Should evolutionary Theory be accepted as fact?

Question

The only evidence to support this theory, of course, is the "theory" of evolution itself, which many scientists accept as "fact" today, despite the insurmountable obstacles to such a theory, particularly the lack of any truly "intermediate" or "transitional" species in the fossil record. Over one hundred years after Darwin, and the geological record is still "missing links" -- in fact, paleontologists have found virtually no true, provable intermediate links in the fossil record. If evolution were true, there should be scores of thousands of such "links" -- they should be plentiful and abundant. They simply don't exist! Other disproofs to evolutionary theory, of course, is the incredible complexity of life itself. Evolution has found itself virtually speechless in the face of such features as the human eye, or the eyes of birds of prey, the ear, the sense of touch, taste, smell, and the fantastic complexity of the "cell" itself. (Dr. William F. Daknenbring)

Is a theory a fact?

Answer 1

No, the fossil record should be accepted as fact.

The theory of evolution provides a model that explains why we see changes in species over time when we observe the fossil record.

Answer 2

Im glad youve asked this question in a scientific manner without resorting to quotations from ancient theology.

In science it already is. It should be considered as factual as existence itself. That may sound arrogant but everything within time and space evolves and to suggest that something can remain a constant defies our most fundamental understanding of time. Scientists and philosophers have independently reached the same conclusion. Time simply does not exist without an evolution or sequence of changing events of sorts.

The idea that we cannot define a transitional species is flawed. Evolution tells us that all species are in a transitional state all the time, so pinpointing a moment when something occured for the first time is next to impossible. Also, the word species is often misinterpreted as if it was carved in stone. We define what is necessary to categorize a specific specie. Those definitions can change over time.

I would like to point out that HIV for example evolved into being and was not always the same. If it was as old as the human race it simply would have wiped us out eons ago[or six thousand in the case of the creationist? ..HIV would have had to have been created during the first seven days!?!]. In fact HIV evolves so fast that new strains are detected annually. Some may describe this as 'micro evolution' but this too is flawed, again based on the definition of the particular specie in question.

The only reason Darwin didnt call evolution a fact is unequivocally simple; he would have been killed by the church as many were before him for their 'threatening' beliefs.

One more point is that evolution is known as the unifying theory of biology. There has never before or since been a unifying theory of any science, able to explain the reasoning for everything within the subject with a single line "survival of the fittest". This is very relevant.

I have one question for you..

It is known[fact] for example that snakes possess the DNA for legs. If god created them as snakes, a) why would he waste his time doing such a thing? b) Doesnt this offer proof the the snakes ancestor wasnt always a 'snake' as we define it?

Answer 3

By 'evolution', I assume you mean macroevolution (one species gradually changing into a more complex one).
This is not a fact. It is based on extrapolation. On the other hand, small variation within a species (microevolution) is a fact, as can be clearly seen in the various breeds of dogs, for example. Of course, you do understand that the definition of 'species' is not settled.

In science, a theory is a fact. So we need to differentiate between a scientific theory and a theoretical theory. When Charles Darwin FIRST published "Origin of
Species" (1859), 'theory' then had a theoretical meaning. Today, that would be a scientific hypothesis. After a hypothesis had been shown to hold true over time and space, it is then upgraded to a scientific theory. If it is still valid after a long time (say, 100 years?), it is further upgraded to a scientific law. At no time was the concept of macroevolution shown to be true. Yet the scientific community were so eager to get rid of God that they were willing to accept anything, including hoaxes such as Haekel's drawings of the early embryonic stage , Nebraska Man and Piltdown Man.

There are numerous reasons why I cannot accept macroevolution, three of which are :

1. Irreducible Complexity
2. the Cambrian Explosion,
3. stasis - species appear suddenly, lived 'million' of years unchanged, then becomes extinct, according to the Geologic Column.

Answer 4

Evolution is called a theory simply because scientists won't accept something as a fact until they have a full and comprehensive understanding of it. There's lots of evidence to support different parts of the theory but to accept the whole theory would need every single bit to be thoroughly explained. Many things have been accepted as fact with far less evidence, but science is rigorous and doesn't just accept things with out thoroughly understanding it. They've only been studying evolution for the last hundred years which means for the last hundred years they have been studying a time frame that's somewhere in the region of 60 million years. How long do you think it takes to gather and analysis 60 million years worth of history.

Answer 5

Why do you continue to copy and paste false arguments that have been conclusively disproven over and over and over again for more than 150 years?

Are you really that disingenuous, or are you truly that ignorant?

1 - There are millions of pieces of physical evidence, from fossil data to comparative morphology, to genetic comparisons, to laboratory experiments that support the theory of evolution.

2 - There are HUNDREDS, if not thousands of known transitional fossils. Anyone who tells you otherwise is LYING!!

