0
In 1859, when Charles Darwin published his book "On the Origins of Species by Means of Natural Selection and the Preservation of Favored Races in the Struggle for Life." Before Darwin (along with Alfred Russell Wallace) announced the idea of natural selection, scientists knew that evolution may exist, but they didn't know how it worked. In 1959, Zinj, a fossil skull of Paranthropus Boisei, was found in Olduvai Gorge by Mary Leaky. Zinj was a bipedal primate-like form with seemed to fit the missing link between humans and primates. Because of this, evolution was then given widespread attention from the non-scientist population
Wiki User
∙ 16y ago
Wiki User
∙ 14y agoThe theory wasn't really invented it was written in 1859 by Charles Darwin. On the Origin of Species
Add your answer:
Earn +20 pts
A theory is a process that we can test find evidence for but not recreate in laboratory conditions because it's scope is beyond such things. So Evolution is just a theory is not a valid argument.?
First answer: Your provided definition of a theory is not accurate and therefore is not valid. A theory is an explanation of experimental data and empirical observation. The current theory is one that best explains everything and has yet to be disproved. Evolution being just a theory is therefore not a valid argument My answer: THe process is observe: hypothesize, draw a theory, test it, and then and if it is true it becomes a law. Evolution is a theory, and has been for 150 YEARS, nobody can debate that, and nobody can prove evolution. There are alot of theories that support the theory of evolution, but neither of them can be proven either. so by definition, evolution is more of a religion than a scientific law, a bunch of people fervently believing something that cannot be proven. Answer A theory is a lacing together of facts that gives a good all-roundish explanation that explains a lot and makes predictions. A theory is better than a hypothesis, a hypothesis is just a good idea. A theory is an hypothesis that has gained much evidence and never been refuted, only supported. Note that one can never prove a theory/hypothesis. To prove a theory 100%, one needs an infinite amount of experiments and observations that meet predictions. Theories are unrefuted and that is the highest quality they can have. A theory is a hypothesis in its greatest glory. A theory is never 'just a theory'. A hypothesis is indeed just a hypothesis or just a good idea or just a rubbish idea if it turns out that way. If a hypothesis is supported by experiment and unrefuted long enough, then it is indeed worthy of not being a hypothesis and being promoted to theory. With regards to your definition of theory: it is slightly inaccurate and I have corrected it above. However, what I hypothesise you mean is that the theory of Evolution is a massive theory, a 'process' that took billions of years to get from Precambrian prokaryote to Holocene hog, hyena and hoopoe, and thus a process whose 'scope' is too large in time and complexity (genetic and morphological and geological and climatological complexity - the world of Natural Selection) to replicate in the laboratory. That is true. We cannot put a modern relative of the earliest bacteria into a laboratory and watch it, human generation by human generation, progress and branch into myriad forms as different from a bacterium as mice and jellyfish, sequoias, starfish, paramecia and pangolins, because, we as a species will not have the time resources to do such a thing. If you think that the Theory of Evolution in all its professed veracity hinges only on this one 3.5 billion year laboratory experiment, then Evolution as a theory (and perhaps even a hypothesis) may seem a failure to you. You may well exclaim "Evolution is just a theory". But Evolution, the Theory, cannot rest on this absurd, nonsensical experiment, too long in time and indeed patience. Do we have to see a hydrogen atom to theorise its existence or see the air push up the wing of an aeroplane? There are many things that we cannot see. And many theories that we accept, theories of the invisible, like the invisible atom or the invisible guanine in DNA, or the invisible change of long-dead animals from fish to amphibian and from coelurosaur to bird and from a possible hyrax-like animal to manatee and elephant, cannot have the ultimate proof brought upon them. See an electron? Feel an electron? Be in two places at once like an electron? And yet we accept the wave-particle duality of electrons. We accept these ideas because they are good ideas of the rank of theory. Not hypothesis, theory. And, within the definition of theory above, stood up in time and not fallen. We accept Evolution because it has evidence, of the quantity that renders evolution a theory. We accept atoms and DNA because there is evidence. The same goes for the Big Bang and Continental Drift. The statement 'just a theory' is always erroneous. A theory is a good thing, the best explanation we can come up with. And the longer we go without refutation, the more confident we become in the veracity of the claims of a theory. And the longer we go without refutation, the more we doubt whether there will ever be refutation, which is another way of stating the last sentence.In short, whether it is possible or not to replicate Evolution over 3.5 billion years in a laboratory, we know that this experiment would be impossible and thus need indirect ways to work out what has happened to bring life into the forms it is in now. These indirect methods (used to build up Evolution as a theory and Atomic Structure as a theory and many other theories of the invisible) have built up extraordinary wonderful theories which seem to be veracious and whose veracity (given the state that it is) it would seem absurd to deny. Just because we cannot see something in the laboratory directly for ourselves with our very eyes does not deny the veracity of the theories (as propoundings) arising from the realm of indirect method research.
What year did they become a part of the US?
and what year they i become a part of the us
In which year did Anders Celsius develop his theory?
1760
What year was the scopes evolution trial?
The Scopes Trial, in which John Butler was accused of teaching evolution in schools, took place in the year 1925. Specifically, the verdict was made on July 21, 1925.
What motivated Charles Darwin to succeed and shat are they most Known for?
Darwin was motivated by a lifelong interest in natural history that started when he was a young boy, and by the discoveries that he made on his five-year, worldwide exploration voyage on the ship HMS Beagle. He is best known for his book "On the Origin of Species" in which he published his theory of evolution and natural selection.
When was the darninim theory of evolution accepted?
The theory of evolution was accepted by scientists in 1859, Darwin's first book was published the same year that his theory was accepted.
What year did Stanley miller discover eveloution?
Evolution is not real the only person who created the earth is god not the big bang theory or the theory of evolution it was god he is the real deal I know
What year did Charles Darwin develop the theory of evolution?
he published his book about his findings in 1858
What year did Charles Darwin produce his theory on evolution?
The theory was rather well formed by 1839, but " The Origin Of Species ", which elucidated the theory, was not published until 1859.
What year did Jean Baptiste Lamarck make his discovery?
He made his dicovery 1815 about the Theory of Evolution
What year did Jean-Baptiste Lamarck make his discovery?
He made his dicovery 1815 about the Theory of Evolution
What year did the Theory of Evolution advance?
Charles Darwin Published "On the origin of species by means of natural selection" in 1859. He was not the first to postulate evolution. His grandfather Erasmus Darwin advanced the theory of evolution 75 years earlier. Charles Darwin gave us the driving force "natural selection"
What year did the electron cloud theory become discovered?
After Bohr's discovery. In the 1900's.
In what decade did the cell theory become an accepted part of biology?
in the year 1850's
Why are the ideas that earth undergoes change and is billions of year old important for evolutionary theory?
Evolution means change over a period of time. The fact that Earth is roughly 4.5 billion years old has shown us those changes in fossil records, geography, human evolution and carbon dating. So we see Evolution happening over that time and that's what makes it not a theory but fact.
Who Described evolution by natural selection?
Charles Darwin is credited with this theory in his book, The Origin Of Species. ---> Actually... Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet, Chevalier de la Marck (AKA Lamarck) was the first to propose the hypothesis that species change over time.
Year of software evolution?
Software evolution is an ongoing process
