Has Evolution Been Proven to be True ?

[Flight]

Something of a misleading topic title.The only 'proven' is mathematics and even that is up for debate, in some circles.


i) 'Pure' evolution (change in living species that occur over time at a genetic level) has, of course, been seen to be true, beyond any reasonable doubt.

ii) 'Survival of the fittest' (perhaps survival of the 'fit enough' is closer) has, again, been seen to be true, beyond all reasonable doubt;

iii) The 'theory of evolution' is more commonly held to be the (spontaneous ?) creation of new species through cumulative evolution and that all life can be traced back to one common organism. The development of the evidence suggesting that speciation has led to the ascent of man is far less clear cut. I'd suggest, at the end of the day the majority of the evidence for it is contained in i) and ii) above and there being no other logical scientific theories.


And nothing in evolution either proves, claims to prove or suggests any explanation for the emergence of the first life.


So the question is, is the evidence for the ascent of man via evolution largely limited to i) and ii) above or has there been any direct evidence found in the fossil record or the laboratory over the last decade ?




edit : post has been greatly edited due to very poor wording in the original post.

[Darus Grey]

Evolution itself is true, is easily testable, and is also kind of DUH at the end of the day.

Evolution as the source of human life is the area of contest, as well as current life-forms.(because it's impossible to prove since we don't have time machines).

However it's very proven that at the very least at this point in time creatures can and do evolve(fruit flies are the main test subjects).

[Tenks]

Let me google that for you

[Suineg]

It's the debate of macro vs micro evolution that is the issue Flight.

Most intelligent people will concede micro evolution in a heartbeat whether they are religious or not. You can call it adaptation or breeding or what have you.

What most 'anti' evolutionists cannot cope with is species changes. I for one am one of those that can't because no solid 'proof' has ever been shown for macro in my very humble opinion and possibly limited exposure.

Evolutionists would probably agree that there isn't any 'proof' either and thus it is still a theory but a plausible one to them.

[Tripamang]

Originally Posted by Tenks

Let me google that for you

That's awesome, anytime my mom asks me a question I'm sending her there from now on.

Yes evolution is real, yes it's been proven. They have made a lot of discoveries recently on it also being the origin of life as well, as they have created the building blocks of life with simple reactions, as well as the blocks of what could be a new form of life this way.

So it's 100% undeniably true that evolution happens is the resulting force of our existence.

Search Results - page 1 - New Scientist

Near infinite source of articles on the subject, have fun.

[Sharmai]

From above ... Evolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Massive wall o text about evolution. Over 200 citations. I'd say its been well researched.

[Screamfeeder]

Originally Posted by Flight

...can anyone put forward any evidence to support or refute evolution ?

welp....

Before we get started, let's hear what you define evolution as. Once you set the goalpost for us we can kick the ball through pretty easily.

If you are unable to define Evolution for us then please elaborate or refine your question.

[aychamo_aycono]

Originally Posted by Screamfeeder

welp....

Before we get started, let's hear what you define evolution as. Once you set the goalpost for us we can kick the ball through pretty easily.

If you are unable to define Evolution for us then please elaborate or refine your question.

Simplistically evolution is the study of how life changes on earth. We know that species adapt to changes. It's true. The only debateable ideas are the mechanisms by which evolution operates, and even that is a very tiny area of disagreement (which creationists blow up to create the illusion that scientists don't agree with evoltion.)

[Mimirswell]

Originally Posted by Flight

I'm not a creationist or a religious nutter, but I've yet to be presented with any truth which has persuaded me that evolution is true. Please don't turn this into a religious debate or bigoted thread. Without referring to alternate theories to evolution, or expressing religious views, can anyone put forward any evidence to support or refute evolution ?

Sure, it's been done ad naseum on this forum several times. If you are serious about this discussion and you appear sincere, do as Screamfeeder suggested and outline what exactly you define as evolution in as specific terms you can manage. Without this, its pointless to engage in debate as it will result inevitably in someone adding an addendum to the question of evolution for each answer provided to invalidate them. This will repeat again and again to ensure that the question is never answered satisfactorily by the questioners and is a consistent tactic in the religious/science debate whenever evolution has come up in the past.

[Azrayne]

I'd say there's a hell of a lot of evidence for it, and no alternative with even the slightest validity. Not sure whether that makes it 'true' by official definition.

[Soriak]

Originally Posted by Darus Grey

Evolution as the source of human life is the area of contest

No, it's not. Evolution deals only with changes of life, it has nothing to do with how life started.

Originally Posted by Suineg

It's the debate of macro vs micro evolution that is the issue Flight.

Macro- vs Micro-evolution is something the creationists came up with. There's no such distinction in science, because a lot of small changes aggregate to large changes.


As for evidence for evolution, scientists continue to find links that fit with what they would expect. The idea that god planted them to confuse us is entirely unscientific. Then there's the study of DNA with which fossils can be dated and again, they fit exactly into the model predicted by evolution.

Aside from that, there's also no competing scientific model. Intelligent design is religion (assumes an intelligent creator, something that can't be proved or disproved), not science.

[PerritoBites]

Nothing can be proven to be 100% correct and we don't claim it to be 100% correct. We just flow with the best we can and evolution gives explanations/results that are pretty accurate. And on a different note....

[Dinthug]

Surprised Lumie hasn't fallen for this trap yet

[chaos]

Originally Posted by Dinthug

Surprised Lumie hasn't fallen for this trap yet

Hold on let me switch accounts.

[Prime]

Haven't you ever seen X Men?