in evolution theory FROM SIMPLE TO COMPLEX? What evidence is there for progress fr one form to another?

Question

The basis of evolution is that the complex, higher lifeforms were derived fr the simpler, lower forms. By what evidence is there for progress from one form to another?

Answer 1

The fossil record is full of evidence that speciation has occurred over and over again throughout the history of life on Earth. Fossils found in different rock layers (called strata) correspond to different periods in Earth's past, so by looking at the layer from which a certain fossil comes, we can build a picture of evolution over time.

Molecular genetics provides corroborating evidence that evolution has in fact occurred. Based on similarities in morphology (shape) and behavior, and on evidence from the fossil record, we can make predictions about the evolutionary relationships between two species. And when we compare the DNA from those species, we find that their DNA is similar...more similar than the DNA of two organisms that don't show such obvious similarities.

Speaking of molecular genetics, you have to consider the fact that EVERY living organism on Earth has DNA made of the same four nucleotides (adenine, guanine, cytosine, and thymine), and that the genetic code reads the same for every organism. Although that's not a smoking gun showing that evolution occurred, you have to wonder how else every organism would have the same genetic code if we weren't all descended from a common ancestor.

If you want more evidence, consider comparative embryology. The embryos of related groups of species go through very similar stages of development, even if the end product is very different. All vertebrate embryos, for example, possess a dorsal nerve cord, gill slits, and a tail, even though many species (like humans) lose their gill slits and tail in the course of development. Like the identical genetic code, the similarities in embryology point to common ancestry, which in turn leads to the idea that these species must have evolved into their present-day forms over great periods of time.

I could go on....for a long, long time. No single piece of evidence is going to definitively prove that evolution has occurred, but the weight of the evidence taken together strongly suggests that it has. We can also see evolution occurring today; in fact, a recent study indicates that human evolution has proceeded much faster in the last five thousand years than it did at any point before that, contrary to expectations that modern medicine would remove many of the selective pressures that ultimately lead to evolution.

One thing you have to keep in mind: evolution doesn't necessarily change organisms from simple to complex (although that has happened in many instances over great periods of geological time). Evolution changes organisms into those that are better suited for survival in a certain ecological niche. If a "fitter" organism happens to be biologically more complex than its ancestor, so be it, but that's not the ultimate goal of evolution.

With that in mind, I should probably also mention that there is no "ultimate goal" of evolution. Evolution isn't goal oriented, and as hard is it might be to accept, the sole purpose of evolution wasn't to make human beings. We are but a milepost in the ever-changing parade of life, and after we're gone, something else will arise to take our place.

I hope that helps you out. Good luck!

EDIT: Please don't believe anything from the article posted by Creation Science. That article contains so many half-truths and outright lies that it makes my head hurt. It's funny that the Ten Commandments admonish people against lying, yet the uber-religious are willing to do exactly that in order to remove what they perceive as, get this, an obstacle to the literal interpretation of the Bible. Sheesh.

EDIT 2: Gregg, I have no doubt that sometime in science's history, a scientist has interpreted data to fit a preconceived idea. The thing is, the existing loads of evidence don't have to be interpreted so tortuously to fit the modern synthesis of evolutionary theory as they do to support creation "science". Furthermore, every piece of evidence..EVERY piece..holds up evolutionary theory, and NONE supports Creationism or ID. None of it.

You say that "If the religious and scientific sides of society are both honestly committed to truth, they will both ultimately arrive at the same conclusion". What business does religion have probing into matters of scientific debate? (And by the same token, what business does science have investigating matters of religious import?) Science and religion are two separate things. No reputable scientist is trying to prove or disprove the existence of God (since God is supernatural and therefore beyond the scope of science), but Creationists ARE trying to impose their religious ideas on science.

Perhaps most insidiously, Creationists are trying to wedge their non-scientific ideas into public school science curricula. This is an inexcusable breach of the establishment clause, and it is an underhanded attempt to indoctrinate children into a flawed way of reasoning.

