With regard to 'facts' this is still a very subjective question. That some form of evolution occurs there is no doubt. However, there are still many unanswered questions about the natureof evolution. There are similar problems, for example, over gravity; we know gravity exists but the mechanism by which it works is still not completely understood. There are theories about gravity 'particles', 'waves', and, of course, the warping of spacetime as postulated by Einstein. But, despite all these theories having a great deal of merit, the exact 'factual' means by which gravity works is still not fully understood. In the same way, evolution, though evidence supports its existence, is still not fully understood, and until it is, facts about it cannot be cited without some doubt. The word 'fact' can be either irrefutable mathematical evidence (eg 2 + 2 = 4) but can also mean an idea for which there is overwhelming evidence - until something else comes along and improves or modifies it, that is! As an example, Newton's laws of motion were 'fact' for hundreds of years until Einstein realised that they break down at speeds near the speed of light. This is not to say Newton was wrong - only limited. In the same way, we are still groping with Darwin and, although it is unlikely that Darwin will be 'proved' wrong, it is almost certain that the current 'facts' will be modified as new evidence comes along. With regard to Darwinian 'facts', there are two extremes, both of which are rather untenable. Firstly there are those, like Richard Dawkins, who accept Darwin as irrefutable fact. He once stated "Evolution is as much a fact as the heat of the sun. It is not a theory, and for pity's sake, let's stop confusing the philosophically naive by calling it so. Evolution is a fact.'Whilst he may be eventually shown to be correct, there are many questions about evolution that Darwin simply does not answer at the moment, and so such a statement by Dawkins is rather foolish and cavalier. There are some intermediary species that havebeen found, but, considering the multitude of different creatures that have existed since life began, there simply aren't nearly enough, even if we discovered many, many more. Also, rather than a gradual process of evolution as suggested by Darwin, the records suggest that it happened, in some cases, in leaps and bounds. Why? There are also many unanswered questions such as the unlikelihood of complex structures like the eye or the feather being formed by chance, and the great improbability of a complex code like DNA being formed also by chance, even in the most primitive of bacteria. While these unanswered problems and others like them, may eventually be solved, to stick ones neck out and claim that evolution, at this moment, is irrefutable, is as silly as Fred Hoyle's insistence in the Steady State Universe, until Wilson and Penzias came along and discovered the background radiation from the Big Bang, causing Hoyle's Steady State to be shelved overnight. Secondly there are those who deny evolution totally and who insist on an earth that is just a few thousand years old, where all species were created together. Creationists have formulated their own explanations of life's formation surrounding the 'falsified' evidence of Darwinism, and usually rely on scripture to dispute Darwin's theories out of hand. This rigid approach is equally untenable as there is clear evidence of the immense age of the earth, and clear, and overwhelming, evidence that some form of evolution through natural selection does actually take place. Creationists seem, also, to forget that the Darwin they demonise, despite some wobbly episodes, lived and died a Christian. He was once famously quoted as saying he had never been an atheist in the sense of denying the existence of a God. Even his Origin of Species ends with the words "There is grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being, evolved. " In truth, then when asking about the 'facts' of evolution it is very presumptuous to either accept evolution as irrefurtable or deny it out of hand. It seems the truth lies somewhere in between. Until more evidence comes to light, until more theories and speculations come and go and until scientists and naturalists understand much (much) more about the workings of DNA, the facts about evolution will still be rather nebulous and controversial.
Evolution, the change in allele frequency over time in a population of organisms, is fact. The theory of evolution by natural selection explains much about the fact of evolution. That is what make a theory, explanation. Facts are useful, but uninteresting. Theories explain facts by gathering many convergent pieces of evidence and putting it into a logical and consistent whole.
Evolution itself is a fact, as it can be observered in both the environment and in the laboratory. A theory is a statement or series of statements which describes and explains a natural phenomenon based upon a solid foundation of evidence. The theory of evolution fits into the criteria of a theory.
We don't use the word "true" to describe scientific theories. They either fit the facts or they do not. Darwin's theory of evolution fits most of the observed facts, and does so beautifully. A theory is useful if it makes successful predictions. Darwin's theory has absolutely zero to do with belief in God. The Catholic Church does not hate God, yet endorses the view that evolution has occurred in much the way Charles Darwin described. Is there a scientific theory that better explains the evidence from paleontology, geology, anatomy, and molecular biology? No. Therefore, we provisionally accept the theory of evolution as an accurate depiction of the origin of species. Again, this has nothing to do with whether or not God exists and/or loves you. Evolution is wrong. God is true.
Evolution is a noun.
Evolution is the process by which species change over time through natural selection. Theories of evolution, such as Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection, are explanations for how evolution occurs and the mechanisms driving it. In essence, evolution is the phenomenon, while theories of evolution are the explanations for how it happens.
No facts currently known to science contradict the fundamental theses of evolutionary theory.
Evolution is based on thousands of facts and has nothing to do with any religion other than the fact that it contradicts many of them.
That the theory of evolution by natural selection fits the facts of evolution. The theory of evolution by natural selection is based on myriad lives of converging evidence and is the best explanation we have for the adaptive changes leading to speciation in populations of organisms.
Since it was still a theory, there are still no comcrete facts that it is true.
The best way to respond to this is to explain that there is the fact of evolution and the theory of evolution. Evolution is defined as genetic change within a population. This is an easily observable fact both in nature and the laboratory. The theory of evolution is an explanation for the diversity of life on earth based on the observable facts that evolution does indeed occur. It is exactly the same situation with gravity. Gravity is a fact, an easily observed physical phenomenon. But there is also a Theory of Gravitation, an explanation for the phenomenon itself and how it works. That there is a theory for both evolution and gravity does not mean the facts of evolution and gravity are any less true.
Evolution believes nothing. It assumes a couple of things, e.g. that life existed previously to any evolution occurring and that laws of physics and chemistry have been constant, etc.However, beyond these assumptions - which are valid - the theory of evolution relies on evidence and facts, and a lot of it.
Answer 1A theory. Just as E=Mc2 is the theory of relativity.Answer 2Evolution is both a fact and a theory, although the fact and the theory of evolution are - at least in my book - two different things:The fact of evolution is the observation that lifeforms evolve over time.The theory of evolution is the model that explains how they evolve, and how that applies to our findings in genetics and palaeontology. The theory of evolution incorporates a number of well-tested hypotheses, laws, and facts.
The only theory. The theory that explains the facts of human evolution and is internally consistent, plus supported by massive amounts of evidence.
The only theory. The theory that explains the facts of human evolution and is internally consistent, plus supported by massive amounts of evidence.
There is no proof it actually happened nor that it was created. Evolution has been disproved but creation has not. How do we know what really happened? It was thousands of years ago for crying out loud!!!
No. Human evolution is a proven fact even if peoples' religious beliefs are contradictory to the facts. These are questions are not scientific questions but ones that are best debated and answered by philosophy.
Evolution is a widely accepted scientific theory, but it is still a theory. It cannot be absolutely proven, it can only be supported by evidence.There are unknown facts about the theory, such as how/where the first cell(s) originated.