I am doing an undergraduate degree in Biomedical Science; and I come across this nonsense all the time. There is NO PROOF of evolution, its only a THEORY !!. I pointed out to a scientist who was a lecturer, that carbon dating was inaccurate after a short period of time, and that the extrapolated 'findings' could be doctored by anyone to indicate anything past the point of accuracy.
The tooth of the alleged 'Nebraska man' ... about which many thesis and phd's were written, turned out to be the tooth of a pig. The butterflies allegedly found 'petrified' on a tree - were just sprayed with some kind of resin that hardened...I pointed this out to the lecturer, and he affirmed that evolution was not a proven 'fact', and that in those days, many of those coming up with alleged 'evidence' for evolution, were driven by fame and prestige to come up with exaggerated and falsified evidence...
The fact that mitochondrial DNA is circular means squat. They are basically saying that because prokaryotic DNA is circular, the mitachondrial DNA being circular, as opposed to human DNA typically being linear - supposedly shows an evolutionary link between prokaryotes and human eukaryotic DNA --- which is quite laughable.
This is like saying, that because the humble walnut kernel looks like a brain, that those scientists brains who believe in evolution; evolved from some strange event involving a walnut kernel - well, because it 'resembles their brain'...LOL...I daresay richard. dawkins would probably nod his head in agreement..., and pay homage to the walnut family as ancestrally relevant to the human brain...
Has it not occurred to anyone, that God in His Wisdom, used similar patterns with variations for all of His creation..., and that common elements would be found within it?? How quickly others find themselves negating God out of the equation of life and Truth...
Claim CA201:
Evolution is only a theory. It is not a fact.
Response:
- The word theory, in the context of science, does not imply uncertainty. It means "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" (Barnhart 1948). In the case of the theory of evolution, the following are some of the phenomena involved. All are facts:
- Life appeared on earth more than two billion years ago;
- Life forms have changed and diversified over life's history;
- Species are related via common descent from one or a few common ancestors;
- Natural selection is a significant factor affecting how species change.
- The theory of evolution has proved itself in practice. It has useful applications in epidemiology, pest control, drug discovery, and other areas (Bull and Wichman 2001; Eisen and Wu 2002; Searls 2003).
- Besides the theory, there is the fact of evolution, the observation that life has changed greatly over time. The fact of evolution was recognized even before Darwin's theory. The theory of evolution explains the fact.
- If "only a theory" were a real objection, creationists would also be issuing disclaimers complaining about the theory of gravity, atomic theory, the germ theory of disease, and the theory of limits (on which calculus is based). The theory of evolution is no less valid than any of these. Even the theory of gravity still receives serious challenges (Milgrom 2002). Yet the phenomenon of gravity, like evolution, is still a fact.
- Creationism is neither theory nor fact; it is, at best, only an opinion. Since it explains nothing, it is scientifically useless.
Moran, Laurence. 1993. Evolution is a fact and a theory,Evolution is a Fact and a Theory
Isaak, Mark. 1995. Five major misconceptions about evolution,Five Major Misconceptions about EvolutionReferences:
- Barnhart, Clarence L., ed. 1948. The American College Dictionary, New York: Random House.
- Bull, J. J. and H. A. Wichman. 2001. Applied evolution. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics 32: 183-217.
- Eisen, J. A. and M. Wu. 2002. Phylogenetic analysis and gene functional predictions: Phylogenomics in action. Theoretical Population Biology 61: 481-487.
- Milgrom, Mordehai. 2002. Does dark matter really exist? Scientific American 287(2) (Aug.): 42-52.
- Searls, D. 2003. Pharmacophylogenomics: Genes, evolution and drug targets. Nature Reviews Drug Discovery 2: 613-623. Nature view
Further Reading:
AIG. n.d. Arguments we think creationists should NOT use.Arguments Creationists Should Avoid - Answers in Genesis
Gould, Stephen J. 1983. Evolution as fact and theory. InHen's Teeth and Horse's Toes, New York: W. W. Norton & Company, pp. 253-262.Stephen Jay Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory" 1994
CA201: Only a theory
Claim CA202:
Evolution has not been, and cannot be, proved. We cannot even see evolution (beyond trivially small change), much less test it experimentally.