With all due respect, I simply cannot agree with your implied statement that Creationism deserves equal consideration as a possible explanation for the incredible biodiversity we see around us, because in reality, it doesn't...at least, not in scientific circles. That's what Creationists are trying to do, however, and they're all too willing to lie to achieve those ends.

EDIT 3: And if I was mistaken in interpreting your intent, please feel free to let me know. I feel pretty confident that I read you correctly, though.

Answer 2

The older the rocks, the more simple the life forms that are represented within them. WIthout making any reference to "evolution" at all, our explanation of the world around us needs to account for the fossil record that shows us snapshots of life in this world going from no life at all to simplicity to a high degree of order, diversity and complexity.

The argument focuses around the process itself. It is not a question of WHETHER life has appeared and become more complex over time, since the record of this is in front of our eyes. The question is HOW this happened, and over what amount of time.

Evolution and its variants (Jay Gould's punctuated equilibrium and the like) are just stories that attempt to fit together the pieces of the puzzle that we can observe.

The field of genetics is solidifying the story to a great extent, since we are finding that the genetic similarities between species closely follows the structure proposed by Linnaeus back in the early days of the evolutionary theory, well before we knew about DNA. While we can still argue about the driving force that created biological complexity (whether it was God or nature) the mechanism and building blocks by which such diversity arose or was created is becoming clearer by the year.

Not to worry - truth prevails over time, whatever that truth may be - and truth is not afraid of being tested against fossils, genetics, or anything else that we throw at it. At the end of the day, truth prevails. If the religious and scientific sides of society are both honestly committed to truth, they will both ultimately arrive at the same conclusion, though the paths may differ along the way. I do not presume to say at this point in the journey what that conclusion will be, though I have my suspicions.

Lucas - we were apparently writing at exactly the same time. FYI, I was in the interesting position in the 80's of being both an evangelical and a graduate-level paleontologist. Let's just say that good research (no matter who is conducting it) requires that you be open to any conclusion that the data suggests. If you go in with the conclusion already fixed in your mind, the "research" will tend to be flawed. I think that both the creationist and evolutionary sides are to some extent guilty of the same shortcoming.

Answer 3

There are many forms of evidence. Some evidence takes the form of organisms evolving capabilities right before our eyes... for example, bacteria have been observed to evolve the ability to resist our antibiotics.

Some of the most powerful evidence, however, comes from the fossil record. This record contains fossils of simple life forms at the bottom of the geologic column, with evolutionary sequences, all the way up to modern life forms at the top of the column. Mr. "Creation Science" has apparently never read a book, since both reptile/birds and reptile/fish transitional forms have been found in the fossil record, along with hundreds of other transition fossils that show evolutionary sequences. The reptile/fish that showed signs of walking on land was reported in the journal "Science" a few years ago. I could go on and on with examples of entire sequences of transitional fossils. Anyone who says that there is no evidence for transitional species or evolution in the fossil record is either a liar, or is so completely ignorant of natural science that they have no business talking about it at all. I have no idea which "Creation Science" is, but either way, he is not to be trusted.

Hope this answers your question!


(Lucas C: Brilliant answer. I wish I could thumbs up it more than once.)

Answer 4

Fossils. Millions of 'em. Compare the few human fossils to see how the form has evolved from more apelike to more humanlike. A species with a good record of fossils forms is the horse. It's all there if you choose to see it. If you don't, even a sledgehammer on the head from God saying "Evolution is real" won't work.

Answer 5

some of your statements are generally accepted as true some are not (41, 39, 35 7, 12, 28, 35) "We do not know for sure Yet" IS NOT THE SAME as "therefore it must be magic" Keep learning you have about 38/ 45 more or less correct, 84% but the most important conclusions are wrong I would grade "D-" If you want to really stretch your mind, read "The Phenomenon of Man" an attempt to philosophically merge religious belief with scientific knowledge Very difficult reading, you may want to stick "Children's bible stories"

Answer 6

There is no evidence for evolutionary theory. One of the articles of Mr.Harun Yahya may help you about this question. Thank you for this good question.

