Is there any proof that evolution exists?

Question

I know animals adapt to their environment, ie the birds in the Galapagos island whos bills are changing shape to suit the food they eat. There are other examples of adaptation like this but no proof as far as I know with evolution, ie an animal changing into another species. Correct me if I am wrong! Also provide proof.

The idea of humans evolving into humans as we know today within the short period of 4 billion years is a hard pill to swallow. Especially when supposidly it would take a single cell organism 150 million years to evolve into a multi cell organism. Then only 26 times longer to reach human stage. That is assuming single cell organisms were here when the earth was made 4 billion years ago. It just doesn't make sense. Where did we come from is the answer everybody wants to know?

Answer 1

You said "I know animals adapt to their environment". That's pretty much it. Evolution is nothing but descent with modification that is passed on to future generations, which is what you just described. Natural selection tends to select for the changes that allow survival.

What you are probably questioning is whether these changes can lead to a new species. Mutations can and do happen all the time that add genes and even entire chromosomes (Trisomy 21 in humans is detrimental, but still an example).

When someone shows a mechanism that limits how much change can accumulate in DNA, then that line of reasoning might challenge the Theory of Evolution. Until then, it's only wishful thinking on the part of religious zealots to claim there is some barrier between "macro-evolution" and "micro-evolution".

As for anyone wanting an example of sudden evolution, species like Spartina anglica provide examples worthy of mention.

Answer 2

I don't know what you think Evolution is, to be fair most scientist look too narrowly at it, but evidence of it is everywhere you look.
A species does not have the ability to breed with another species. So you are correct in stating that we have not witnessed evolution in the short time we have studied it scientifically. Although the Vampire Finch of the Galapagos took only 20yrs. but that's a sub-species.
But looking at it logically, just how long do you imagine it would take us to meddle so much that a Chihuahua could no longer mate with a Great Dane?
If we can do it, I'm sure God's doing it better.
I think of my God as intelligent enough to invent an automatic system, rather than having to spend his time creating every single life. Or perhaps you see God as down on the production line, rather than factory owner?
Best leave the genetic level alone until they've ironed out the kinks. Don't jump on something that's not fully understood and say 'see you were wrong'. Because the answers going to be ' I wasn't finished yet'.
Where did we come from?
Evolution is a process not an answer. It won't explain how life was created. So you can't look for philosophical questions with it. That's the Creationists big tell, if they understood they wouldn't be threatened. If they're threatened it's because they worry about their faith.

Answer 3

I don't think there is an answer that exists that would ever, ever, ever make you think that evolution is anything more than a heretical ploy to kill God by the unbelievers who are bringing forth the rapture.

But for the rest of us who have our eyes and minds open, there is more "proof" of evolution than there is "proof" of God.

I'm not saying God doesn't exist - I'm saying there's no proof God exists. And NO, the bible is NOT proof.

You're saying evolution does not exist - in spite of the considerable fossil record and scientific credibility associated with evolution.

Answer 4

Proof that Evolution exists are contained within the rocks of the Earth. However, I do not wish to go into that, I want to clear up some misconceptions posted by other answers.
First, dheeraj said: "let me just say first that evolution as a concept has been proven and the only thing theoretical about it is the process by which it occurs and even that we pretty much have down". Wow! I have never heard of the Theory of Evolution, or any other theory for that matter, as having been proved. The aim of Science is explain, not to prove. Theories are based on facts but they are not facts in themselves.

Next, Rev. Albert Einstein said: "Contrary to what is commonly assumed by laymen, there is NO proof of evolution having occurred."
Wow Rev, when did you become something other than a layman? Just because you have the term "Reverend" in front of your name hardly makes you an expert on Evolution. Where did you get you PhD in Science that makes you anything other than a "layman"?

Then he said: "There is plenty of evidence AGAINST EVOLUTION:. First, the 'Cambrian explosion'...... the millions of fossil types in Cambrian rock (oldest fossil bearing rocks) appear suddenly and fully formed and without any previous forms...IOW [sic], there are no transitional forms."
Hey Rev., there is an abundunce of Edicadian fossils, prior to the Cambrian Explosion. The fact that the Earth was under conditions of extreme glaciation during the "Ice House" of the Edicarian did not stop life from existing prior to the "Green House" of the Cambrian. There are transitional forms, but then not having those three letters (PhD) behind your name means you are prone to making "layman" mistakes.

Answer 5

Well to answer your first question the two most prominent pieces of evidence that support cross-species evolution that come to my mind are embryology and the various vestigial structures apparent in most organisms.

If one were to compare the development of embryos of different species, one can see that the embryos of birds, reptiles, and mammals develop in a very similar way, almost identical, in the early stages. Then as the embryo matures, the unique structures then begin form.

Vestigial structures are also evidence as most organisms have these organ/cell structures that serve no purpose any more. One example is the appendix in humans. Another are the 'walking' hips in blue whales.


