0
Darwin might give an explanation based on the theory of natural selection, which suggests that organisms best adapted to their environment are more likely to survive and reproduce, passing on their advantageous traits to future generations. This theory forms the core of Darwin's theory of evolution.
What else can I help you with?
What is known as the fittest is Darwin's explanation for diversity in nature?
'Evolution of the fittest by natural evolution' is attributed to Darwin and Wallace. An alternate phrasing might be 'Failure of the least-fit by ... ', which equally (or better) explains the results.
Why do scientists call evolution a theory?
Because it cannot be proven or replicated.AnswerIn science, a hypothesis is a good idea, a possible explanation, which might be right and might be wrong. Hypotheses can be refuted by experimentation. If the expectation from the hypothesis is not met by the outcome of experiment, the hypothesis is refuted. The longer a hypothesis survives unrefuted the more confidence we have in it. Evidence can support a hypothesis. The more evidence one has in support of a hypothesis, the more grows our confidence in it. Within the philosophy of science of Karl Popper, a hypothesis cannot be proven, but one can have a mighty amount of confidence in one, proportional to the amount of evidence in support of it. Unrefuted and with backing evidence, a hypothesis is promoted to a theory! A theory is better than a hypothesis. Evolution has much evidence from comparative genetics, comparative morphology and the fossil record. Evolution was once a hypothesis. Darwin collected a large mass of evidence for On the Origin of Species and now we have evidence from Mendelian genetics and comparative genetics, which Darwin knew nothing of. We now have a greater fossil record than Darwin did. There is far more evidence these days (for what is now called Neodarwinism or the Modern Synthesis- the combination of genetics and Darwin's basic 1859 ideas) than there was in Darwin's time. Evolution now has so much evidence that it is best to call it a theory, rather than a hypothesis. Yes, theories are unproven, but in Popperian philosophy of science they cannot be proven. Theories survive refutation and have much evidence and explain a lot. Biology regards evolution as its baseline, its most important idea ever. It might only be a theory of which we can only be 99% confident, but it explains everything so well that most biologists should better call it a fact rather than a theory. Evolution is such a good theory that its pedantic differentiation from 'fact' is entirely unnecessary.
What is a suggested explanation that might be true and is subject to testing by further observations is an?
A suggested explanation that might be true and is subject to testing by further observations is
Was Charles Darwin a leader of any group?
Charles Darwin was not a leader of any specific group per se, but he was a prominent figure in the scientific community due to his work on the theory of evolution by natural selection. His ideas revolutionized the field of biology and led to significant advances in our understanding of the natural world.
What is the origin of the Theory of Evolution?
Evidence of evolution began to be recognised as far back as the eighteenth century, but naturists could not yet identify an explanation for this evidence. Jean-Baptiste Pierre Antoine de Monet (1744-1829) was an early advocate of evolution and believed that it proceeded in accordance with natural laws.Thus Charles Darwin (1809-1892) was not the first to study evolution, but he was the first to recognise the role of natural selection in evolution. He had studied medicine, before dropping out and studying taxidermy, then natural history. His father enrolled Charles to study theology, hoping he would become a clergyman. Charles Darwin developed the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection after observing the evidence for evolution during his voyage in HMS Beagle. The captain of the Beagle was already aware of evolutionary theories that were already beginning to shock Christian believers in Europe, and had hoped that by having a naturalist on board he might obtain geological evidence to refute the them. During the voyage, from 1831 to 1836, Darwin travelled hundreds of miles inland, from country to country, trying to interpret the fauna, flora and geological formations. He then spent a further twenty years gathering and investigating evidence before publishing his conclusions.Darwin's Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection says that species evolved over time in response to changes in the natural environment, and is seen by scientists as the best explanation for the facts. Darwin wrote Origin of Species in 1859 and The Descent of Man in 1871.The English naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace also invented the theory of natural selection, independent of Charles Darwin. However, he believed that natural selection did not apply to humans, because our evolution was divinely guided. In the years since, paleoanthropologists have found ample evidence that human evolution did occur as the result of natural selection, just as the evolution of all other species did.
Which and why theory sound like an explanation that Bismarck might give?
Which theory sound like an explanation that Bismarck might give
Which theory sounds like an explanation that Lamarck might give?
Giraffes have long necks because their ancestors stretched their necks reaching for food, and this trait was passed on their offspring.
Is a theory a prediction?
