How can you prove evolution?

[NatJo]

How can you prove evolution without the fancy scientific words? If you think evolution is false then tell why. If something is completely true then you should be able to say it in a simple way, whether or not it's simple or not. I'd like to hear your thoughts not your critique on other people's religion or lifestyle. We can make this a debate using "theories, hypothesis, and facts" not just plain nonsense.

 

[Hydra009]

How can you prove evolution without the fancy scientific words?

You mean like "mutation", "gene", "natural selection" and "species"? Those are fancy scientific words?

If something is completely true then you should be able to say it in a simple way, whether or not it's simple or not.

Big assumption. Can you explain how your car works without using fancy car words like "cylinder" and "engine"? I guess your car isn't true, then.

 

[funyun]

How can you prove evolution without the fancy scientific words? If you think evolution is false then tell why. If something is completely true then you should be able to say it in a simple way, whether or not it's simple or not. I'd like to hear your thoughts not your critique on other people's religion or lifestyle. We can make a debate using "theories, hypothesis, and facts" not just plain nonsense.

Why should something be true only if it can be explained simply? That's like saying that a recipe can only be good if it can be made fast.

I was reading the book Hyperspace by Michio Kaku a few weeks ago, and he said something I'd never thought about before, but it makes sense.

He said that throughout history, scientists have observed and tested, and very often what they find to be true is counter-intuitive. The earth revolves around the sun, for instance, which to a normal person who knew nothing on the subject but what he saw when he looked up, would seem ludicrous. Or special relativity, which says that even if you are going 99.99999% the speed of light, light itself would still seem to be traveling just as fast to you as if you were standing still. Or the Schrodinger's Cat problem, which after 70 years we still can't fathom well enough to create a satisfactory conclusion from. Why? Because these things are all counter-intuitive. They go against our common sense in terms of how we observe the everyday world. If everything in nature was parallel with common sense, we'd have no need of science.

So I think to say that everything which is true must be explainable in simple terms is ridiculous.

 

[Praxiteles]

Or fancy words like "fusion" to explain the points of light in the night sky?

(Or the thumpin' great big one in the daytime sky?)

 

[NatJo]

That's not what I meant.

 

[NatJo]

Ok, just give me your proof for evolution. I didn't want a big debate over my choice of context. I just wanted it to be simplified so it's easier to understand.

 

[Hydra009]

Ok, just give me your proof for evolution. I didn't want a big debate over my choice of context. I just wanted it to be simplified so it's easier to understand.

BAM!

You have 2 wishes left.

 

[NatJo]

lol

 

[IchbinBerliner]

Impossible, my version of common language is considered scientific and confusing to most people I talk to, except for my close group of friends who also uses the language.

 

[NatJo]

Not impossible, that's what a thesaurus is for.

 

[ego licet visum]

The strong ones live and the weak ones die until you have a new race of Uber Soldats!

 

[NatJo]

Ok, no offense dude, but that was totally off the subject.

 

[gluadys]

Ok, just give me your proof for evolution. I didn't want a big debate over my choice of context. I just wanted it to be simplified so it's easier to understand.

Actually, the easiest way to learn about evolution is to read about it for yourself. After all, this is not a classroom.

So to save people giving you loads of information that may mean nothing to you, it would probably be best if you gave us an idea of what it is about evolution you want to know?

Definition?

Process?

Mechanisms?

Observations?

Expectations?

Like any scientific theory, the "proof"** for evolution is supporting evidence, accurate predictions and explanatory power.

**No scientific theory is "proved" absolutely as a mathematical or logical theorem is. Instead a scientific theory gains credibility if in test after test after test it is not falsified. This means that no one line of evidence "proves" evolution, but rather that many interlocking lines of evidence all point to the same conclusion and together constitute powerful evidence in favour of evolution.

 

[NatJo]

Ok fair enough, I already know what I think I just want to hear what other people have to say to prove evolution. Because, I don't think any of the books that I've read on evolution have done it justice.

 

[ego licet visum]

Ok, no offense dude, but that was totally off the subject.

was it?

I suppose I should have said the survivable ones survive but whatever...

 

[Vance]

Ok fair enough, I already know what I think I just want to hear what other people have to say to prove evolution. Because, I don't think any of the books that I've read on evolution have done it justice.

If I was you, I would spend some time at talkorigins:

www.talkorigins.org

They have lots of good summaries and the back and forth of the debate. They even give the Creationist side of the argument better than the Creationists do! (but then show that it is wrong, of course, but you can skip that part if you don't want to hear it).

 

[NatJo]

Thanks

 

[Tpt]

yea talkorigins is awesome,
There are some others but i'd have to get back to you on them, I forget ATM.

 

[Jet Black]

Clikbing Mount IMprobable is a good read, and it is made of paper so it doesn't need to be plugged in.

 

[Nathan Poe]

How can you prove evolution without the fancy scientific words? If you think evolution is false then tell why. If something is completely true then you should be able to say it in a simple way, whether or not it's simple or not. I'd like to hear your thoughts not your critique on other people's religion or lifestyle. We can make this a debate using "theories, hypothesis, and facts" not just plain nonsense.

How can you prove math without the numbers?

Sad but true: You want to dance, you gotta learn the steps.