All the so-called rewards that I am aware of are offered by creationists, who have probably offerred amounts beyond their ability to pay - in one case, ten million lira. The fact that apparently enormous "rewards" are being offered only by people with strongly held views opposed to evolution demonstrates that this is a Propaganda exercise, not a genuine quest for proof. What this also demonstrates is a belief that the public will believe anything if you appear to show confidence in your beliefs.
Take for example, the "reward" offered by Kent Hovind. The principal roadblock to claiming this reward is that you have to convince him and him alone of evolution, and he has already declared all scientific evidence to be false. He has not put any money in trust, nor appointed an independent panel of scientific experts to make the decision. So, it doesn't matter whether he has a quarter of a million pounds on offer: he is in the position of always declaring himself unconvinced.
If such reward had been offered by a science foundation on the basis of an independent arbitrator and fair rules, the reward would have been claimed long ago. The absence of rewards on offer from genuine science foundations, or even from uncommitted philanthropists eager to advance scientific inquiry, demonstrates the confidence that proof of evolution is no longer required.
For more information, please visit: http://christianity.answers.com/theology/the-story-of-creation
Answer 1There appear to be three different offers currently on the table from different people or groups.1. Young-earth creationist Kent Hovind has an offer of $250,000 (allegedly for around 12 years) for proof of evolution.2. Creationist Adnan Oktar of Turkey, reported on one site as a 'rival of Richard Dawkins' has an offer of 10 trillion lira $7.5 million dollars for fossil evidence of evolution.3. An Old-earth Creationist site has an offer of $1,000,000 for proof of Abiogenesis (life from non-life).Relevant conditions are attached to all of these.Answer 2Although the first answer to this question is correct in that these groups do appear to offer rewards for proof of evolution or abiogenesis, there is no actual intent there to give the reward to anyone who offers actual evidence for the mentioned proofs. The conditions attached to these rewards, and the definitions of 'proof' and 'evidence' applied by those who offer them, and even the interpretation of the relevant explanatory models themselves, are carefully chosen so that no evidence or proof that complies with scientific tenets can ever be accepted and the rewards can never be awarded.
People may deny the proof of evolution due to personal beliefs, religious reasons, lack of understanding of the evidence, or misinformation. Some may feel that accepting evolution conflicts with their worldview or beliefs.
Evidence for evolution includes the fossil record, comparative anatomy, molecular biology, and observed instances of natural selection. These different lines of evidence all support the concept of biological evolution occurring over time.
Darwin's theories of evolution by natural selection are supported by a vast amount of evidence from various scientific fields, including paleontology, genetics, comparative anatomy, and biogeography. Fossil records show a progression of life forms over time, genetic studies demonstrate shared ancestry among species, anatomical similarities suggest common descent, and the distribution of species across geographic regions aligns with evolutionary predictions. Additionally, observations of adaptation in living organisms through selective breeding and bacterial resistance further validate the mechanisms proposed by Darwin.
true Answer The Theory of Evolution by Means of Natural Selection is accepted by most, almost all, scientists as an excellent account of how life must change and diversify and adapt across time. Evolution is considered factual and thus true by most scientists. The reason for this is the huge amount of evidence, which comes from comparative genetics, comparative genomics, comparative cytogenetics, biogeography, comparative morphology, comparative biochemistry, comparative behaviour and the fossil record.
Answer 1There appear to be three different offers currently on the table from different people or groups.1. Young-earth creationist Kent Hovind has an offer of $250,000 (allegedly for around 12 years) for proof of evolution.2. Creationist Adnan Oktar of Turkey, reported on one site as a 'rival of Richard Dawkins' has an offer of 10 trillion lira $7.5 million dollars for fossil evidence of evolution.3. An Old-earth Creationist site has an offer of $1,000,000 for proof of Abiogenesis (life from non-life).Relevant conditions are attached to all of these.Answer 2Although the first answer to this question is correct in that these groups do appear to offer rewards for proof of evolution or abiogenesis, there is no actual intent there to give the reward to anyone who offers actual evidence for the mentioned proofs. The conditions attached to these rewards, and the definitions of 'proof' and 'evidence' applied by those who offer them, and even the interpretation of the relevant explanatory models themselves, are carefully chosen so that no evidence or proof that complies with scientific tenets can ever be accepted and the rewards can never be awarded.
Because nothing is proof of evolution.
To demonstrate proof of a bank account, one can provide a bank statement or a letter from the bank confirming the account details and balance.
yes u can tell by looking at him
Yes, demonstrate is a verb meaning to clearly show the existence of truth of something by giving proof or evidence.
Evolution. Just more proof that evolution is just playing around. It serves no purpose.
To show or demonstrate something is a more flexible concept; proof suggests a certain degree of intellectual rigor.
to show proof or demonstrate how did they do it
Discovering proof of evolution
Discovering proof of evolution
To demonstrate proof of insurance for a rental car, you can provide a physical copy of your insurance card or policy document, show an electronic version on your phone or device, or have the rental car company verify your coverage directly with your insurance provider.
To demonstrate the validity of a statement using proof by absurdity or contradiction, we assume the opposite of the statement is true and then show that this assumption leads to a logical contradiction or absurdity. This contradiction proves that the original statement must be true.