Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Trending News

Promoted
NDMA
Lv 7
NDMA asked in Society & CultureReligion & Spirituality · 8 years ago

Where is your evidence?

I keep hearing in this category "Evolution is a fact" To call it a fact you need evidence. To assert a theory empirical evidence (Actually observed in nature or experimentally validated) There remain two hypotheses in the evolutionary model that have no empirical evidence supporting it and therefore do not even quality as a theory. You keep asking theists for evidence, well I am asking you, Where is your evidence?

The two unproven hypotheses are:

1. The accumulation of mutations can produce novel alleles that are both beneficial for survival and selectable.

2. The combination of novel alleles and natural selection can produce a novel phenotype.

Both represent the minimum necessary for common descent to occur. When has either been observed in nature or objectively validated by experimentation?

Don't argue proving natural selection is enough, natural selection explains variation with a genus and amounts to selecting existing information. Formation of a novel phenotype requires new alleles, as well as modification of the non-coding control areas of the gene that mediate morphological development and physiology. This is why mutations was presented, natural selection alone fails to explain the source for new alleles.

Don't argue every little mutation provides new information etc. Dawkins debated Gould back and forth for 3 months the allele is the basic unit of selection. Anything less than a novel allele is not sufficient to the task.

Good luck!

Update:

Unmellow IV: I did in the biology section. Nobody was able to produce a valid example of either.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=Amkki...

As I stated in the question, you folks keep bringing it up in here so, If you can asset it is a fact you should be able to produce the evidence - intellectual honesty - so where is your evidence?

Archer: If you had evidence you would not be changing the subject. Thanks for admitting albeit indirectly you don't have any evidence to present...

2.718281... Which word do you not understand?

Update 2:

Frog: Look at the responses from Alex and Chef -- both assert "Evolution is a fact" OK now do you have any actual evidence?

Update 3:

Alex: As the name implies Chromosomal duplication duplicates - it does not normally create novel alleles which are both useful and available for selection, In fact most errors in duplication produce diseases! Big fail!

Update 4:

CHEF™: And that lizard is still the same genus (Phenotype).. So you have provided no evidence - care to try again?

Update 5:

Banana!: Not able to come up with any evidence either so you give us a fractured analogy?

Here is a picture of somebody presumably aged 11. Here is another picture of somebody presumably age 16.. You say it is the same person, I say it is two different persons who have are similar in appearance. Do you have a separate line of evidence to prove they are the same person?

Checkmate

Update 6:

darwinsfriend3 AM: So you can't point to any evidence of the two specific hypotheses in question either? You can't find even one peer reviewed paper? WOW so much for the empirical evidence being overwhelming!

Update 7:

darwinsfriend3 AM: edit. You asked for evidence that evolution is a fact.It's not my fault if you are not intellectually honest enough to accept it

Edited 5 minutes ago

No I didn't, I asked for empirical evidence of two specific hypotheses that are part of the evolutionary model (added in 1953 when Watson and Cricks discovery of DNA refuted Darwin's assertion that the possible variation was infinite thereby disproving the common dissent aspect of Darwin's Model) Since you missed it here it is again:

The two unproven hypotheses are:

1. The accumulation of mutations can produce novel alleles that are both beneficial for survival and selectable.

2. The combination of novel alleles and natural selection can produce a novel phenotype.

Both represent the minimum necessary for common descent to occur. When has either been observed in nature or objectively validated by experimentation?

Do you have some or not?

Update 8:

darwinsfriend3 AM: edit. You asked for evidence that evolution is a fact.It's not my fault if you are not intellectually honest enough to accept it

Edited 5 minutes ago

No I didn't, I asked for empirical evidence of two specific hypotheses that are part of the evolutionary model (added in 1953 when Watson and Cricks discovery of DNA refuted Darwin's assertion that the possible variation was infinite thereby disproving the common dissent aspect of Darwin's Model) Since you missed it here it is again:

The two unproven hypotheses are:

1. The accumulation of mutations can produce novel alleles that are both beneficial for survival and selectable.

2. The combination of novel alleles and natural selection can produce a novel phenotype.

Both represent the minimum necessary for common descent to occur. When has either been observed in nature or objectively validated by experimentation?

