One way to check evolution is to compare genomes.
Another even more direct method is by observing instances of speciation in nature, such as the acquisition of novel traits in bacteria (antibiotic resistance) or the inability to interbreed (various insects, chichlid fishes, etc.)
The fossil record provides excellent indirect evidence for evolution. None of the mammals that exist today can be found in paleozoic or mesozoic strata. The fossil record tells us mass extinctions occurred multiple times through geologic history, followed by periods of fairly rapid diversification as new ecological niches were subsequently filled.
Flowering plants are rife in the current Cenozoic fossil record, but entirely absent from the paleozoic, and only a few primitive forms are known from the late mesozoic. This indirect evidence is highly suggestive of an evolutionary process.
A discovery that shows species appearing suddenly in the fossil record without any preceding ancestors would provide evidence against the theory of evolution. This would contradict the gradual changes in species predicted by evolution.
No. God hypothetically could have created evolution. Science has evidence of evolution and plausible explanations for the creation of life. Science does not provide evidence of a god's existence.
To disprove evolution, one would need to provide scientifically-backed evidence that cannot be explained by evolutionary theory, such as finding a fossil in a rock layer that it should not be in based on the geological timescale, or demonstrating a complex biological structure that could not have evolved through gradual processes. However, the overwhelming evidence from multiple scientific fields strongly supports the theory of evolution.
You could never get any type of evidence to prove untrue things...
Nicolas Rashevsky
Yes mutations are the basis of evolution as they provide variance in the phenotype that could have evolutionary advantages
No. Evolution is a consequence of selective pressure(s) from the environment acting on organisms. Virtually all living beings are not conscious of this process.The only species that *could* consciously direct its own evolution is Homo sapiens (humans), but currently it doesn't.Artificial selection can and has consciously directed evolution, but it always was a species acting over other different species, not on their own evolution.
Weak evidence in a criminal investigation could be a single unreliable witness testimony without any corroborating evidence, such as physical evidence or surveillance footage.
No, Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection actually complements the principles of biogeography. Biogeography, the study of the distribution of species, provides evidence of how species have adapted to their environments over time through the process of evolution. Darwin himself used biogeographical evidence to support his theory of evolution.
Simple example. You know hair color is under genetic control. Two types, blond ( which is recessive ) and brown ( which is dominant ) exist in our population. These two alleles are in a 75% to a 25% frequency. ( dominant to recessive ) if that frequency changed to 60% to 40% you could say that evolution had taken place. Evolution is the change in allele frequency in a population of organisms over time. ( example very simplified ) PS Scientist do not prove things. They support their work with the evidence.
There isn't direct evidence but because of his family background and the way he depends on Dick to do the "dirty work" could mean that he is emotionally unstable. Also, his artistic gifts and his obsessions with people could also be evidence that he is not mentally stable.
To provide a concise answer, could you please specify the context or topic for which you need four pieces of evidence? This will help me tailor the response accurately.