Many people in Yahoo answers love to say that evolution is a fact. As I understand it, that is only partially true. There are six types of evolution.
Cosmic evolution- the origin of time, space and matter. Big Bang. Chemical evolution- the origin of higher elements from hydrogen. Stellar and planetary evolution- Origin of stars and planets. Organic evolution- Origin of life from inanimate matter. Macroevolution- Origin of major kinds.
and
Microevolution- Variations within kinds. *This one is a fact. No denying that.
Can anyone please give me an example of how any of the first five types of evolution can be called a fact?
2008-09-29T10:38:54Z
Many people here are saying that gravity is also a theory. At least I can observe gravity working. Never in recorded history has there ever been a witness to a change in species. Never has there been a horse born with feathers or a cow with gills. People here also try to blur the live between micro and macro evolution saying that small changes eventually will change a species. I don't agree. No matter how many times my hair color changes or the shape of my eyes change, I'll still be a human. Many have also tried to say that the other example of evolution aren't evolution at all - thats nonsense. Its all part of an explaination of our origins. Through all of the answers, no one posted an example of how evolution is a fact. They just said it was. It sounds pretty faith based. I guess evolution is a religion as well since there is no sciene to support it. Just because a scientist believes it doesn't make it a science.
The great deal™2008-09-29T01:36:13Z
Favorite Answer
According to the Bible, anyone who denies the existence of God is a fool. Why, then, are so many people, including some Christians, willing to accept that evolutionary scientists are unbiased interpreters of scientific data.Creation is by definition "supernatural." God, and the supernatural, cannot be observed or tested (so the argument goes), therefore Creation and/or Intelligent Design cannot be considered a science. As a result, all data is filtered through the preconceived, presupposed, and pre-accepted theory of evolution, without alternate explanations being considered.However, the origin of the universe and the origin of life cannot be tested or observed. Both Creation and evolution are faith-based systems when they speak of origins.If Creation is true, then there is a Creator to Whom we are accountable. Evolution is an enabler for atheism. Evolution gives atheists a basis for explaining how life exists apart from a Creator God. Evolution denies the need for a God to be involved in the universe. Evolution is the “creation theory” for the “religion” of atheism. According to the Bible, the choice is clear. We can believe the Word of our omnipotent and omniscient God, or we can believe the illogically biased, "scientific" explanations of fools.
Cosmic evolution: No such thing. Creationists deliberately try to equate the Big Bang theory with Evolution, despite the fact that they are in two entirely different fields of science. In this case, cosmology and biology. Chemical evolution: No such thing, and once again a deliberate conflation of two entirely different fields. As before, cosmology and biology. Stellar and Planetary Evolution: No such thing. Again with the deliberate conflation. This is the field of astronomy, not biology. Organic Evolution: Again no such thing. The fields confused here are abiogenesis (chemistry) and biology. The two overlap, but they are not the same thing. Macroevolution: Creationists invented this word to describe the transformation from one species to another. There is no such thing. There is only "evolution". Microevolution: See above.
The reality: Evolution is the process by which life forms change over time through mutation and natural selection. That's it. Period. Nothing about stars, planets, or life from non-life. The ToE deals exclusively with life that is already present. If you want to challenge abiogenesis, the Big Bang, or the rest, then address your query to the proper fields.
Tell me...if you move an inch at a time, can you eventually cover a mile? That is how speciation occurs...little by little, small changes over time adding up...usually when one group of a species is isolated in some way from the rest.
If the origins of life are based in divine creation, then no, they cannot be tested. If, however, they are based in natural processes, then they can be tested. Of course, at this time evolutionary theory hasn't discovered the origins of life, but there is evidence.
Of particular interest is the discovery of the potential for the natural formation of RNA. This is conspicuous because it is dependent upon a type of common sea clay which binds to certain amino acids, forming RNA while also allowing it to pass through lipid membranes.
As you may already know, evidence points to the origins of life at sea by virtue of the fact that if you look far back enough, you'll find that all animals were aquatic. RNA is a component found in all living cells. And biological processes on the cellular level are dependent upon the ability of chemicals to pass through lipid membranes. So it is significant that a common sea clay could be involved in the natural formation of RNA while simultaneously possessing the ability to pass through lipid membranes.
This is not proof of the origins of life, but it's almost certainly a step toward it. Evolutionary theory is full of such evidence. For example, the fact that fully aquatic mammals, unlike fish, have hip and leg bones. This is highly suggestive that these aquatic mammals once possessed the ability to walk on two legs. What other possible purpose could their be for these animals having skeletal systems more similar to land mammals than to the fish they bear a closer outward resemblance to?
Creationists usually fall back on the idea of the "missing link". Yet even when shown the missing link (for instance, dinosaurs which could fly, were covered in feathers, had hollow bones, and looked more or less like birds) they deny it.
Again, all of this does not mean that evolution currently has all the answers. But that's why it's a theory. It's a strong theory with mountains of evidence to back it, yet there are plenty of unanswered questions at this point.
You need to be corrected. Evolution has many definitions, like the progression of something simple to something more complex.
However, in the study of evolutionary science, that rule does not always apply.
For example, there are more genes (chromosomes) in a grain of rice than there are in a human being.
Its important to understand what evolution is when it comes to talking about origins of species. It does not include the study of cosmology or astronomy. Nor is evolution the study to try and explain something out of nothing.
In very simple terms, evolution only covers observable life and the study of the evidence of life before us and a means to explain where a species came from. Whether extinct or alive today.
Cosmology describes a science to explain the universe which does include only what we have discovered now. Which is the big bang, and it's logical to assume that we don't fill the holes with god just because we haven't found the next answer or answers, yet.
Don't be afraid that because the earth is no longer flat that you have to give up your religion. You don't. You just have to catch up to the reality of the 21st Century and adapt by reading non religious web sites for a while. Because I see clearly, you got that from a fundamentalist Christian web site and this is not what they teach at major universities for one to obtain their PhD.
"Chemical evolution" is a fact - we have observed the formation of elements in stars. "Stellar and planetary evolution" are facts - we have observed stars forming and stars "dying", we have observed planerary accretion discs around stars. Biological evolution is a fact - we have observed species changing and we have observed new species separating from existing species.
The Theory of Evolution (comonly called just "evolution") is an explanation of the observed facts of biological evolution. So it can be said to be both a fact and a theory.
Your first 3 items are not part of the Theory of Evolution, they fall under fields of physics and cosmology. The 4th is Abiogenesis, agan a different field of study.
"cosmic" and "organic" are supported by the evidence that we can see although we have not observed the events taking place.