Do you have some or not?

Update 9:

FROG: *After the fact* "Now do you have any actual evidence?" Are you too poor, too lazy or too thick to use Google? Here have ten internet groats. Now off to the science section coward.

Edited 9 minutes ago

I have done so and was not able to find any. But as you atheists are so fond of asserting the burden falls on the one making the claim to provide evidence -so basically your After the fact statement is just a variation of shifting the burden! You are asserting you are not responsible to provide evidence I am responsible to find evidence to support your view - Sorry you could not find any evidence!

Update 10:

*RE "Unmellow IV: I did in the biology section. Nobody was able to produce a valid example of either."

So you did, nine months ago in fact, but not before posting it in R&S. Funny that!

Edited 48 seconds ago

Questions are listed in the order they are asked here are the entries from my Questions asked area in the order they appear:

Where is your evidence?

1 StarsIn Biology - 3 answers - 9 months ago - Resolved

Where is your evidence?

2 StarsIn Religion & Spirituality - 13 answers - 9 months ago - Resolved

This is called the red herring fallacy - If you had evidence you would not need to resort to logical falalcies.

Update 11:

-----Come On Folks ---------

You either have empirical evidence of the two hypotheses or you don't. If you have it post it.

7 Answers

Relevance
  • darwinsfriend3 AM
    Lv 7
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    Here you go

    http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

    edit. You asked for evidence that evolution is a fact.It's not my fault if you are not intellectually honest enough to accept it

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Evolution is a fact, all it takes is a little research on your own. If you aren't willing/able/capable to do this - it isn't our problem. We know what we know - that's all. We know the whiptail lizard has evolved to the point where the female no longer requires a male to fertilize eggs & that she performs copulation with another female. There are many more examples like this. All it takes is a rudimentary search.

    No scientist or educated person is going to tell you that science proves anything more than what we know & understand about it. We are not saying that it proves how life began or how the universe started - that is what the religious are saying. So therefore - the religious need to back that claim up with a fact or two. Not us.

    The religious are always asking to 'prove god don't exist' -- guess what, we aren't going to do your work for you. The religious are petulant that way. You are making a far greater claim than science has ever dreamed of making, therefore, you need to show your work.

    Source(s): common sense, rudimentary internet searches & a 3d grade education
  • Frog
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Evolution is a theory that contains many facts.

    'I keep hearing in this category "Evolution is a fact."'

    Source or strawman!

    *After the fact*

    "Now do you have any actual evidence?" Are you too poor, too lazy or too thick to use Google? Here have ten internet groats. Now off to the science section coward.

    *RE "Unmellow IV: I did in the biology section. Nobody was able to produce a valid example of either."

    So you did, nine months ago in fact, but not before posting it in R&S. Funny that!

    *"So basically your After the fact statement is just a variation of shifting the burden!" Waffle. 'After the fact' is simply pointing out the fact that your claim and examples are non-sequential.

  • ?
    Lv 4
    8 years ago

    Read chromosomal duplucation and have a good day. Evolution is a fact and theory. Why? Because we see it occur thru model organisms and is supported by fossil records n many sciences and it is a theory because we do not have complete understanding of evolution and all its mechanisms.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Here's how your argument goes:

    Atheists, I see you have a picture of someone 10 and then you claim this other picture is the same person at 16.

    Unless you can demonstrate for me all processes involved in aging, this person was never 13.

    Checkmate.

  • Archer
    Lv 7
    8 years ago

    So you have evidence that proves creation, empirical or otherwise?

    Evolution is a theory not a fact,

    Creation is a belief.

    Live with it!

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Novel alleles what? Can you repeat that?

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.