0
It's a fine bit of circular reasoning that requires that fossils found fit into the pre-decided place on the evolutionary chart. They then point to the fossil record as proof of the theory. There are many gaps and instances of "parallel evolution". For example, the focusing eye had to develop at least four separate times, for the evolutionary theory.
Answer:
Fossils are like the clues the police use to solve a crime.
Each one tells a story. Like clues to a crime, where the police don't have to find a print of every footstep taken by a subject or confirm every thing that he did, the clues paint a logical outline of all the events around the crime.
Like clues in a crime the police do not initially identify a person they want to pin the crime on and then seek to tie him to the event - they find a number of clues which identify potential subjects of interest. They then attempt to prove the relation of these suspects to the crime until the trail of evidence is strong and dependable. Usually multiple facts on the same evidence are considered - for a crime it might be fingerprints and video tape and eye witnesses, for fossils it could be carbon 14 and dendronchronology and geologic strata.
What else can I help you with?
How does Josiah Strong show that he supports the theory of evolution?
There is strong support for the theory of evolution due to fossils that have been found by archeologists. The fossil records show evidence of evolution over billions of years.
How does biogeography support the theory of evolution?
Biogeography is the study of the distribution of species (biology) spatially (geography) and temporally (history). Biogeography aims to reveal where organisms live, at what abundance, and why they are or are no) found in a certain geographical area. Biogeography does not support the theory of evolution any more then when (history) you (biology) moved into your house (geography).
What was the Neo Darwinism theory of evolution based on?
The theory of evolution is that species aren't fixed; new species can evolve from existing species. The earliest recorded theory of evolution dates back to the ancient Greeks - Anaximander in 650BC proposed that life originated in the sea and later moved to the land. The theory was postulated again in the 18th century; fossils had been discovered of extinct animals - including of "primitive" forms of modern animals. At the time, multiple floods were proposed to explain fossils of extinct animals - although it was never explained where all the water went in between floods! The discovery of fossils of extinct animals with fossils of existing animals was very hard to explain with flood theory - how could some animals survive a flood and others not? To explain evolution several theories have been proposed; Larmarck suggested that offspring inherited characteristics from parents that they had acquired during life - for example, giraffes stretching to reach high leaves on trees grew longer necks - the longer necks were passed on to their offspring. The problem with Larmarckian evolution is that there wasn't a mechanism to explain how acquired characterstics could be passed on; if you have a scar on body from an injury, your children aren't born with the same scar. It was the careful research of Charles Darwin and Alfred Wallace that led to the natural selection theory - which provides a mechanism for evolution. Darwin, in particular, provided a large amount of evidence to support the theory.
Why are missing link fossils a powerful evidence for Creation and not for evolution?
Some people who reject the biblical account of Creation think that living things went though gradual changes (biological evolution) from one kind to another. In order to support their beliefs, they find fossils that, when lined up, seem to show a continuous change from simpler organisms to a much larger and more complex one. But fossils for the most part do not show gradual changes from one kind to another. They are clearly one kind or another not something in between. For example; fossils of mice exist and fossils of bats exist, but no fossils of half-winged, mouse like creatures have been found.
How does observed evolutionary change support the scientific theory of evolution?
The theory predicts that evolution will happen and in certain ways. The observed evolution makes this prediction correct. It also defines evolution as happening, and as such is perfect evidence in support of it.
What is the name of a fossil that disproves evoloution?
No fossils disprove evolution, but support it
How do fossil support evolution?
Fossils show the geological history of man and animals.
How does Josiah Strong show that he supports the theory of evolution?
There is strong support for the theory of evolution due to fossils that have been found by archeologists. The fossil records show evidence of evolution over billions of years.
How are fossils used to oppose the theory of evolution?
Fossils are not used to oppose the theory of evolution. They acutually support it in every way. So far not one fossil has been found that is not exactly where you would expect it to be if evolution were true. As we dig deeper we go further back in time and see by piecing fossils together how organisms evolved over time. Although we don't need fossils to support the fact that evolution is happening, it's a nice bonus to have in support of the theory.
How are fossils a piece of evidence to support evolution?
Fossils show the progression of ancient organisms. By comparing older fossils with more recent fossils, we can see how older ones are related in body structure to newer ones, supporting the idea that new generations evolve from older ones.
What evidence of earths climate in the past supports the theory of contnental drift?
It is not so much the climate, but it is the tectonic plates movement, and fossils of extincted animals on different continents that support this theory. Also, fossils support the theory of evolution that was proven by Charles Darwin.
How do fossils provide evidence that evolution has taken place?
Fossils show evidence of evolution by showing a picture to the past and through some methods how DNA of one animal may be similar to that of a modern animal.
What evidence do scientists find in fossils and living things?
Scientists find evidence in fossils and living things such as changes in morphology, genetic similarities, and transitional forms that support the theory of evolution. Fossils can show physical adaptations over time, and living organisms can reflect common ancestry through shared genetic traits. These pieces of evidence help scientists to understand the evolutionary history and relationships between different species.
Why fossils are important discoveries?
Fossils provide a record of past life forms and environments, helping scientists understand evolution, ecosystems, and Earth's history. They can also provide insights into the behavior, anatomy, and physiology of ancient organisms. Additionally, fossils are used as evidence to support scientific theories and reconstruct past environments.
How do fossil and biochemicals support the theory of evolution?
Fossils provide physical evidence of extinct organisms and show a progression of forms over time, supporting the concept of evolution through natural selection. Biochemicals, such as DNA and proteins, can be compared between different species to reveal shared genetic sequences, indicating a common ancestry and supporting the theory of evolution.
How do fossils provide evidence that species alive today have evolved from simpler organisms?
Fossils provide evidence of evolution by showing a record of past life forms, demonstrating the gradual changes in species over time. By examining the fossil record, scientists can trace the lineage of modern species back to simpler, ancestral forms. Transitional fossils, which exhibit characteristics of both older and newer species, further support the idea of evolution by showing the gradual changes that occurred over generations. Overall, fossils provide tangible evidence of the process of evolution and the interconnectedness of all living organisms.
Why fossils support the theory of continental movement?
Fossils found on different continents with similar characteristics suggest that these landmasses were once connected millions of years ago. As continents drift apart, similar fossils can only be explained by the movement of landmasses over time, supporting the theory of continental drift. This provides evidence that different continents were once part of a single supercontinent, such as Pangaea.
