0
Answer 1
There appear to be three different offers currently on the table from different people or groups.
1. Young-earth creationist Kent Hovind has an offer of $250,000 (allegedly for around 12 years) for proof of evolution.
2. Creationist Adnan Oktar of Turkey, reported on one site as a 'rival of Richard Dawkins' has an offer of 10 trillion lira $7.5 million dollars for fossil evidence of evolution.
3. An Old-earth Creationist site has an offer of $1,000,000 for proof of Abiogenesis (life from non-life).
Relevant conditions are attached to all of these.
Answer 2
Although the first answer to this question is correct in that these groups do appear to offer rewards for proof of evolution or abiogenesis, there is no actual intent there to give the reward to anyone who offers actual evidence for the mentioned proofs. The conditions attached to these rewards, and the definitions of 'proof' and 'evidence' applied by those who offer them, and even the interpretation of the relevant explanatory models themselves, are carefully chosen so that no evidence or proof that complies with scientific tenets can ever be accepted and the rewards can never be awarded.
What else can I help you with?
What do the various rewards for proof of evolution demonstrate?
All the so-called rewards that I am aware of are offered by creationists, who have probably offerred amounts beyond their ability to pay - in one case, ten million lira. The fact that apparently enormous "rewards" are being offered only by people with strongly held views opposed to evolution demonstrates that this is a propaganda exercise, not a genuine quest for proof. What this also demonstrates is a belief that the public will believe anything if you appear to show confidence in your beliefs.Take for example, the "reward" offered by Kent Hovind. The principal roadblock to claiming this reward is that you have to convince him and him alone of evolution, and he has already declared all scientific evidence to be false. He has not put any money in trust, nor appointed an independent panel of scientific experts to make the decision. So, it doesn't matter whether he has a quarter of a million pounds on offer: he is in the position of always declaring himself unconvinced.If such reward had been offered by a science foundation on the basis of an independent arbitrator and fair rules, the reward would have been claimed long ago. The absence of rewards on offer from genuine science foundations, or even from uncommitted philanthropists eager to advance scientific inquiry, demonstrates the confidence that proof of evolution is no longer required.For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Why do people deny the proof of evolution?
People may deny the proof of evolution due to personal beliefs, religious reasons, lack of understanding of the evidence, or misinformation. Some may feel that accepting evolution conflicts with their worldview or beliefs.
What proof do we have evolution taking place?
Evidence for evolution includes the fossil record, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, and observed instances of natural selection. These different lines of evidence all support the concept of biological evolution occurring over time.
How does it require faith to believe in evolution?
Evolution doesn't require faith. Faith is confidence or trust in a person, thing, deity, or in the doctrines or teachings of a religion. It is also belief that is not based on proof. - Dictionary.com But theory of evolution. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. - National Academy of Sciences.
How does scientists use biochemistry DNA and RNA as evidence of evolution?
In any practical sense, they don't. Scientists have long ago stopped looking for "proof of evolution", since virtually every observation in biology turned out to be "proof of evolution". So today, even though every new observation and every new experiment still poses a potential test for evolution, the central theses of evolutionary theory are taken as a given.The ways that observations in biochemistry, especially concerning DNA and RNA, are consistent with common descent and descent with modification are diverse. For one thing, the molecular make-up of RNA and DNA sequences in life forms seemlessly follow the nested hierarchies of life that we find mirrored in morphology, behaviour and fossils. These sequences allow us to formulate more accurate phylogenetic hypotheses. Also, the biochemical details of DNA and RNA and their ancillary mechanisms show us how evolution works at the molecular level.
Why are lenski's bacteria not proof of evolution?
Because nothing is proof of evolution.
What do the various rewards for proof of evolution demonstrate?
All the so-called rewards that I am aware of are offered by creationists, who have probably offerred amounts beyond their ability to pay - in one case, ten million lira. The fact that apparently enormous "rewards" are being offered only by people with strongly held views opposed to evolution demonstrates that this is a propaganda exercise, not a genuine quest for proof. What this also demonstrates is a belief that the public will believe anything if you appear to show confidence in your beliefs.Take for example, the "reward" offered by Kent Hovind. The principal roadblock to claiming this reward is that you have to convince him and him alone of evolution, and he has already declared all scientific evidence to be false. He has not put any money in trust, nor appointed an independent panel of scientific experts to make the decision. So, it doesn't matter whether he has a quarter of a million pounds on offer: he is in the position of always declaring himself unconvinced.If such reward had been offered by a science foundation on the basis of an independent arbitrator and fair rules, the reward would have been claimed long ago. The absence of rewards on offer from genuine science foundations, or even from uncommitted philanthropists eager to advance scientific inquiry, demonstrates the confidence that proof of evolution is no longer required.For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Is barry proof of evolution?
yes u can tell by looking at him
Why do people get cusp of carabelli?
Evolution. Just more proof that evolution is just playing around. It serves no purpose.
What was the mission the led Darwin's boat to sea?
Discovering proof of evolution
What the the mission that led Darwin's boat to sea?
Discovering proof of evolution
When are 2010 proof pennies going to be available?
2010 Proof sets are currently available from the Royal Mint.
1970 proof set value?
Currently is worth about $7.00.
Is there any proof of judaism practiced in UK?
Currently or Historically?
How have bacteria shown proof of evolution?
all bacteria will form and there will be a massive wave of pollution
What proof other than the Bible can fundamentalist Christians offer that there is a Hell?
I can only speak for myself and can not offer you any proof other than the Bible itself.
Why do people deny the proof of evolution?
People may deny the proof of evolution due to personal beliefs, religious reasons, lack of understanding of the evidence, or misinformation. Some may feel that accepting evolution conflicts with their worldview or beliefs.