The Fossil Record Refutes Evolution

According to the theory of evolution, every living species has sprung from a predecessor. A previously-existing species turned into something else in time and all species have come into being in this way. According to the theory, this transformation proceeds gradually over millions of years.

If this was the case, then numerous intermediary species should have existed and lived within this long transformation period.

For instance, some half-fish/half-reptiles should have lived in the past which had acquired some reptilian traits in addition to the fish traits they already had. Or there should have existed some reptile-birds, which acquired some bird traits in addition to the reptilian traits they already had. Evolutionists refer to these imaginary creatures, which they believe to have lived in the past, as "transitional forms".

If such animals had really existed, there should be millions and even billions of them in number and variety. More importantly, the remains of these strange creatures should be present in the fossil record. The number of these transitional forms should have been even greater than the present animal species and their remains should be found all over the world. In The Origin of Species, Darwin explained:

If my theory be true, numberless intermediate varieties, linking most closely all of the species of the same group together must assuredly have existed... Consequently evidence of their former existence could be found only amongst fossil remains.

Even Darwin himself was aware of the absence of such transitional forms. It was his hope that they would be found in the future. Despite his hopefulness, he realized that the biggest stumbling-block in his theory was the missing transitional forms. Therefore in his book The Origin of Species he wrote the following in the chapter "Difficulties of the Theory":

…Why, if species have descended from other species by fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms? Why is not all nature in confusion, instead of the species being, as we see them, well defined?… But, as by this theory innumerable transitional forms must have existed, why do we not find them embedded in countless numbers in the crust of the earth?… But in the intermediate region, having intermediate conditions of life, why do we not now find closely-linking intermediate varieties? This difficulty for a long time quite confounded me.

The single explanation Darwin could come up with to counter this objection was the argument that the fossil record uncovered so far was inadequate. He asserted that when the fossil record had been studied in detail, the missing links would be found.

LIVING FOSSILS

The theory of evolution claims that species continuously evolve into other species. But when we compare living things with their fossils, we see that they have remained unchanged for millions of years. This fact is a clear evidence that falsifies the claims of evolutionists.

Believing in Darwin’s prophecy, evolutionists have been searching for fossils and digging for missing links since the middle of the 19th century all over the world. Despite their best efforts, no transitional forms have yet been uncovered. All the fossils unearthed in excavations showed that contrary to the beliefs of evolutionists, life appeared on earth all of a sudden and fully-formed. Trying to prove their theory, the evolutionists have instead unwittingly caused it to collapse.

A famous British paleontologist, Derek V. Ager, admits this fact even though he is an evolutionist:

The point emerges that if we examine the fossil record in detail, whether at the level of orders or of species, we find–over and over again–not gradual evolution, but the sudden explosion of one group at the expense of another.

Another evolutionist paleontologist Mark Czarnecki comments as follows:

A major problem in proving the theory has been the fossil record; the imprints of vanished species preserved in the Earth's geological formations. This record has never revealed traces of Darwin's hypothetical intermediate variants - instead species appear and disappear abruptly, and this anomaly has fueled the creationist argument that each species was created by God.

They have also had to deal with the futility of waiting for "missing" transitional forms to appear in the future, as explained by a professor of paleontology from Glasgow University, T. Neville George:

There is no need to apologize any longer for the poverty of the fossil record. In some ways, it has become almost unmanageably rich and discovery is outpacing integration… The fossil record nevertheless continues to be composed mainly of gaps.

Life Emerged on Earth Suddenly and in Complex Forms

When terrestrial strata and the fossil record are examined, it is to be seen that all living organisms appeared simultaneously. The oldest stratum of the earth in which fossils of living creatures have been found is that of the Cambrian, which has an estimated age of 500-550 million years.