For your second question, you have to take into account of the environment and climate of the planet back then. It was a less stable and forgiving place than it is today. In fact the reason why the single celled organism evolved into multicellular is because of the planet had settled down.

Answer 6

Halox,

No theory or idea in science is ever "proven", that is not how science works. There is, however, an extremely large amount of evidence that supports evolution. This business that there are no undisputed transitional fossils is something that was made up by attackers of evolution many years ago, and has continued to be quoted to this day even though there are hundreds upon hundreds of transitional fossils. If you don't believe me, visit the following sites. The two links below show the slow transitions that took place amongst trilobites as they evolved over 250 million years.

http://www.trilobites.info/biostratigraphy.htm
http://www.trilobites.info/trends.htm

For a more recent evolutionary series, see the site below that describes the transition from reptiles to mammals, beginning with a transition fossil called cynodonts, a reptile that began showing mammalian bone structure, and was followed by at least 7 other transitions that showed one by one the loss of reptilian features and gain of mammalian features:

http://members.tripod.com/~Cambrian/Reptile-Mammal

There are hundreds of other examples that you are perfectly capable of looking up on your own that I will not type out in this response. The people who are feeding you this garbage about "no evidence for evolution" and "no transition fossils" are either LYING to you, or they are completely and wholely ignorant of biological science. You should be upset with THEM for deceiving you and making you believe things about science that are completely false, and NOT with us for pointing out the truth. "Rev. Albert Einstein", and the others promoting this old propoganda, have apparently not done their homework on this.

I hope I haven't offended you, but you did ask for "proof", and I am trying to provide you with just that. Please look over those websites and digest what you find. If you have any questions, I invite you to e-mail me. I'm a nice guy, and I'm happy to share anything I know and understand about this.

Answer 7

Read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduction_to_evolution


and this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution


and this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation
Your time frames are way off. It took 500 million years after earth formed for the first life forms of any kind to arise (how life came to be we do not know, and for that matter, evolutionary biology doesn't care about how the first living thing came to be; all evolutionary biology cares about is how that life form evolved into other life forms).

It took another 3 BILLION years for the first vertbrates to evolve. So life was inverterbrates only for 3 billion years.

Humans evolved in a relatively short time frame, only about 3 million years.

How you came up with the idea that it would take 150 million years for a single-celled organism to evolve into a multicellular organism, I have no idea. I've never heard that time frame mentioned.

There is also a difference between evolution and speciation.

Evolution is where the genetic frequencies in a population change. This is easily observable.

Speciation is a special class of evolution that means going from one species to another.

You are correct in saying that we have never seen one form of an animal or plant evolve into another form. Keep in mind that it takes hundreds thousands of generations, though, to see any significant change in genetic makeup. You might as well look at a huge oak tree for 5 minutes and say, "I've never seen this tree be anything but big, so it must not have ever been anything else besides big." The time frames in question are huge.

Answer 8

Animals don't "change into other species" in our lifetime, or even in recorded history. This happens over thousands and thousands of years, as shown in the fossil record. What more proof do you need? Adaptation is a small facet of evolution. You're debating a very simplified version of the big picture.

Answer 9

Well, you actually give examples of evolution. So, ta da! If you understood evolution better, you would see why your examples are evolution.

A single celled organism evolving into mutli celled takes longer then ancestor ape into humans because it is a bigger jump genetically. A single celled into mulit celled is like 50% new genetics. An ancestor apes into humans is like 3% new genetics. this is seen in the fact that monkey share so much of the same genetics.

Answer 10

Dear Mr. Creationist (or whatever your handlers tell you to call it this week),

Another 30 board-feet of pasting the same arguments does not change the fact that they are still as wrong as when we debunked them all the first time.

You have absolutely zero ability to comprehend what you paste, and as such, when you come across the same argument already shredded here at a later date it appears brand new to you. It is a truly sad state, and you need to grasp that you only highlight your own mental deficiency by persisting with the cut and paste marathon.

Were you able, on even the simplest level, to grasp the concepts involved, you would recognize the repetitive nature of your posts. As it is, you do not even have that elementary comprehension of the topic at hand.

Sadly, this is how creationism works, they rely on the vehement and vociferous response of their most ignorant and uneducated of followers to speak for them. They pot up the article, fully knowing the lies, distortions, and misleading nature of them and wait for people like you to cry them from the mountaintops.

We know the creationist movement to be dishonest to it's core, because the articles they produce requires a pretty decent knowledge of astronomy, cosmology, geology, anthropology, and a variety of other sciences... yet it is deliberately twisted and distorted in to outright lies. And this is not the type of misunderstanding that comes from a bad grasp of the topic, it required in-depth lies and trickery to produce.

So climb that mountain again, Rainman, and tell us again how wrong we are.