The FACT of evolution.?

Question

Species evolve- no question, no theory, no conjecture. Evolutionary THEORY deals only with a mechanism called natural selection. Now can the creationists on here finally get their heads round that idea and we can maybe move on instead of asking the same mindless questions as if evolution were somehow theoretical or a matter of belief.

Maurice- I've read your input on this board. I doubt if you have three brain cells never mind three arms ;)

Steve N,
Evolution of species is a fact. Humans can't synthesise vitamin c and neither can primates because we both have the same enzyme deficiency- that means we have a common ancestor. Evidence like that can't be easily challenged.

Regius Filius Deis
The fossil evidence for man? There are 5 million classified species on the planet at any given time and the same biological laws apply to all of them. Fossil evidence for man is irrelevant given the fact that there is fossil evidence showing evolutionary transition in hundreds of other species. If other species are shown to evolve then mankind must unquestionably evolve also.

Serving Lord Jesus- Look at the fact mentioned above about the shared enzyme deficiency of man and primates- it's even caused by the exact same genetic defect. Now you can come up with any rhetoric you like but facts like that aren't going to go away. That combined with the wealth of fossil evidence and the fact that speciation has been observed occuring in species such as fruit flies shows that evolution is not in question.

TG,
The problem with your statement is that if microevolution occurs what is the mechanism that limits the extent of change within a species? If no mechanism exists then it must be accepted that through time microevolution will eventually lead to the emergence of new and distinct species.

Answer 1

Evolution is a fact, the only thing up for debate is how it happens.

Bog Dug: Because Crockoducks don't eat bananas!

Maurice, why didn't your god give you a third arm?

Answer 2

???Species evolve- no question, no theory, no conjecture???

Really? The fossil evidence for the supposed evolution of man would fit on an ordinary sized dining room table. The "connections" between these fossils have been deduced based on having "homologous" structures. The genetic information proving connection is entirely absent since there remains NO DNA in any of these fossils to examine - it was destroyed by the fossilization process. The supposed genetic evidence which is being presented is an extrapolation from analysis of Homo Sapien DNA and noting changes within the gene pool at this level. This is not the same thing as a direct comparison between the DNA of homo havilus and homo erectus, for example (and I'm not saying they are in direct descent with one another), since there is none to compare. And what if we did find strong similarity? Does that mean that it is *proven* that this evolution occurred, or is it merely suggestive? Good design is good design. If I build a dining room table out of wood, and then build a workbench style table out of another chunk of wood, I will have homologous structure and genetic similarity, but this does not mean that one "evolved" from the other.

The appearance of something ought not to be mistaken with the proof of something. That said, there is a lot of information being bandied about that variation occurs within a species, and this is not disputable - it is an observed fact. It is also an observed fact that preferential selection of helpful traits within a species occurs. Where the disconnect occurs is the obsurd proposal that this has resulted in speciation. This has NOT been observed. I hear this often, but when prompted, I never get anything other than presumption and a vague pointing to either a mathematical model of genetic drift, or else back to the fossil record which, as noted above, is sketchy.

Let the evolutionist bring forth his best evidence for speciation, and we will honestly discuss it, but let's not pretend that it is an established fact since it plainly is not; it's mere presumption.

Tom

Answer 3

There are two types of evolution that are commonly discussed.

Their is inter-species evolution where an animal will "change" or evolve WITHIN its own species. An example of this would be where a cat (common feline) would develop smaller teeth than its "wild" counterpart. The changes here are within the specific species of the feline. There is proof of this kind of "evolution".

On the other hand, in order for a human to have evolved from an ape, a cross-species evolution would have to occur. This is the type of evolution for which there is absolutely no proof. There is not a shred of modern or ancient evidence that evolution has crossed the species line.

Natural selection would fall into the first type of evolution.

Answer 4

Yes, it is an observable fact that organisms incorporate beneficial genetic mutations.

The theory uses evolution to explain how we got from proposed first lifeforms to humans and such.

There is no question that organisms do evolve. We even make it happen.

Answer 5

You can't force people to go against beliefs they have had there whole lives. I personally believe in evolution. Some people find comfort in their beliefs. I don't like it when they preach to me. I just don't believe in judging others that have different theories than my own.

Answer 6

You made a funny.

Evolution is a theory, not a fact.

You can't change facts just because you want to believe the theory is a fact.

Answer 7

the fact is creationists will still deny it's a fact even if it was called a fact because it contradicts the bible. don't worry though many of these nay-sayers are typically people who go with the flow. once enough people are educated and realize that intelligent design is based on a fairy tale the rest will follow.

Answer 8

That would be nice, but unfortunately this question will get buried along with all the rest and then some theist will ask the same questions again.

It's a beautiful dream that won't come true I'm afraid.

Answer 9

They hide behind ignorance. They haven't seen the documented evidence, nor are they interested in seeing it.
They mistake theory for conjecture and will not look at the evidence.

Answer 10

Creationists DO believe in 'survival of the fittest', we DO believe there are changes within a species. However the change involves a reduction of genetic information, not the creation of new information.

My question is why do evolutionist believe 'survival of the fittest' is a synonym for evolution?