Response:
- Nothing in the real world can be proved with absolute certainty. However, high degrees of certainty can be reached. In the case of evolution, we have huge amounts of data from diverse fields. Extensive evidence exists in all of the following different forms (Theobald 2004). Each new piece of evidence tests the rest.
- All life shows a fundamental unity in the mechanisms of replication, heritability, catalysis, and metabolism.
- Common descent predicts a nested hierarchy pattern, or groups within groups. We see just such an arrangement in a unique, consistent, well-defined hierarchy, the so-called tree of life.
- Different lines of evidence give the same arrangement of the tree of life. We get essentially the same results whether we look at morphological, biochemical, or genetic traits.
- Fossil animals fit in the same tree of life. We find several cases of transitional forms in the fossil record.
- The fossils appear in a chronological order, showing change consistent with common descent over hundreds of millions of years and inconsistent with sudden creation.
- Many organisms show rudimentary, vestigial characters, such as sightless eyes or wings useless for flight.
- Atavisms sometimes occur. An atavism is the reappearance of a character present in a distant ancestor but lost in the organism's immediate ancestors. We only see atavisms consistent with organisms' evolutionary histories.
- Ontogeny (embryology and developmental biology) gives information about the historical pathway of an organism's evolution. For example, as embryos whales and many snakes develop hind limbs that are reabsorbed before birth.
- The distribution of species is consistent with their evolutionary history. For example, marsupials are mostly limited to Australia, and the exceptions are explained by continental drift. Remote islands often have species groups that are highly diverse in habits and general appearance but closely related genetically. Squirrel diversity coincides with tectonic and sea level changes (Mercer and Roth 2003). Such consistency still holds when the distribution of fossil species is included.
- Evolution predicts that new structures are adapted from other structures that already exist, and thus similarity in structures should reflect evolutionary history rather than function. We see this frequently. For example, human hands, bat wings, horse legs, whale flippers, and mole forelimbs all have similar bone structure despite their different functions.
- The same principle applies on a molecular level. Humans share a large percentage of their genes, probably more than 70 percent, with a fruit fly or a nematode worm.
- When two organisms evolve the same function independently, different structures are often recruited. For example, wings of birds, bats, pterosaurs, and insects all have different structures. Glidinghas been implemented in many additional ways. Again, this applies on a molecular level, too.
- The constraints of evolutionary history sometimes lead to suboptimal structures and functions. For example, the human throat and respiratory system make it impossible to breathe and swallow at the same time and make us susceptible to choking.
- Suboptimality appears also on the molecular level. For example, much DNA is nonfunctional.
- Some nonfunctional DNA, such as certain transposons, pseudogenes, and endogenous viruses, show a pattern of inheritance indicating common ancestry.
- Speciation has been observed.
- The day-to-day aspects of evolution -- heritable genetic change, morphological variation and change, functional change, and natural selection -- are seen to occur at rates consistent with common descent.
Furthermore, the different lines of evidence are consistent; they all point to the same big picture. For example, evidence from gene duplications in the yeast genome shows that its ability to ferment glucose evolved about eighty million years ago. Fossil evidence shows that fermentable fruits became prominent about the same time. Genetic evidence for major change around that time also is found in fruiting plants and fruit flies (Benner et al. 2002).
The evidence is extensive and consistent, and it points unambiguously to evolution, including common descent, change over time, and adaptation influenced by natural selection. It would be preposterous to refer to these as anything other than facts.
Theobald, Douglas. 2004. 29+ Evidences for macroevolution: The scientific case for common descent.29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: The Scientific Case for Common Descent
Colby, Chris. 1993. Evidence for evolution: An eclectic survey.Evidence for Evolution: An Eclectic Survey
Moran, Laurence. 1993. Evolution is a fact and a theory.Evolution is a Fact and a TheoryReferences:
- Benner, S. A., M. D. Caraco, J. M. Thomson and E. A. Gaucher. 2002. Planetary biology--paleontological, geological, and molecular histories of life. Science 296: 864-868.
- Mercer, John M. and V. Louise Roth. 2003. The effects of Cenozoic global change on squirrel phylogeny. Science 299: 1568-1572.
- Theobald, D. 2004. (see above)
CA202: Evolution proof