3 - The human eye argument was asked and answered by Charles Darwin in the original thesis (The Origin of Species). If you had actually read it, you'd know that.

4 - The theory of evolution is the scientific explanation for how evolution occurs. The fact that biological evolution occurs was known as far back as Ancient Greece. The FACT that anti-biotic resistant bacteria develop is incontrovertible proof that evolution occurs. There is no rational way to argue that it does not occur.

Answer 6

I find it amusing when people argue against evolution for not being a perfect explanation of how life forms change over time because in their estimation it lacks sufficient evidence or has holes, and then they say something like, "Creation is the real answer. No holes in that theory!"

Don't you realize that there is just as much evidence for a supreme being creating everything at once as there is for crazed space monkeys having seeded the earth with life on a bet?

And to answer your question, in the scientific community, yes a theory is a fact. Einstein's theory of relativity is also a fact, and has been verified through experiments and mathematics, but until we can travel at the speed of light it will not be classified as a scientific law. "Theory" and "law" mean different things as scientific terms than they do as every day words.

Answer 7

I believe in evolution and have found sufficient research to support it. Personally I believe in a higher power and in evolution. Why can there not be a higher power and evolution? What was considered the "great flood" or "Noah's Arc" was a story that came from a time when many glaciers were melting creating massive floods around the world. The Black Sea was fresh water during this time and got flooded with salt water creating what it is today, wiping out some of the peoples that lived on the shore. I believe you can take some of the stories in the bible with a grain of salt. lol. I don't believe that giving credence to science makes you an atheist or anything(not that there's anything wrong with that either).
Some of the most "fundamentalist" Christians say that diseases can mutate(if it supports making a drug to remedy it), that's evolution.

Answer 8

Nearly everyone does believe in evolution in some form. However natural selection is a far cry from the limitless process imagined by Darwin. A more interesting question is how many scientist believe in God and that .14% figure zooms up to over 60%! The notion that science alone holds all the secrets of our existence has become a religion of its own… Science is the proper way to understand the natural, of course; but science gives us no reason to deny that there are aspects of human identity that fall outside the sphere of nature, and hence outside the sphere of science. Metaphysical naturalism is the view that nature is reality and that there is no reality beyond the physical, natural world — no supernatural beings, no supernatural powers and no supernatural events. (Metaphysical naturalism is a position typically adopted by atheists as it does not either consider if there is anything beyond the physical.) Methodological naturalism is the basis of scientific work and is the process of assuming that natural explanations can be found for natural events. When operating under methodological naturalism, scientists act as if metaphysical naturalism is true without also asserting that it definitely is. Because of this, scientists today are aware that science itself is limited. Science is competent to answer questions about how matter behaves according to the laws of nature, but science is not competent to answer the question of whether or not the laws of nature have a Lawgiver.

Answer 9

As a practising catholic I have come to believe that there is nothing regarding religion or mans creation that could be taken as any fact including the bible, Mankind really is the dumbest of the species of life on this planet, he has a thousand different interpretations of the bible, and just as many of how he was created, and he still doesn't have a clue of who or what he is, he has an intelligent brain but uses it unintelligibly when it comes to religion and creation, it's no wonder why our societies get so screwed up over religion.

Answer 10

Yes.

"lack of any truly "intermediate" or "transitional" species in the fossil record. "

ALL FOSSILS ARE TRANSITIONAL GGHCFTYI HVKJFKYJUF HGGKL.

"there should be scores of thousands of such "links" -- they should be plentiful and abundant."

You clearly know nothing about paleontology. Not every animal that dies is fossilised. Only a very small minority of life that has existed has been found. If humanity were to become extinct tomorrow, future paleontologists might find an arrow-head, a tooth and a breezeblock.

"Evolution has found itself virtually speechless in the face of such features as the human eye,"

No it hasn't. We know almost exactly how the eye formed.

You are clearly very ignorant. Go and read a book not written by a loony Creationist, then come back.

Answer 11

Beautifully stated! It drives me crazy when people accept Darwin's "theory" as truth, when in fact it would take more faith to believe whole heartedly in evolution than it would "Intelligent Design"

You'll be surprised as to how many scientist (very well respected scientists) have looked at the "facts" within evolution and staded publically that in theory it souds great, but when you analize the info that the theory was based upon, it just doesn't work.
I've always wondered how we've grown the population of the earth by 4 billion people in what, the past 10 years? So if animals and primative people have been around for millions and billions of years constantly evolving and mating, why hasn't the population grow as rapidly as now. Shouldn't the Earth have been overpopulated at least 5000-1000 years ago?

Did all varieties of trees stem from one particular tree to creat both fruit bearing trees and non fruit bearing? Just because the structure of all trees are similar it doesn't mean they came from the same tree. Just as cars are all similar but they didn't come from the same manufacturer.