No. Of course no theory can answer *all* our questions about anything. Humans are *very* good at asking questions. And there are certainly a lot of questions (such as the origins of life, or the origins of the universe) that have nothing to do with the theory of evolution. For example, evolution does not cover the question of abiogenesis (the origins of life) ... only the origins of modern species of life from the first life forms after life began.
But evolution certainly does answer a *lot* of questions. Questions about the patterns and relationships in the DNA we see throughout *all* species. In the locations and structures of fossils we find. In the geographic locations of all the species (e.g. why kangaroos, other marsupials, and their fossils appear in Australia and *only* in Australia). In the commonalities in structures (homologous structures, vestigial structures ... why whales have hip bones, or snakes have leg buds, or humans have a plantaris muscle in the calf or a big toe that resembles a thumb more than it does the other toes). In the development of embryos (why human embryos have tails and gill slits, why dolphin embryos have leg buds). Etc. etc.
... A *lot* of questions ... but certainly not *all* questions.
>" Why ... did some species stop evolving thousands of years ago, while others continued?"
*No* species "stopped evolving" thousands (or millions) of years ago. For example, it is a mistake to think that humans are "more evolved" than, say, chimps. They are NOT "unevolved humans". They are fully evolved chimps. Every bit as evolved as we are ... just as well adapted to their environment as we are to ours. They are the product of just as many years of evolution as we are.
>"If the dinosaurs hadn't been wiped out suddenly, what would they have evolved into?"
Although most dinosaurs were indeed wiped out about 65 million years ago ... a small contingent of them survived and have evolved into what we now know as birds.
2007-09-23 08:47:05
·
answer #1
·
answered by secretsauce 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
Evolution for a particular organism is like solving a linear programming problem with n variables. There is an algorithm, but it tends to stop at a local maximum in n-space where conditions are locally optimised. Species evolve to fit a particular niche but if environmental changes occur they either adapt by favourable mutations or become extinct, especially if the change is sudden and catastrophic. There is some fossil evidence to indicate that at least dinosaurs and birds shared a common ancestor or that the descendants of some dinosaurs may have evolved into birds. The period corresponding to the location of simian like fossils with some human characteristics is about the time of the great rift in east Africa where geological changes mediated the change in environment from forest to savannah. Whether selection for upright walking or larger brain size was the most favourable evolutionary response is a matter of conjecture-perhaps a bit of both.
You could on the other hand just accept the fundamentalist/creationist view which says that there was no evolution, no fossil record, and no explanation required except that god made heaven and earth in 6 days 6,000 years ago and that the first humans were made fully fledged as A&E in the garden of eden. It depends which you think is the best story.
2007-09-23 16:44:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by alienfiend1 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Species continually evolve, but because of the competition to survive, it literally is survival of the fittest. This means that a small mutation that is inadequate or useless to surviving any better than the main species will probably not result in a sub species forming in a few generations. However a small mutation which serves a great advantage when compared to the main species could result in a new sub species all with this same new ability/feature, and may even result in the original species struggling to survive as a result.
What I am saying is that some species did not stop evolving, it is just that any new changes were not suited and were consequently wiped as soon as they emerged. Also we do have descendants of dinosaurs to this day, in fact only a few days ago it was suggested that the T-REX may have been an oversized turkey and did not have scaly reptilian skin as previously thought but had feathers etc instead.
2007-09-23 16:42:57
·
answer #3
·
answered by kfgmaster 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Species stop evolving for two reasons:
1- They are jsut so simple that they can survive anywhere (so most bacteria are more or less similar to their original ancestors).
2- They cannot cope with new conditions and cannot evolve in time. They die out.
Yes, evolution is pretty good at explaining why we are here. Most of our evolutionary process is tracked, and evidence for it is huge (it is one of the most supported scientific theories). It includes:
-Fossils
-Genetic evidence (we can track genetic progress over time).
-Homlologous tructures (similar bodytypes of gorups of animals suggests a common ancestor).
I could go on.
We have no idea what the dinosaurs would have become. I do know they were in trouble before they got wiped out. Earth is a lot cooler now, which amy have finished them off.
2007-09-25 07:25:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by Bob B 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Species only evolve within themselves. There is no evidence at all to conclude that species turn into some other forms of life, ie. There was nothing before the dinosaurs, and when they died out there were no more dinosaurs, Homo erectus died off, as did Africanus and Habilus and all the others They all certainly evolved, but only within their own species and when we die out there will be no more humans. Why is it so hard for folk to understand, its a simple matter of common sense.
2007-09-23 18:34:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by jingles 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes evolution answers all our questions, if we know how to phrase them properly.
Nothing stops evolving - natural selection is taking place all the time - you might ask why horseshoe crabs are the same as they've been for a few hundred million years but their selection pressures have remained the same - evolution's rule is 'if it aint broke, dont fix it'
Nothing evolves for the sake of it.
Some people think dinosaurs could have evolved in to an intelligent (as smart as us) species under the right circumstances. Iguanadons had an impressive thumb, if the dinosaurs had developed more hand dexterity they might have discovered how to make fire and then... who knows.
Oh and Ethan is right, birds are dinosaurs - T-rex is still here today - he's just got feathers (or more feathers, some say dinosaurs had pin feathers) in fact, cladists whose field is the family trees of living creatures when referring to animals like T-rex call them 'non-avian dinosaurs' to distinguish them from seagulls and eagles.
2007-09-23 15:56:27
·
answer #6
·
answered by Leviathan 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Evolution is a theory, whose basis is unsound.
On the evidence before Darwin, he could have taken a different view.
Assuming that his theory was correct, there was insufficient time on the scale which the scientists believe, for some primeval slime to develop into a Yahoo answerer.
2007-09-23 21:37:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by Canute 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
no i dont think elolution answer's all our questions...
i dont think that any species stoped evolving, especialy now with our planet changing so fast all things great and small will need to evolve, i think even humans are Evolving to try to live in our world with more ease
2007-09-23 15:50:23
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Your question is hard to answer.
If by evolution you mean one kind of animal changing into another kind of animal (fish to reptile, goo-to-you), then this kind of evolution has never been shown to have happened at all.
The fossils that are allegedly millions of years look just like living creatures (or else are extinct). The fossil record shows stasis and extinction.
If by evolution you mean change within a kind (finches beaks, or even lions and tigers which are descended from a common ancestor), then this has never stopped. This is natural selection and is an observed fact.
Some people deliberately equivicate about the word - pointing out that the latter type occurs (yes) and that this therefore proves that the former type occurs (no, it doesn't prove any such thing.)
I recommend you check out a site like this if you want to find out more
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/21/65
2007-09-23 15:58:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by a Real Truthseeker 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Are you complaining?
2007-09-25 11:25:17
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