Want this question answered?
Molecular genetics
Most religious creation myths teach that human beings (and every other form of life), were created specially, separate from all the others, for a particular divine purpose.Evolutionary theory does not award the human race (or any other kind of life) with a special position. Each and every living thing is the end product, the summum, of a long history of surviving common ancestors, producing diverging lineages. According to evolutionary theory, we're special not because of our origins, but because of the characteristics we've evolved, which set us - but every other life form as well - apart from all the others. There is no overriding purpose to our being special, according to evolutionary theory. We're merely a product of differential reproductive success.I believe that, in the basis, it is the issue of needing to be special in combination with the need for some overriding purpose that causes fundamentalists to reject evolutionary theory as an explanation for the diversity of life. See the answer below for an example of this.Answer:Fundamentalism, and religion in general, is at odds with evolutionary theory because evolutionary theory tends to be taught with the implicit message that God is not part (or need not be part) of the picture, that people do not have souls, and that there's no life after this one.
Molecular Genetics
The theory of evolution by means of natural selection, Darwin's theory, has bee modified and added to in the over 150 years it has been in existence. Still, Darwin's theory formed the core of modern evolutionary theory and can still be considered essentially valid today. Modern evolutionary theory, based on the modern synthesis of the 30's and 40's, is the bedrock upon which biology is built.
a scientist who believed in the big bang theory
You and I have the same 50% DNA as a banana.
What kind of information or items, did he use to support his theory
Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered, and then test the theory to see whether it holds water. The easiest, fastest way to make sure that you are regarded as a wingnut by real scientists is to adopt or invent a theory, and then spend your time trying to prove it.
If you browse around this category, you will find several similar questions with replies that answer your query. ==================================== Real scientists do not "gather evidence in support of" any theory. The technical term for that kind of thing is "cherry-picking". Real scientists build a theory to explain the evidence that they have already gathered, and then test the theory to see whether it holds water. The easiest, fastest way to make sure that you are regarded as a wingnut by real scientists is to adopt or invent a theory, and then spend your time trying to prove it.
He used fossils,climate changes,and landforms to support his theory.
his brain
hypothesis
There is no evidence of any kind to support the idea.
There is no evidence of any kind to support the idea.
Molecular genetics
There is no evidence of any kind to support the idea. NO.
he found fossles