Darwins' Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection says that species either adapt and evolve via an accumulation of sequential minor variations, or become extinct.
The Gaia hypothesis says that the planet's biomass self-regulates the conditions on the planet to make its physical environment (in particular temperature and chemistry of the atmosphere) on the planet consistently hospitable to the species which constitute its 'life'. For example, when atmospheric carbon dioxide levels rise, the biomass of photosynthetic organisms increases and thus removes more carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. Gaia has attracted considerable debate and should, at this stage, be considered a hypothesis rather than a proven theory.
The two concepts are parallel in that they explain the ability of an 'organism' to adapt to the changing environment. However, one is concerned with biological processes, while the other is concerned with macro-physics. They neither contradict nor support each other.
No, Charles Darwin did not contradict the theory of evolution. In fact, he is considered one of the founders of the theory with his work on natural selection. Darwin's research provided evidence and a framework for understanding how species change over time through the process of evolution.
The hypothesis that evolution occurred slowly but steadily is called gradualism. This theory suggests that small, incremental changes accumulated over long periods of time to result in the diversity of life we see today.
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.
The hypothesis that proposes evolution occurs slowly but steadily is known as gradualism. It suggests that species evolve through gradual changes over long periods of time. This contrasts with punctuated equilibrium, which suggests that evolution occurs in short bursts of rapid change followed by long periods of stability.
Evolution does not contradict religion itself. It contradicts the interpretation of a religious text as a literal description of biology. By the same token, the solar system contradicts the interpretation of religious text as meaning the Earth is the center of the Universe.
A hypothesis is an idea suggested in order to explain data (information). It's essentially the same as a theory. For example, evolution is a hypothesis that explains why different groups of plants and animals have different similarities. Once a hypothesis has been suggested, you go and collect more data that will either support the hypothesis or contradict it. In the case of evolution, DNA patterns and protein similarities support the hypothesis.
No, Charles Darwin did not contradict the theory of evolution. In fact, he is considered one of the founders of the theory with his work on natural selection. Darwin's research provided evidence and a framework for understanding how species change over time through the process of evolution.
Yes. However, it is possible to PROVE the validity of evolution on an evidential basis.
Evolution is an observed and observable fact. The theory of evolution by natural selection explains many things about evolution. The theory generates testable hypothesis, as any good theory does. Remember, theory is the highest concept in science.
he's bent
"Biographic" or "biographical" refers to an account of a person's life, and I see no reason why this theory would contradict any such account.
No facts currently known to science contradict the fundamental theses of evolutionary theory.
natural selection
Darwin invented the theory of evolution
RNA world Hypothesis.
In science, a hypothesis and a theory differs in that a hypothesis is a conjecture based on empirical observation or theoretical derivation yet unproven or by any experimental work, and that a theory is a hypothesis that has been rigorously tested by many researchers and supported by strong evidence. Evolution is a theory that has been repeatedly tested, supported by overwhelming evidence, and can be used to explain natural phenomenon very well.
No. it contradics sexual evolution, seriously.