformations, the indirect evidence is clear, unambiguous and compelling.

All sciences frequently rely on indirect evidence. Physicists cannot see subatomic particles directly, for instance, so they verify their existence by watching for telltale tracks that the particles leave in cloud chambers. The absence of direct observation does not make physicists' conclusions less certain.

Read some EVIDENCE
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoEvidence.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_evolution

Answer 3

A BELIEF can not be disproved, by definition. If you believe that you are Superman, you must jump off a tall building to prove it, but still likely will never know the answer. Fossils are in fact relatively rare. If all creatures left fossils in neat layers the absolute proof you desire might be somewhere in the pile. In the meantime it is as difficult to disprove a theory as to prove it. Some believers in an all-powerful God even maintain that He could have created the World in seven days, even including million year old fossils! Others believe that Man is evolving into skeptics. Have fun.

Answer 4

You seem to be struggling with some of the very simplest priciples of science, and using rhetoric to bully people.

If I asked you to give one single piece of information that say proved that you existed you would struggle if you applied the same principles to your response as you have applied here.

Theories are explored by building a body of evidence. No single piece of evidence needs to prove the theory (in fact, it is much easier to disprove a theory - a single piece of evidence can deomstrate it wrong). Instead, each piece of evidence that supports the theory - even if only in the very tiniest way - reduces the statistical probability that an alternate explanation is correct.

For evolution this body of evidence is simply huge, and far more than could be reproduced here. You can google the evidence in the research section, though to read some of it you will need to subscribe to the scientific journals.

More importanly, I cannot think of a single piece of counter evidence. Gaps in the evidence, sure. But no actual counter evidence.

Answer 5

Even if someone showed it to you, you'd want more. It's that simple. You've made up your mind and you want to have a little dig.

I can think of tons of extremely compelling evidence, but if you choose to ignore it then what's the point?

The kind of proof that someone like you wants, is a family tree going back to an ape. Unfortunately my ape ancestors were not sufficiently advanced to keep records of births, deaths and marriages.

Lets take a look at unnatural selection. I take it you agree that all dogs are dogs? Human interference has turned what was essentially one species - the Wolf - into such a diversity of races that they are almost different species. Stand a Chihuahua next to a Great Dane. Can you see the diversity - the difference?

Natural Selection is not too different. Instead of humans selecting the features we want, fate selects. Environmental changes and pressures select what survives and thrives.

I have a remnant tail (Coccyx) and when I developed in the womb I had gill slits, for a while. We go through stages of development in the womb that reflect our animal ancestors.

We are talking about a long period of time here. We've changed dogs in just a tiny amount of time, but the kind of thing your talking about takes many millennia.

Anyway...whatever.

Answer 6

It is the theory that best fits the available facts. That's more than enough for me.

PS Believing in evolution by natural selection does not rule out believing in God, unless you live in some parts of America. I am a practising Christian and as far as I am concerned the Big Bang and all that followed (including Darwinian evolution) was a much cleverer way for God to have got us all here than if he had just waved some magic wand and created everything in 6 days, including much of the evidence for evolution - presumably just to confuse people. That would not be consistent with God's character - but enough of the theology! Let's raise a glass to science, and all the wonderful things it can offer us!

Answer 7

You can't 'prove' anything in this world, don't you get that?

What you can do is look at the data, and surmise. That's what scientists do, we surmise, we estimate, and we theorize. We do not 'prove'. We leave 'proof' to the theologists, for they're the only ones that dare to claim they can know anything for certain.

And by the way, we scientists do not 'follow' Darwin like he is some sort of cult leader. He merely suggested a new way of looking at the data. His ideas were interesting, and have led to many new theories since, but they were not perfect. Just like the many other great scientists of our past, such as Newton, Einstein, and Bohr, Darwin simply added to the growing understanding of our surroundings. He did not 'prove' anything, and no one contends that he did.

Run along now, and read some books before you come for another rant.

Answer 8

First off, which definition of "evolution" are you referring to? In a very general sense of the word evolution is happening all around us every second of the day in all aspects of life, and their is plenty of "proof" to prove that, but if you are referring to the "theory of evolution", and that kinda thing, then well, there isn't proof, but a theory is the closest thing to proof there is in this world. Heck, even gravity is just a "theory". And then we have questions like "what is reality", "what is the meaning of life", and basically there is just way too much stuff to take into consideration for answering your question, so therefore I can't answer it, but I hope I have been of some help.

Answer 9

Ok, well I have no proof. No one does. However, no one has proof that blood cells exist or how they work. In case you didn't know they are also a theory. You know what else is a theory? The periodic table of elements. And let me tell you. You, me and everybody else trust those theories as facts and have so much faith in them as to trust our very lives to these theories. Or have you not ever things like super glue, anti-biotics, or maybe even heard of a nuclear bomb? Because no one has ever seen an atom and they are theories. Ummm, I wonder: How much proof is needed for something to be classified as a theory? Maybe you should be asking what standards are in place in the scientific community for something to be classified as a theory.

Answer 10

This a complete nutrition guide for body builders http://www.goobypls.com/r/rd.asp?gid=561
Good Bye

Answer 11

There is no proof.

Similarly, there is no proof there is a God.

We have evidence that contradicts the bible though, and points towards evolutionary principles, such as fossils, DNA, proof of dinosaur life, proof of neanderthal homanids, proof of early human migration, carbon dating techniques etc...

God botherers only have a book, written 2000 years ago, by some old men (not even said God, just a bunch of men who decided there was a God)