AGS Steam Games

Forums → WEPR → if eveloution is real why are there still apes?

85 20704
bryceop
offline
bryceop
103 posts
Nomad

i would just like to ask the question above beacuse i think it means eveloution isnt real.

  • 85 Replies
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Well it's called the "Theory of evolution", so technically it's never been proven to be a Law of science, but it is still widely accepted.

*facepalm* You're misunderstanding the meaning of a scientifical theory. Just like so many people, you're playing with words right there. A scientifical theory is backed up by evidence. What you think of is more something in the line of a hypothesis.

On the matter of anthropology, I just found an apparently good site. I will be sure to read more articles from that blog, but for the moment have a look at that one:
Fossil hominid skulls
Just click on the image for a list of the names and age of the hominids, and a larger image.
Read carefully what he wrote, especially below the image, to avoid misunderstandings.
I also find some of the comments quite worthwile to read.
Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

Well it's called the "Theory of evolution", so technically it's never been proven to be a Law of science, but it is still widely accepted.


The everyday definition of theory is "a guess based on observation or past experience", while the theory that you need to associate ANY branch of science with is "an established explanation accounting for known facts or phenomena which has been verified to certain degrees".
MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

Well it's called the "Theory of evolution", so technically it's never been proven to be a Law of science, but it is still widely accepted.


Theories don't grow up to become laws. Laws don't explain why an observation is the way it is, while theories do. A law is limited to circumstances resembling those previously previously observed. Laws can however be used along with a theory to express the relationship between observations or events based on verified hypotheses.

Also we can never say a theory is proven as it has to remain falsifiable. This allows it to make predictions about the natural world that are testable.This also allows for it's modification and expiation when new evidence is presented.
xNightwish
offline
xNightwish
1,608 posts
Nomad

I won't believe in evolution until I grow a pair of wings or get extra limbs.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

I won't believe in evolution until I grow a pair of wings or get extra limbs.


Evolution doesn't work that way and such a thing happening would be evidence against evolution. Even if it did work that way it would have to happen on a group of people, not just you.

Evolution put simply is decent with modification. Or another way to put it, the change in allele frequencies in the gene pool from one generation to the next.
grimml
offline
grimml
879 posts
Nomad

I won't believe in evolution until I grow a pair of wings or get extra limbs.

Thanks for letting us know that you don't know what evolution is and how it works.
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,043 posts
Shepherd

I won't believe in evolution until I grow a pair of wings or get extra limbs.


Like this?

http://i51.tinypic.com/34nmwjq.jpg

Or this?

http://i53.tinypic.com/fem05v.jpg

Believe it or not, evolution doesn't really work this way.
xNightwish
offline
xNightwish
1,608 posts
Nomad

I think Darwin or whoever created the big boom theory just was studying natural selection and so he created the evolution story.

Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

Nightwish, Natural Selection came about because of Evolution, to an author, Charles Darwin, who had no involvement with the Big Bang theory, in fact the theory was far beyond his time.

xNightwish
offline
xNightwish
1,608 posts
Nomad

Well actually I looked it up and natural selection has been there long before your theories. Like the greek Empedocles (490 - 430 bc)

Freakenstein
offline
Freakenstein
9,504 posts
Jester

The early theories of Natural Selection were ill-lacking, if that.

HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

I browsed over an article on Empedocles's thoughts, and found no mention of natural selection; maybe my search was too specified. Could you show me a text where it talks about that?

And Freakenstein is right, most previous hypothesis about natural selection weren't really correct; most prominent in the time frame of Darwin was Lamarck and his 'transmutation of species'. He made two postulates that from an actual viewpoint are false. Darwin came after that, and had the right thoughts about natural selection, that he did get during or after his voyage with the Beagle.

EmperorPalpatine
offline
EmperorPalpatine
9,439 posts
Jester

Could you show me a text where it talks about that?

I'm guessing he meant here.
HahiHa
offline
HahiHa
8,256 posts
Regent

Ah, thanks.
Well, of course Darwin wasn't the first to have thoughts about the origin and diversity of plant and animal species. But Empedocles and Lamarck used their imagination to try to find a correct answer, while Darwin drew his hypothesis from his observations, not his fantasy.

MageGrayWolf
offline
MageGrayWolf
9,462 posts
Farmer

I think Darwin or whoever created the big boom theory just was studying natural selection and so he created the evolution story.


Darwin had nothing to do with the Big bang theory, he discovered the mechanism of evolution which had been around for some time by Darwin's time.

Well actually I looked it up and natural selection has been there long before your theories. Like the greek Empedocles (490 - 430 bc)


What Empedocles proposed was spontaneous generation, not evolution by natural selection. However the mechanism that determined what forms survived that had spontaneously generated was similar to that of natural selection.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Empedocles#Cosmogony
Showing 61-75 of 85