Evolution is a fact

1 - I can do better 2 - Jury's out 3 - Pretty darn good 4 - Splendiferous 5 - Awesometastic by 4 people | Log in to rate

Ranked #3,118 in News, #273,269 overall

HERE'S WHAT I THINK

Evolution is a fact


Evolution, the overarching concept that unifies the biological sciences, in fact embraces a plurality of theories and hypotheses. In evolutionary debates one is apt to hear evolution roughly parceled between the terms "microevolution" and "macroevolution". Microevolution, or change beneath the species level, may be thought of as relatively small scale change in the functional and genetic constituencies of populations of organisms. That this occurs and has been observed is generally undisputed by critics of evolution. What is vigorously challenged, however, is macroevolution. Macroevolution is evolution on the "grand scale" resulting in the origin of higher taxa. In evolutionary theory it thus entails common ancestry, descent with modification, speciation, the genealogical relatedness of all life, transformation of species, and large scale functional and structural changes of populations through time, all at or above the species level (Freeman and Herron 2004; Futuyma 1998; Ridley 1993).

Common descent is a general descriptive theory that concerns the genetic origins of living organisms (though not the ultimate origin of life). The theory specifically postulates that all of the earth's known biota are genealogically related, much in the same way that siblings or cousins are related to one another. Thus, macroevolutionary history and processes necessarily entail the transformation of one species into another and, consequently, the origin of higher taxa. Because it is so well supported scientifically, common descent is often called the "fact of evolution" by biologists. For these reasons, proponents of special creation are especially hostile to the macroevolutionary foundation of the biological sciences.

< I borrowed this text from Douglas Theobald, Ph.D., who gave permission for everyone to use his article, so thank you Dr Theobald. >

YOUR TURN! 

Evolution is a fact

Loading Fetching blurbs now... please stand by

Yes, you're right!

dnev says:

Looks kinda quite in here, guess we've solved the argument :)

dnev says:

If i'm wrong? I can assure that threats of post-death torture are'nt going to sway me. I find some comfort in the fact that I will be eaten by worms and eventually become plant food :). I'll always live on in the form of grass or something.

sydney says:

Evolution is far better than a fact: it's a revelation.

Read Daniel Dennett & you'll get it.

pk2000 says:

evolution is simpler concept than god which is highly improbable.

Clayton says:

FACT!

D-Nev says:

Also - Dont forget to rank this page, opinions of all sides are welcome, so give it a 1 star if you dont like it :) It's gotta be fair.

Thanks
D-Nev

D-Nev says:

If God is some omnipitent being, then how could we possibly come closer to "understanding" it? Seriously, it's like people want to regress into a hole when they consider the reality that there is no life after death. It's a completely natural cycle that all things go through.

It's our fear of mortality that has allowed religion to corrupt our education and scienfitic advancement from the beginning. If we could have been fortunate enough to understand this 500 years ago, we would probably have flying cars and would live in space.

I think this is another reason we can all be upset at "churchies". I want a flying car dammit!

eccles1 says:

if we believe in creation because of Genesis we are in big trouble !!
I hope they keep religion out of schools this belongs at home.

girlyred says:

I agree with kab!

CheekyChimp says:

ooohOOOOOOH EEEEEEEE OOOHoooooh eeeeeeEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!

D-Nev says:

While I may be backing up a step, I never understood the "God created the Earth in 7 days theory", if you took lumber, nails, windows, insulation, and all the other items required to build a house and threw it together no matter how many times you tried, you'd NEVER have a house. I think it is all a question of origins. Creationism has never given me a plausible reason for the origin of life.

Your Ape-Daddy says:

And PLEASE keep your religious idiocy out of the public school classrooms!

Your Grandad the Ape says:

The bible is a fictional story as told by the Rush Limbaughs of that time.

(The only plausible argument AGAINST it is that these types of idiots haven't evolved into intelligent human beings!)

thoughts says:

Yes it is. However, what created the first living organism?

kab says:

I do believe in evolution, but I believe that it is God's hand guiding it. And, your right Kirk Cameron's argument was awful. He doesn't speak for me.

Chadrew says:

You're right!

dnev says:

Happy Birthday Charles!

El_Wizardo says:

The hippocrisy of creationists is numbing. Biology the cornerstone of medicine is also the cornerstone of evolutionary theory. What they fail to acknolledge is that medicine is also a theory and much for the same research and testing that is used in medicine is use in evolutionary studies. Medicine doesn't come right out to say you are an ape... but evolution does.

dnev says:

I created this little topic because I dont get tired of fighting with religous people over the issue.

If any of you brainwashed churchies can argue against Evolution with something more than Kirk Cameron's 2 minute bullshit explaination, be my guest.

No way, Monkeybrain!

American says:

Do you ever think to yourself "what if I'm wrong?"

The New World Order and Christianity

SivartM says:

Evolution can't be a fact if you can't prove it. And you can't prove evolution if you've never seen it happen. And you haven't seen it happen, because nobody has. Evolution (or Macro-evolution, to be specific) isn't even plausible. I'm a Biblical creationist, by the way.

CrashXprt says:

Microevolution is a pretty well accepted theory of science. Just because it is a theory, does not mean it is not tested or well-documented, its just that there are VERY FEW LAWS in science. Learn your epistemology, Jack. That said, even the most staunch evolutionist must admit that there has never ever EVER been any proof of macroevolution. Period. This is not even debatable. The only people that will deny this are those that have no background in anthropology or biology, and just have some bent against religion for some personal reason. So, please, each side needs to spend more time researching the other side's real position before hammering on about religion in school. Personally, I think the closer scientists get to discovering the origins of life, the closer those scientists will come to understanding God.

John Koetsier says:

it's rather interesting that almost all of the comments in favor are ad hominem arguments, insults, and the like. I guess that's to be expected on the internet ...

Icea says:

If we are going to prove evolution is a fact and not a theory then we must be able to answer the questions raised by the 1966 Wistar Symposium. As it is currently defined evolutionary theory can not withstand the test of mathematical statistics. The time-frame is off-scale by astronomical proportions. And, without a provable solution to these anomolies evolution can only remain a theory... and one, perhaps, no more provable than creationism.

I believe in Creationism and evolution as mechanism of God's process.

Garindan says:

While I may be backing up a step, I never understood the "Big Bang Theory", if you took lumber, nails, windows, insulation, and all the other items required to build a house and threw it together no matter how many times you tried, you'd NEVER have a house. I think it is all a question of origins. Evolution has never given me a plausible reason for the origin of life.

Fred says:

Nope, not even close. Presuppositions. A puzzle that never fits together, thy name is evolution. Seriously, I don't know anyone who says they believe in it that isn't doing so out of immature spite.
I've never seen anything that constitutes a fact as it relates to evolution. Whatever, it's your problem, not mine.

eskimo13 says:

Evolution is a theory. Not a very good one. Not provable. Put forth by people who refuse to take responsibility for their own lives and actions. To believe the Bible's account of the origins of the world is to commit to surrendering control and living by God's word.

Adam says:

I dont think classic darwinian evolutionary processes alone account for all life on earth.

 

They say "Evolution is only a theory; it hasn't been proved." 

Why this is bull

First, we should clarify what "evolution" means. Like so many other words, it has more than one meaning. Its strict biological definition is "a change in allele frequencies over time." By that definition, evolution is an indisputable fact. Most people seem to associate the word "evolution" mainly with common descent, the theory that all life arose from one common ancestor. Many people believe that there is enough evidence to call this a fact, too. However, common descent is still not the theory of evolution, but just a fraction of it (and a part of several quite different theories as well). The theory of evolution not only says that life evolved, it also includes mechanisms, like mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift, which go a long way towards explaining how life evolved.

Calling the theory of evolution "only a theory" is, strictly speaking, true, but the idea it tries to convey is completely wrong. The argument rests on a confusion between what "theory" means in informal usage and in a scientific context. A theory, in the scientific sense, is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" [Random House American College Dictionary]. The term does not imply tentativeness or lack of certainty. Generally speaking, scientific theories differ from scientific laws only in that laws can be expressed more tersely. Being a theory implies self-consistency, agreement with observations, and usefulness. (Creationism fails to be a theory mainly because of the last point; it makes few or no specific claims about what we would expect to find, so it can't be used for anything. When it does make falsifiable predictions, they prove to be false.)

