Look to the morphologies of all mammals and see rather easily how closely related they are in comparison to the more distantly related morphologies of all reptiles.
Ancestral traits, such as tetropodal arrangement of limbs and then derived differences between mammals and reptiles. Reptiles having scales and mammals having hair.
In every way.
Darwin's theory of evolution is supported by a vast amount of evidence from various scientific fields, such as biology, genetics, paleontology, and comparative anatomy. The theory is also consistent with observations of natural selection in action, as well as with the fossil record showing gradual changes over time. Additionally, modern research continues to provide new evidence in support of the theory.
Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection was better than other theories of his time because it provided a mechanism (natural selection) to explain how evolution occurs. It was supported by evidence from various scientific disciplines such as geology, paleontology, and morphology. Additionally, Darwin's theory was able to explain the diversity of life on Earth in a simple and elegant way.
Fossils are not used to oppose the theory of evolution. They acutually support it in every way. So far not one fossil has been found that is not exactly where you would expect it to be if evolution were true. As we dig deeper we go further back in time and see by piecing fossils together how organisms evolved over time. Although we don't need fossils to support the fact that evolution is happening, it's a nice bonus to have in support of the theory.
Relative and absolute dating of the rocks and the fossils near it (geology and archaeology), as well as chemical components of various surrounding areas are consistent in explaining the diversity of life as explained by theory of evolution. Evolution is also consistent with embryology, genetics, comparative physiology, biochemistry, and more. See the related link below for more details.
true Answer The Theory of Evolution by Means of Natural Selection is accepted by most, almost all, scientists as an excellent account of how life must change and diversify and adapt across time. Evolution is considered factual and thus true by most scientists. The reason for this is the huge amount of evidence, which comes from comparative genetics, comparative genomics, comparative cytogenetics, biogeography, comparative morphology, comparative biochemistry, comparative behaviour and the fossil record.
It is generally thought to support the Theory of Evolution.
'Comparative religion' is merely the comparison of differences and similarities between two or more religions or sects. It has nothing to do with evolution (a scientific principle) and support from religions is irrelevant to science. Most religious groups recognise that the scientific community has validated evolution, and accept these findings as correct, while some do not. Recognition of evlution's validation is one criteria to compare religions with.
The lines of evidence that support the theory of evolution include fossil records, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, and biogeography. Fossil records show a progression of life forms over time, while comparative anatomy reveals similarities in structures among different species. Molecular biology demonstrates common genetic sequences among organisms, and biogeography examines the distribution of species around the world, all of which provide evidence for the common ancestry and gradual change of species over time outlined in the theory of evolution.
Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection has been widely accepted in the scientific community and has provided a robust framework for understanding the diversity of life on Earth. Over time, new evidence in genetics, paleontology, and comparative anatomy has continued to support and refine the principles of evolutionary theory.
The theory predicts that evolution will happen and in certain ways. The observed evolution makes this prediction correct. It also defines evolution as happening, and as such is perfect evidence in support of it.
I do not so much " believe it " as I an convinced by the myriad lines of converging evidences that support the theory of evolution by natural selection. talkorigins.org
In every way.
Yes. If evolution was not widely supported by evidence, then it would be regarded as a hypothesis rather than a theory.
Fossil records, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, and biogeography are all forms of scientific evidence that support the theory of evolution by showing how species have changed and diversified over time.
The better question would be; what biological sciences DO NOT support Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection. Evolution is the backbone of biology and the theory that explains much about evolution is the bedrock on which all biology is built, regardless of the apparent absence in some disciplines of biology. It is no longer just Darwin's theory as many disciplines not formed then, and some extant then, have added to and refined the theory. Genetics Molecular cell biology. Evolutionary developmental biology. Biochemistry. Geology. Paleontology. Population generics. Botany. Evolutionary biology. And the list can go on. Google, disciplines in biology, wiki.
There is no single piece of evidence that definitively disproves evolution. The theory of evolution is supported by a vast amount of evidence from various scientific fields, including genetics, paleontology, and comparative anatomy. Any challenges to the theory of evolution would need to provide substantial evidence and be subject to rigorous scientific scrutiny.