Even though this thread is 10 pages long evolution posts are like crack to me and I am compelled to respond.
Almost all biologists will say evolution is a fact, however they would say evolution by natural selection is a theory. Looking at the world around us leads to the factual observation that some kind of evolution has occurred. DNA, morphology, zoology, and paleontology independently produce enough evidence to show evolution is factual. The mechanism of evolution is the theoretical part. Evolution could be done by aliens, God, Natural Selection, or a process yet unknown, however the preponderance of evidence support natural selection.
It is just a theory
Evolution by natural selection is a scientific theory. This mean it has been tested and met observational confirmation. It is not simply an idea or hypothesis. A theory explains fact but a theory can never be a fact. There is often this belief that once a theory is proven it becomes fact or worse a Law. A theory is an explanation of facts and observations that provides predictive value. A fact is simply an observable truth. For instance water will flow from higher concentration to lower concentration across a permeable surface. So water will pool on a tile floor but if you drop a towel onto the pool it will be absorbed into the towel. This is a trivial thing and would never be called a theory however this concept leads to Osmosis and the theory of Homeostasis.
There is no progression in science above theory. A theory is the top of the chart. In the 19th century and earlier several theories were labelled laws due to their ability to be expressed as short equations. F=ma is Newton's second law of motion for instance but by the late 19th century and onwards this fell out of fashion. This is due to the fact that there is no difference between a 'law' and a 'theory' (other than a law typical results in an equation while a theory is not bound to this rule.) However both can be dis proven or altered. For example Newton laws on gravity were generalized by Einstein. Newton could not explain the orbit of Mercury using his 'laws' but Einstein could using his theory.
If we evolved from apes why are there still apes
I thought the if-america-was-settled-by-british-people-why-are-there-still-british-people analogy should have answered this however I will try using biological examples. Human beings share a common ancestor with Chimpanzees and Bonobos. This common ancestor lived about 6 million years ago. A researcher by the name of Tim White(and a large team supporting him) has uncovered an amazing fossil of a species that lived about 4.4 million years ago called Ardipithucus ramidus. This creature is very close to the common ancestor probably looked like. One of the more amazing things about Ardi is it turns the "we evolved from apes" or its head a bit as the fossil suggests that chimp and bonobos evolved from us. Not Homo sapiens but from a bipedal human-like creature into a knuckle-walking arboreal creature.
Regardless of the 'direction' of evolution the reasons the species still exist today is all the same, reproductive isolation, varying environments, and time. If you place a population of the exact same species into 3 different environments and ensure they can only reproduce within there environmental set given enough time they will speciate into 3 different species. The 3 might be very similar like a Lion and a Tiger and could even produce infertile offspring like a Liger but if they are at that point they are permanently on different evolutionary paths. One of which might lead to humans while an other leads to Bonobos.
Almost all biologists will say evolution is a fact, however they would say evolution by natural selection is a theory. Looking at the world around us leads to the factual observation that some kind of evolution has occurred. DNA, morphology, zoology, and paleontology independently produce enough evidence to show evolution is factual. The mechanism of evolution is the theoretical part. Evolution could be done by aliens, God, Natural Selection, or a process yet unknown, however the preponderance of evidence support natural selection.
It is just a theory
Evolution by natural selection is a scientific theory. This mean it has been tested and met observational confirmation. It is not simply an idea or hypothesis. A theory explains fact but a theory can never be a fact. There is often this belief that once a theory is proven it becomes fact or worse a Law. A theory is an explanation of facts and observations that provides predictive value. A fact is simply an observable truth. For instance water will flow from higher concentration to lower concentration across a permeable surface. So water will pool on a tile floor but if you drop a towel onto the pool it will be absorbed into the towel. This is a trivial thing and would never be called a theory however this concept leads to Osmosis and the theory of Homeostasis.
There is no progression in science above theory. A theory is the top of the chart. In the 19th century and earlier several theories were labelled laws due to their ability to be expressed as short equations. F=ma is Newton's second law of motion for instance but by the late 19th century and onwards this fell out of fashion. This is due to the fact that there is no difference between a 'law' and a 'theory' (other than a law typical results in an equation while a theory is not bound to this rule.) However both can be dis proven or altered. For example Newton laws on gravity were generalized by Einstein. Newton could not explain the orbit of Mercury using his 'laws' but Einstein could using his theory.
If we evolved from apes why are there still apes
I thought the if-america-was-settled-by-british-people-why-are-there-still-british-people analogy should have answered this however I will try using biological examples. Human beings share a common ancestor with Chimpanzees and Bonobos. This common ancestor lived about 6 million years ago. A researcher by the name of Tim White(and a large team supporting him) has uncovered an amazing fossil of a species that lived about 4.4 million years ago called Ardipithucus ramidus. This creature is very close to the common ancestor probably looked like. One of the more amazing things about Ardi is it turns the "we evolved from apes" or its head a bit as the fossil suggests that chimp and bonobos evolved from us. Not Homo sapiens but from a bipedal human-like creature into a knuckle-walking arboreal creature.
Regardless of the 'direction' of evolution the reasons the species still exist today is all the same, reproductive isolation, varying environments, and time. If you place a population of the exact same species into 3 different environments and ensure they can only reproduce within there environmental set given enough time they will speciate into 3 different species. The 3 might be very similar like a Lion and a Tiger and could even produce infertile offspring like a Liger but if they are at that point they are permanently on different evolutionary paths. One of which might lead to humans while an other leads to Bonobos.
Last edited:
