Why should we accept the theory of evolution as truth?

Question

Science, in the broadest sense of the term, refers to any system of knowledge attained by verifiable means. In a more restricted sense, science refers to a system of acquiring knowledge based on empiricism, experimentation, and methodological naturalism, as well as to the organized body of knowledge humans have gained by such research.
Scientists maintain that scientific investigation must adhere to the scientific method, a process for properly developing and evaluating natural explanations for observable phenomena based on empirical study and independent verification. Science typically, therefore, rejects supernatural explanations, arguments from authority and biased observational studies.
(excerpt from wikipedia)

If this is true, science can only hold as true that which is verifiable.

Answer 1

There is no single, homogeneous theory of evolution. Most of what Darwin proposed is now well-established and verified science. As you learn it, try to be discerning. Is a particular claim which is called evolution based on science or not? The problems and the controversy begin when you go beyond what has been confirmed by good science. Some ideas are attributed to evolution but are simply a desperate attempt to avoid even considering that there might be a Creator God to whom we are accountable. If you start with the premise that God did not create the universe or life, then you need to really stretch your imagination to invent an alternative.

There is an extreme wealth of evidence that certain genetic variations within a species prevailed because they offered a competitive or survival advantage. There is an extreme sparcity of evidence that one species ever changed into another. There is an absolute absence of evidence that life just happened.

Answer 2

We shouldn't accept the Theory of Evolution as truth because it is a theory. However, the definition of truth is debateable at best. Is truth somthing that everyone agrees on or what scientific facts actually prove. Does 2+2 = 4 if everyone on the planet says 2+2 = 5 and uses that in all calculations? Everything is relative.

Answer 3

First point, faith can be based on reason and evidence; to 'have faith' does NOT mean that you are picking an idea at random, and believing it without ever looking at any evidence. It is better to look at evidence in order that you can properly understand each idea, and where it leads. I am a Christian, and I do not think the theory of evolution is true. I do not know this, but from looking at the evidence as well as I can understand it, it appears that there are some holes in it. I have not so far seen any explanation of them, and some I cannot see how they could be explained by it. I know several people with Biology related degrees, 1 with a Masters in Environmental Science who also disbelieve the theory, so I am comfortable that it is not just due to my lack of understanding. I can clearly see that 'Natural Selection' works, but that is just common sense. It does not really need to be demonstrated for someone to accept. However, I can see no evidence for any creature changing enough that it can be classified as something completely different to its 'ancestor'-indeed, I cannot see how such evidence could ever be gathered. The clear evidence would appear to lie heavily in the opposite direction, in that the only animals that we know can interbreed are obviously closely related. To my knowledge these are lions/tigers, dogs/wolves, and horses/donkeys/zebras. In all these cases, the animals could easily be said to be the same 'type'; so, although you could go as far as to say these have a common ancestor, they could be that 1 of them is the original, an the other developed from them. In the case of dogs/wolves, this is almost certainly the case. I cannot see how you can say every genus developed from 1 life form, ultimately. I do not disbelieve it because I was taught so by 'religous' people; in fact most religious leaders I know think it is true. I think it probably isn't, but as I said before, I do not know.

Answer 4

Because it is the best explanation for the available evidence such as the similarity of species, the fossil record, and observed short-term changes such as resistance to antibiotics.

I'm not sure, though, that science contains the concept of "truth" in the sense your question implies. Evolution is currently the best explanation of the processes that drive biological change. It isn't as if there's a rulebook whose contents we are trying to read, and once we read it, we know the absolute answer. Scientific theories are more like tools, and they are measured by their usefulness. Unless something better comes along, the collection of ideas that go under the rubric "evolutionary theory" are the best tools we have to understand biological change.

Answer 5

Science has looked at examples over recorded history and the fossil record and shown evidence that living things evolve. Darwin's "Origination of the Species" simply takes this process backwards to some conclusion. Modern science has tested his theory by continuing to examine living beings at the lowest and highest levels to continue to support his findings and refine the definition of the term "evolution" to show how living creatures progress over the course of time and how "nature adapts".

Why does everyone pick out evolution theory to attack? There are all sorts of astronomical theories, big bang, black holes, etc. that are just as much, if not more so, of a challenge to the precence of a "God" yet everyone worries about whether or not they are "a monkey's uncle".

Answer 6

Since it was a priest who claimed that man was descended from apes (Darwin had only showed and claimed that each species evolved to best fit into its environment) what exactly is the church's problem with evolution?

It may not be totally verifiable but there is absolutely zero verifiability in Creation. Both need a bit of faith so how much are you prepared to spend from your faith budget?

Answer 7

What's an example of an unverifiable claim made by the theory of evolution?

Answer 8

You answered your own question, though you probable did not mean to. Evolution is held as the verifiable theory explaining the observations made.

Answer 9

So, you're trying to argue evolution is all wrong? That "God" created us on the spot? Well, if God is perfect, why are His/Her creations so imperfect? Are we a failed trial manufacturing run? Why create us at all? Is God's ego fragile or something? He/She needs millions of "souls" worshipping Him/Her to feel good? Just what exactly then was God's reason for creating humans? Was He/She lonely or something? Wanted some company, but if so, why put us here and not in Heaven? What is the empirical evidence for God's creation process?
Sorry, but I was brought up Catholic. So, I learned all about creation, Genesis etc. Then I got older and learned history. Such as the Catholic Church condemning people like Bruno and Galileo for pretty much going "Well, would ya look at that?" No, the Catholic Church refused to look.
My science education has given me a very firm belief in some sort of Creator. The universe is way too beautifully and elegantly complex... it had to have taken some sort of "divine" entity to make it. I do not believe "God created man in his image", I believe that certain men created a "God" in the image best suited for the religion the men also invented to make themselves important--and that is ALL the world's religions. All religion is, is the best business in history. Every religion preaches about kindness and caring for fellow man, unless said fellow man is part of some other religion so that particular fellow must die. I mean, huh? How does that even make sense?

Answer 10

Because it is proven fact. Most scientific theories are, for technical reasons, unproveable. Evolution is an exception; it is provable and I have done so. (Details available on request.) Even absent that, the fact that scientists have been relying on it for a hundred years to make predictions which they find to be accurate should give you a clue.