Lack of proof isn't a weakness, either. On the contrary, claiming infallibility for one's conclusions is a sign of hubris. Nothing in the real world has ever been rigorously proved, or ever will be. Proof, in the mathematical sense, is possible only if you have the luxury of defining the universe you're operating in. In the real world, we must deal with levels of certainty based on observed evidence. The more and better evidence we have for something, the more certainty we assign to it; when there is enough evidence, we label the something a fact, even though it still isn't 100% certain.

What evolution has is what any good scientific claim has--evidence, and lots of it. Evolution is supported by a wide range of observations throughout the fields of genetics, anatomy, ecology, animal behavior, paleontology, and others. If you wish to challenge the theory of evolution, you must address that evidence. You must show that the evidence is either wrong or irrelevant or that it fits another theory better. Of course, to do this, you must know both the theory and the evidence.

Ignorance is not a platform to argue from. 

Bill O'Riley is the role model for Christian's who have closed their minds to the truth. Fox News and Bill O'Riley can eat me.

I love how Bill Oreilly gets this smug look on his face everytime he tries to refute a fact like "HAHA I got him this time" and Dawkins effortlessly makes him look like the assbag that he is. I have to commend Richard Dawkins for not laughing in his face, cause i sure as hell was laughing my ass off.

- I stole this comment from YouTube - It's late and i'm tired.

Richard Dawkins 2007.04.23 O'Reilly Factor

Richard Dawkins 2007.04.23 O'Reilly Factor

Runtime: 282
141718 views
2531 Comments:

curated content from YouTube

Some links to give you a little background 

I'll add some more as they become necessary.

Links galore
A Wilipedia entry on Charles Darwin
This is just a simple link to learn more about Charles Robert Darwin, the Naturalist who changed scientific understandings for an entire generation. His writings on Geology and Natural Selection scares the religous faithful, as it rocks the foundation of their brainwashed existence.

New Guestbook 

submit
  • Reply
    dnev dnev Feb 21, 2008 @ 8:07 pm
    I'd like to thank everyone who has contributed to this argument, and I hope you have more to say in the future.
  • Reply
    CrashXprt CrashXprt Feb 15, 2008 @ 7:22 pm
    Proving evolution is true is just as impossible as proving it is false, especially to a person who does not even understand the basics of the topic he is supporting. If you can show me direct evidence of one species that has evolved into another species (that means evolution occurring above the species level) via naturally selective processes, I will accept your premise. Please do not belittle the ideas you do not understand, but endeavor to learn more about them before making up your mind. Otherwise, you reveal yourself to be a small-minded person who is more interested in insulting people than you are interested in science. You do Darwin a great disservice with your ignorant rantings.
  • Reply
    dnev dnev Feb 11, 2008 @ 9:55 pm
    Go me!

New Flickr Photos 

One major contributor to Global Warming by illuminating9_11

One major contributo...

What would you tell Charles Darwin about modern science? by Rammikins!

What would you tell...

John Ruskin, Charles Dickens, William M. Thackeray, Charles Darwin. The Best of the World's Classics, 1909. by DominusVobiscum

John Ruskin, Charles...

DSC_0283_mod by fry_theonly

DSC_0283_mod

Charles Darwin by alistairmcmillan

Charles Darwin

Thisen Written Longen Ago? by nickstone333

Thisen Written Longe...

Alicia Boyle, Desert Knowledge CRC and Charles Darwin University by sridgway

Alicia Boyle, Desert...

John Ruskin, Charles Dickens, William M. Thackeray, Charles Darwin. The Best of the World's Classics, 1909. by DominusVobiscum

John Ruskin, Charles...

Tottem poles, Charles Darwin University by Sarah M Stewart

Tottem poles, Charle...

Tottem poles, Charles Darwin University by Sarah M Stewart

Tottem poles, Charle...

Charles Darwin Quantum Leap by JonTandy

Charles Darwin Quant...

Charles Darwin Quantum Leap by JonTandy

Charles Darwin Quant...

Charles Darwin Quantum Leap by JonTandy

Charles Darwin Quant...

Charles Darwin Quantum Leap by JonTandy

Charles Darwin Quant...

Charles Darwin Quantum Leap by JonTandy

Charles Darwin Quant...

automatically generated by Flickr

by dnev

Just your average, fairly educated, self employed, IT junky with a good head on his shoulders and alot of time to read and learn.

I've read Darwin... (more)

Explore related pages

Create a Lens!