The living creatures found in the strata belonging to the Cambrian period emerged all of a sudden in the fossil record–there are no pre-existing ancestors. The fossils found in the Cambrian rocks belonged to snails, trilobites, sponges, earthworms, jellyfish, sea hedgehogs, and other complex invertebrates. This wide mosaic of living organisms made up of such a great number of complex creatures emerged so suddenly that this miraculous event is referred to as the "Cambrian Explosion" in geological literature.

Most of the life forms found in this stratum have complex systems like eyes, gills, circulatory system, and advanced physiological structures no different from their modern counterparts. For instance, the double-lensed, combed eye structure of trilobites is a wonder of design. David Raup, a professor of geology in Harvard, Rochester, and Chicago Universities, says: "the trilobites used an optimal design which would require a well trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today".

These complex invertebrates emerged suddenly and completely without having any link or any transitional form between them and the unicellular organisms, which were the only life forms on earth prior to them.

Richard Monastersky, the editor of Earth Sciences, which is one of the popular publications of evolutionist literature, states the following about the "Cambrian Explosion" which came as a total surprise to evolutionists:

A half-billion years ago, the remarkably complex forms of animals we see today suddenly appeared. This moment, right at the start of Earth's Cambrian Period, some 550 million years ago, marks the evolutionary explosion that filled the seas with the world's first complex creatures. The large animal phyla of today were present already in the early Cambrian and they were as distinct from each other as they are today.

How the earth came to overflow with such a great number of animal species all of a sudden and how these distinct types of species with no common ancestors could have emerged is a question that remains unanswered by evolutionists. The Oxford zoologist Richard Dawkins, one of the foremost advocates of evolutionist thought in the world, comments on this reality that invalidates the very roots of all the arguments he has been defending:

For example the Cambrian strata of rocks, vintage about 600 million years, are the oldest ones in which we find most of the major invertebrate groups. And we find many of them already in an advanced state of evolution, the very first time they appear. It is as though they were just planted there, without any evolutionary history. Needless to say, this appearance of sudden planting has delighted creationists.

THE EYE OF THE TRILOBITE
T he trilobites that appeared in the Cambrian period all of a sudden have an extremely complex eye structure. Consisting of millions of honeycomb-shaped tiny particles and a double-lens system, this eye "has an optimal design which would require a well-trained and imaginative optical engineer to develop today" in the words of David Raup, a professor of geology.
This eye emerged 530 million years ago in a perfect state. No doubt, the sudden appearance of such a wondrous design cannot be explained by evolution and it proves the actuality of creation.

Moreover, the honeycomb eye structure of the trilobite has survived to our own day without a single change. Some insects such as bees and dragon flies have the same eye structure as did the trilobite.* This situation disproves the evolutionary thesis that living things evolved progressively from the primitive to the complex.

As Dawkins is forced to acknowledge, the Cambrian Explosion is strong evidence for creation, because creation is the only way to explain the fully-formed emergence of life on earth. Douglas Futuyma, a prominent evolutionist biologist admits this fact and states: "Organisms either appeared on the earth fully developed or they did not. If they did not, they must have developed from preexisting species by some process of modification. If they did appear in a fully developed state, they must indeed have been created by some omnipotent intelligence."

Darwin himself recognized the possibility of this when he wrote: "If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory of descent with slow modification through natural selection." The Cambrian Period is nothing more or less than Darwin’s "fatal stroke". This is why the Swiss evolutionist paleoanthropologist Stefan Bengston confesses the lack of transitional links while he describes the Cambrian Period and says "Baffling (and embarrassing) to Darwin, this event still dazzles us".

As may be seen, the fossil record indicates that living things did not evolve from primitive to the advanced forms, but instead emerged all of a sudden and in a perfect state. In short, living beings did not come into existence by evolution, they were created.
http://harunyahya.com/articles/20evolution01.php
http://harunyahya.com/articles/16understanding03.php
You can also visit Evolution Deceit site http://www.harunyahya.com/evolution_specialpreface.php