Want this question answered?
The branches of genetics, paleontology, observed natural selection and speciation all support evolution. Examples: (Genetics) Human chromosome 2 resulted from a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. (Paleontology) Evolution of the horse. (Natural selection) Observed in Peppered moths. (Speciation) The Hawthorn Fly
The Peppered moth avoids predation by using camouflage to blend int to tree bark. It was originally white with black spots. However in the industrial revolution when the local trees were blacked by soot from the factory chimneys, a black variant with white spots became prevalent in these regions. In the areas of pollution the black version blended in and the white stood out so natural selection changed the appearance of the population in these areas.
yes
By giving the theory a mechanism of inheritance. Particulate inheritance, where each parent contributes chromosomes ( Mendel dod not know what a chromosome was and called genes " factors " ) that contain separate alleles that contribute to the progeny's traits. Darwin's idea of " blending " inheritance was completely wrong.
Because in the wild there is a struggle for existence as more organisms are born than there are resources to support them. Thus, there is a wide variety of traits expressed by these many organisms and some of these traits confer survival and reproductive advantages which is what natural selection is selecting for.
The branches of genetics, paleontology, observed natural selection and speciation all support evolution. Examples: (Genetics) Human chromosome 2 resulted from a fusion of two ancestral chromosomes. (Paleontology) Evolution of the horse. (Natural selection) Observed in Peppered moths. (Speciation) The Hawthorn Fly
Genetic variation in itself does not 'support' natural selection: it is what natural selection acts upon.
The Peppered moth avoids predation by using camouflage to blend int to tree bark. It was originally white with black spots. However in the industrial revolution when the local trees were blacked by soot from the factory chimneys, a black variant with white spots became prevalent in these regions. In the areas of pollution the black version blended in and the white stood out so natural selection changed the appearance of the population in these areas.
yes
Charles Darwin, the creator of the theory of natural selection, was born 1809.
One of those that caught my attention was the evidence of peppered moths changing their color from light to dark due to industrial pollution. This supposedly shows how natural selection can change a species into another type, and eminent scientists have emphasized the importance of this supposed proof of evolution.Professor John Maynard Smith stated: "We should expect to find the most rapid evolutionary changes in populations suddenly exposed to new conditions. It is therefore natural that one of the most striking changes which has been observed in a wild population . . . is the phenomenon of 'industrial melanism,' the appearance and spread of dark forms of a number of species of moths" (The Theory of Evolution, 1966, p. 137).
By giving the theory a mechanism of inheritance. Particulate inheritance, where each parent contributes chromosomes ( Mendel dod not know what a chromosome was and called genes " factors " ) that contain separate alleles that contribute to the progeny's traits. Darwin's idea of " blending " inheritance was completely wrong.
Because there is a large body of evidence to support it.
Life has a great potential for creating diversity.
It is not a matter of agreement, it is a matter of accepting the overwhelming evidences in support of the theory of evolution by natural selection.
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
supports hypothesis that species have changed over time.