contain three common misconceptions of evolution.
'Is it possible for humans to develop more fingers?'
Their is a hypothesis which states teleological evolution
known as orthogenesis which isn't supported by the theory of evolution. One theory states humans will develop more fingers
in the future because of the excessive use of computers. But, this is most likely not to happen due to the fact that having
more fingers will not induce a higher reproductive rate. However, at the current time the development of more fingers seems
highly unlikely. However, who though that apes would be walking after millions of years of evolution.
'Evolution has never been observed.'
Biologists state evolution as the change in a gene pool over time. Some Creationists recognise this as a fact. But they
don't recognise the rate of evolution that produces the diversity on the Earth. The origin of new species has been observed
in the lab and in the wild. Even without these direct observations it is incorrect to say evolution hasn't been observed.
it is known that evolution isn;t limited to what you see before your eyes. It includes fossils, comparative anatomy, genetic
sequences, geographical distribution of species.
and these predictions have been verified many times over. The number of observations supporting evolution is overwhelming.
But, we havn't observed animals suddenly changing to a completely new animal. because this didn't happen it strongly supports
evolution as a theory.
'Evolution is only a theory it has never been proven.'
A large percent of people associate evolution as the common decent from one or several ancestors. Most think its a fact
but it is part of several theories. This is the theory of common descent. There are many other theories like mutation,
matural selection and genetic drift. Calling the theory of evolution a theory is true but the idea it puts forward is wrong.
Scientific theories differ from scientific laws.
Creationism is not a theory it not a theory because its last point. it makes no specific claims about what we'll expect
to find. Thherefore it can't be used for anything. Some of its conditions are fallable, and prove to be false. Remember religion
is certainty without evidence, whilst science is evidence without certainty.
The lack of evidence in the theory of evolution is not true, there's plenty of it. We must deal with levels of certainty
based on evidence. However, we can only be 99% sure never 100%. The more and the better the evidence the more certainty we
Evolution is supported by many observations in the fields of animal behaviour, genetics, anatomy, ecology and paleontology.
But, to challnge evolution you must address the evidence and prove it wrong, irrelevant or fits another theory better. But
to do this you also must have a theory and evidence.
Aren't some Creationists well respected and have credentials. How could they be wrong?
Good thinking there Armed. The quality of a theory put forward doesn't have to be someone of importance. However it does
help as many wouldn't believe a primary school kid even if he had the best evolution theory in the world. But, many of these
Creationists have questionable credentials. Some of them even lie about references when quoting. But, Creationism can't be
a theory because it has faith and science cannot have religion in it.