No, a theory is not a prediction. A theory is a well-supported explanation for a phenomenon based on evidence and research, while a prediction is a statement about what might happen in the future based on the theory.
Would Darwin have developed his theory of evolution if he had not read the works of Lyell and Malthus?
He might not of if Malthus had not been around but he depended on the works of Lyell.
What is known as the fittest is Darwin's explanation for diversity in nature?
'Evolution of the fittest by natural evolution' is attributed to Darwin and Wallace. An alternate phrasing might be 'Failure of the least-fit by ... ', which equally (or better) explains the results.
What is the reason that a theory might be replaced with a new theory?
a theory is an explanation to a specific question being studied. it has been tested many times. it might be replaced with a new theory because new information come and so the past information will be improved.
Can a theory be true or false?
Yes. If you have a theory about how things work, it might turn out to be true or it might turn out to be false. The more you know about the subject, the stronger the theory is likely to be, and the likelier it is that the theory will be proven.
Was darwin's theory correct?
Yes, yes it was. As far as we know though, in years to come, someone might find the possibility of it being incorrect, but if it ever happens, it will be a while.
Why is Darwin more famous than Wallace in the explanation of evolution?
The reason the focus, or major credit goes to Darwin is, though they both realized the principles of evolution, Wallace's presentation was little more than the realization. Darwin had had the realization and spent almost twenty years documenting and exploring the relations and complexities of said theory. Wallace himself had no difficulty with Darwin receiving the majority of the credit. Wallace had sent Darwin his paper on the topic, which kind of shocked Darwin that some one else might scoop his idea, he decided to present his idea to the Royal Society, and when he did so, he presented at the same time Wallace's paper, a very gracious thing to do on Darwins part. Wallace was at the time totally unaware of what was happening and only learned after the fact that he was presented to the Royal Society as co-discoverer of, The Theory Of Evolution By Natural Selection.
How was lamarks theory of evolution different than Darwin's theory?
Lamarck's theory of evolution proposed that traits acquired during the lifetime of the parent were genetically passed on to children. Some animal might, according to Lamarck's theory, learn a novel way of obtaining food, and then its children would be born with this novel mechanism already in place. Darwin, contrarily, proposed that lineages evolved new traits though natural selection: by the elimination of lineages that do *not* possess a certain trait.
What was the field of Gregor Mendels study that later supported Darwin's theory of natural selection?
i only know which detracted from Darwin's theory. It was his research in genetics. At Darwin's time, people believed that if someone was to have a burned ear, or his arm fell off, their offspring might have a missing arm or burned ear when born. As we know now, that is completely false, since we still carry the "good gene" (most of the time) and that there are actually things that prevent and fix cell mutations
Why do scientists call evolution a theory?
Because it cannot be proven or replicated.AnswerIn science, a hypothesis is a good idea, a possible explanation, which might be right and might be wrong. Hypotheses can be refuted by experimentation. If the expectation from the hypothesis is not met by the outcome of experiment, the hypothesis is refuted. The longer a hypothesis survives unrefuted the more confidence we have in it. Evidence can support a hypothesis. The more evidence one has in support of a hypothesis, the more grows our confidence in it. Within the philosophy of science of Karl Popper, a hypothesis cannot be proven, but one can have a mighty amount of confidence in one, proportional to the amount of evidence in support of it. Unrefuted and with backing evidence, a hypothesis is promoted to a theory! A theory is better than a hypothesis. Evolution has much evidence from comparative genetics, comparative morphology and the fossil record. Evolution was once a hypothesis. Darwin collected a large mass of evidence for On the Origin of Species and now we have evidence from Mendelian genetics and comparative genetics, which Darwin knew nothing of. We now have a greater fossil record than Darwin did. There is far more evidence these days (for what is now called Neodarwinism or the Modern Synthesis- the combination of genetics and Darwin's basic 1859 ideas) than there was in Darwin's time. Evolution now has so much evidence that it is best to call it a theory, rather than a hypothesis. Yes, theories are unproven, but in Popperian philosophy of science they cannot be proven. Theories survive refutation and have much evidence and explain a lot. Biology regards evolution as its baseline, its most important idea ever. It might only be a theory of which we can only be 99% confident, but it explains everything so well that most biologists should better call it a fact rather than a theory. Evolution is such a good theory that its pedantic differentiation from 'fact' is entirely unnecessary.
