English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

.
Some here have stated mere speculation that even scientist disagree on as indisputable fact. There is some fact in animal adaptation, how much is mere speculation?

2007-03-08 14:24:23 · 11 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

11 answers

We observe adaptation and speciation in nature. Some choose to label this 'micro-evolution'. But it is adaptation-nothing more. Evolution is pure speculation. We do not have any evidence yet that supports one specie turning into another specie. The term "micro-evolution" is use to sneak in the word evolution into the equation. We see finches with short beaks and finches with long beaks-that is adaptation. The real point is that both are still finches. We never see a T-Rex turn into a Mocking bird or a cow turn into a whale. Evolution never happened and there is not even a hint of evidence to suggest it did.

2007-03-08 14:34:06 · answer #1 · answered by Desperado 5 · 0 4

There is much less "speculation" than there is propaganda. The claim that evolution is "just a theory, not a fact", and is "all speculation" is pure propaganda. Go study evolution with an open mind for a few months. You will find that it makes perfect sense, and is supported by a vast amount of evidence. Evolution was already on solid footing before DNA was discovered. In fact, it is one of the great triumphs of the Theory of Evolution that Watson & Crick used principles from the ToE to guide their search that led to the discovery of DNA. In the last 15 years the study of the genomes of different species has completely solidified the ToE.

Pablito is right. You can take Evolution to the bank. 50 years from now, the only kind of people who will still be disagreeing with evolution are the kind of people who today claim that the earth is flat. The only religions that will survive are those who adapt to that fact, and recognize that Evolution does not in and of itself disprove a supernatural creator.
---- Edit
By the way, for those that claim that there is no evidence supporting macroevolution, please go read these 29 different types of evidence for macroevolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

2007-03-08 14:42:45 · answer #2 · answered by Jim L 5 · 0 0

It's a theory. Whenever they get new evidence, they update it to the best of their abilities. A lot of stuff like natural selection has been proven in controlled settngs and we know that the best genes get passed on and that a breed of animal can change over time. The next step is the controversial one: the scientists took that fact and applied it to the idea of one species completely changing form and evolving into a completely different species to get macroevolution. I personally believe in macroevolution, but I am aware that it has some gaps that haven't quite been filled in yet and that are troubling other people. Some people just discount the whole thing and say animals never change. Most reputable scientists agree in that the theory of evolution is not only very plausible, but the best scientific theory regarding the origin of all the species and the fossils, etc, to date.

2007-03-08 14:34:16 · answer #3 · answered by Amy 4 · 0 0

Many of the fine details are highly educated inferences and are still being debated. But over all between fossils, the geologic record, genetics, phylogeny mapping, and a good understanding of the molecular mechanism for the generation of genetic diversity......

You can take evolution to the bank.

2007-03-08 14:29:56 · answer #4 · answered by Pablito 5 · 2 0

There is not a single paper in any peer reviewed scientific journal in at least 50 years that goes against the big idea. There is a little discussion on the details only. There is no serious discussion in Biological circles about the main idea at all. It happened.

2007-03-08 14:29:31 · answer #5 · answered by Alex 6 · 3 0

This good question could have a very long answer. Instead, I will just refer you to an article, "Is Evolution a 'Fact' of Science".

This was written by Bert Thompson, PhD. His doctorate is from Texas A & M, and his field of study is microbiology.

2007-03-08 14:45:37 · answer #6 · answered by JoeBama 7 · 0 1

The premises of macro evolution is fact. Some of the mechanisms of evolution are still being studied.

2007-03-08 14:28:19 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

A scientific theory is an attempt to explain observable facts.

Change over time, which aggregates to major changes, is an observable fact.

Evolution is the theory that attempts to explain it.

"Creation science" denies that these observable facts occur at all.

2007-03-08 14:27:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4 0

Everything scientists tell you about it is fact. Everything the creationists tell you about it is rubbish.

Put your mind at ease: evolution is a fact, clear and simple.

2007-03-08 14:36:11 · answer #9 · answered by SomeGuy 6 · 1 0

It's a peer reviewed scientific theory.

2007-03-08 21:02:06 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers