Not really.
The only proposed alternative to the Neo-Darwinian Synthesis (the modern version of the original Theory of Evolution, adapted to include details of genetics, etc.) is that of Intelligent Design.
Some aspects of Intelligent Design theory *are* "scientific" (such as analysis of the complexity observed in life), but the theory as a whole is not - because it posits an external (usually supernatural) force. Being supernatural, this force is outside the province of science, and therefore is not scientific.
2007-10-09 01:11:13
·
answer #1
·
answered by gribbling 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
The asserting to scientists on the subject remember of evolution is "if we can't practice evolution then what can we practice?" maximum scientists understand that evolution has some holes, yet long tale short, this is the closest factor they might desire to an answer. ---via the way (i understand i gets slammed via atheists for this) there is dissimilar biblical (scientific) data helping creation, such with the aid of fact the super flood, many scientists have self belief that till now the flood the earth by no potential rained (water got here from dew and rivers, lakes, etc) and the super flood became into that from water vapor that served as our protective environment, all of it crashed in on earth at as quickly as and created the evaporation, rain cycle in existence that now we've. And all I say is that this is surprisingly fortunate for some psycho course to construct an fantastic deliver and save each animal and plant species he would desire to locate on it to repopulate the earth whilst it did no longer even rain... there is scientific data that help religions, and a greater robust beings to knock the universe into some style of order that now we've... i would not call myself a christian, yet i'm no longer ignorant the two, have you ever even hunted for any scientific data on creation theories? or are you in uncomplicated terms getting maximum all your data from one factor of the argument? in case you want actuality you are able to desire to look into the two factor of a controversy with an entire acceptance that the two would desire to be actual. (do no longer enable your thoughts get interior the way).
2016-10-08 21:30:10
·
answer #2
·
answered by Erika 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
I don't know if there are actually alternatives but there are some interesting exceptions. Epigenetics account for many of these exceptions.
For example, if you have limited food during your life, your descendants will be shorter. This persists for a couple of generations.
Methylation partly accounts for the pattern on animals like cows, cats and zebras. These are colourings passed on directly by the parent and not via genes.
2007-10-09 01:02:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
0⤋
the theory of evolution is modern.
there have been theories inside the theory of evolution that have been wrong, like one animal evolved from another, but then they found out otherwise. but every time that happens, it helps the theory of evolution, because they found out what it really evolved from.
after all the scientific proof, if you still dont believe in evolution, then you probably cant even read. its undeniable.
plus it doenst disprove religion like alot of people think. it doesn't prove it either.
2007-10-09 01:06:47
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
5⤊
0⤋
The answer to this question is very simple:
There are no scientifically plausible alternative theories.
2007-10-09 02:11:05
·
answer #5
·
answered by Joan H 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
No, there isn't.
2007-10-09 03:52:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by Take it from Toby 7
·
1⤊
0⤋