How can you prove evolution?

[Nathan David]

It sounds like you're asking someone to explain the basics of evolution in plain language.

Here you go:

The basics of evolution in plain language

 

[TheGreatBongChicken]

It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

 

[Tomk80]

It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

Sometimes, but sometimes simplicity just is that, simplicity. If you want to get into a debate on why genetics supports evolution, you'll have to have a basic understanding of genetics and the relevant terms. Hate to break it to you, but at some point you'll have to do some studying.

 

[Nathan David]

It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

Did you read the OP in the thread I linked to? I was little disappointed that you never responded to that post, given that it was you who asked for a simple explanation in the first place.

 

[Jet Black]

Did you read the OP in the thread I linked to? I was little disappointed that you never responded to that post, given that it was you who asked for a simple explanation in the first place.

you used the word differ. that is too long for ernest.

 

[Mechanical Bliss]

It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

Didn't people already explain to you why scientific terminology is used to explain scientific concepts in the other thread you started? It's as if you ignored what was written in that thread.

As for simplicity, simplistic explanations can often be wrong and simplicity is the downfall of those explanations. Reality is more complicated than such simplistic explanations allow.

Simplistic creationist arguments like, "there are fossils in the rocks, therefore there must have been a global flood that did it," or "there are layers in the sediments at Mt. St. Helens and layers at the Grand Canyon so they must be the same and caused by the same processes" are clearly wrong and they are wrong because they are so simple. Your argument from simplicity is meaningless and essentially amounts to being an argument from ignorance.

 

[Ondoher]

It's impossible to explain Evolutionary thinking in common terms because that would expose what they believe and make it seem almost as inconcievable as it really is. Simplicity exposes things.

Lets give that a try:

In any population there is variation of heritable traits. Not all members of a population will successfully produce offspring due to environmental factors, such as limited resources, disease, sexual preferences and predation. Those members of the population with heritable traits and combinations of heritable traits most likely to confer a benefit within these environmental pressures are most likely to produce offspring, and pass these traits on. In this way beneficial traits become fixed in a population. This is called natural selection.

Variation of heritable traits is produced through mutation. Mutation changes the DNA responsible for such things as embryonic development, biochemical pathways, and disease resistance.

The combination of new variation due to mutation, and natural selection result in the process of evolution. Over time this process can produce a great number of species, with vastly different anatomy. In other words, biodiversity.

 

[kingreaper]

Lets give that a try:

In any population there is variation of heritable traits. Not all members of a population will successfully produce offspring due to environmental factors, such as limited resources, disease, sexual preferences and predation. Those members of the population with heritable traits and combinations of heritable traits most likely to confer a benefit within these environmental pressures are most likely to produce offspring, and pass these traits on. In this way beneficial traits become fixed in a population. This is called natural selection.

Variation of heritable traits is produced through mutation. Mutation changes the DNA responsible for such things as embryonic development, biochemical pathways, and disease resistance.

The combination of new variation due to mutation, and natural selection result in the process of evolution. Over time this process can produce a great number of species, with vastly different anatomy. In other words, biodiversity.

I'm afraid to say I know people who'd see your post and get that out of it

 

[Silent Bob]

And I would like to point out that although English is my second language the only word I need to look for is: predation.

 

[Ondoher]

I'm afraid to say I know people who'd see your post and get that out of it

I guess that's my fault for assuming the reader was familar with English. For that I am deeply apologetic.

 

[awstar]

Lets give that a try:



Variation of heritable traits is produced through mutation. Mutation changes the DNA responsible for such things as embryonic development, biochemical pathways, and disease resistance.

So man evolved from some other kind of animal because of mutation? hee hee hee. ri-i-i-ght!!!

"Mutations result when the DNA polymerase makes a mistake, which happens about once every 100,000,000 bases.


Actually, the number of mistakes that remain incorporated into the DNA is even lower than this because cells contain special DNA repair proteins that fix many of the mistakes in the DNA that are caused by mutagens. The repair proteins see which nucleotides are paired incorrectly, and then change the wrong base to the right one. " -- http://gslc.genetics.utah.edu/units/disorders/sloozeworm/mutationbg.cfm​

 

[Ondoher]

So man evolved from some other kind of animal because of mutation? hee hee hee. ri-i-i-ght!!!

"Mutations result when the DNA polymerase makes a mistake, which happens about once every 100,000,000 bases.




Actually, the number of mistakes that remain incorporated into the DNA is even lower than this because cells contain special DNA repair proteins that fix many of the mistakes in the DNA that are caused by mutagens. The repair proteins see which nucleotides are paired incorrectly, and then change the wrong base to the right one. " -- http://gslc.genetics.utah.edu/units/disorders/sloozeworm/mutationbg.cfm

​

Is your claim that mutations do not happen? That they are always repaired? That they are always detrimental? I'm afraid I don't understand the objection.

What differences between human and chimpanzee DNA makes it impossible for both to have arisin from a common ancestor and to have diverged due to mutation and natural selection?

 

[CuteAlien]

@awstar: Hm, i think that's the mutation for flies and it's slightly higher for humans, but that really doesn't matter so much. We have about 6.000.000.000 bases and that leads to a quite high mutation rate even when using your numbers.

If it's still seems low to you - no one ever said evolution is a fast process . That's why even large groups of humans which got seperated for a few thousand years are still able to reproduce and even our closest animal ancestors from which we are seperated by millions of years have more than 98% identical genes.

Even if you dislike numbers with lots of zero's - think about it that way: The math used here is pretty basic statistics and if the mutation rate couldn't explain the number of differences between animal and human genes within the known timespans the evolution theorie wouldn't even survive another day

 

[awstar]

Is your claim that mutations do not happen? That they are always repaired? That they are always detrimental? I'm afraid I don't understand the objection.

What differences between human and chimpanzee DNA makes it impossible for both to have arisin from a common ancestor and to have diverged due to mutation and natural selection?

Doesn't it seem rather -- well -- unlikely -- that humans are the product of a series of "mistakes" ? This is science?

 

[kingreaper]

Doesn't it seem rather -- well -- unlikely -- that humans are the product of a series of "mistakes" ? This is science?

You ever heard of a thing called "natural selection"

And BTW trhey're only mistakes if the aim of the genetic process is to produce perfect duplicates

I doubt this is the case

A less subjective term would be "Changes"

 

[Vance]

Awstar,

Are you equating mutations with "mistakes"?

Why?

 

[Nathan Poe]

Doesn't it seem rather -- well -- unlikely -- that humans are the product of a series of "mistakes" ? This is science?

1: This is neither the definition of mutation nor evolution, so the question is flawed.

2: Doesn't it seem rather -- well -- unlikely -- that out of the 100 billion people who have roamed this Earth in its history, your parents would meet, fall in love, and conceive the child who would grow up to be you?

Arguments about improbability tend to fall flat in reference to events which have already occurred.

 

[NatJo]

Life had a beginning. Everything that had a beginning had to be caused by something or somebody else (which is only natural). Does evolution have enough evidence to be that cause?

 

[Vance]

Evolution does not address the issue of the first cause of life. This is why there is no conflict between evolution and Christian belief (which explains why most Christians worldwide accept evolution).

 

[NatJo]

That is absolutely correct. The only thing is that evolution is not supported by scientific discoveries.