Evolution

No, evolution does not describe how life began. Evolution explains how life forms have changed and adapted over time through the process of natural selection, but it does not address the origin of life itself. The origin of life is a separate field of study known as abiogenesis.

Causes of evolution and diversity of organisms include genetic mutations that introduce variations in the population, natural selection which favors individuals with advantageous traits, genetic drift resulting from random changes in gene frequencies, and migration that introduces new gene pools. These factors contribute to the variation and adaptation of organisms over time.

Any company which consumes raw material to assemble/manufacture products and/or generate a waste stream (every company!!)

Biological evolution is the process of changes that occur in living beings that can be passed on to their offspring.

Chemical evolution is the process of changes that occur in substances. However, scientists have found that these substances have changed to form organic molecules, meaning that they have created life from nonliving substances.

Traits that are passed down through the generations must be either culturally or environmentally inculcated or genetically inherited (or some combination of these).

Evolutionary biology concerns itself with genetically inherited traits.

In the long term, for genetically inherited traits to continue to be passed down through the generations, they must be at least neutral with regard to reproductive fitness, or advantageous (i.e. they must not be subject to negative selection pressure)

Charles Robert Darwin

When organisms evolve, it means that they have undergone genetic changes over time that result in new characteristics or adaptations that allow them to better survive and reproduce in their environment. Evolution is driven by natural selection, mutations, genetic drift, and other factors that lead to changes in the genetic makeup of a population.

There is no such thing! The Bible states that God Created the earth in 7 days. Not a big bang hit the earth and everything was there.

The answer above is very Christian-centric, but here's an answer in a nutshell: Scientists can't prove that there was an evolution, but they cannot disprove it either. So evolution wasn't nessecary, if that's what you believe. You know what? This whole question is regarding YOUR personal beliefs.

Topics in macroevolution include speciation (the process by which one species splits into two), extinction events, adaptive radiations (rapid diversification of a single lineage into many different species), phylogenetics (study of evolutionary relationships among species), and mass extinctions that have shaped the history of life on Earth.

Much more morphological variation occurs in plants. Genetic variation is the big variation in plants because of polyploidy; this doubling, tripling and halving of chromosome number in the mating of two plants not only leads to great variation in genetic material, but also leads to great speciation in plants.

Possible so, as the theory of evolution by natural selection, though his greatest product, was by no means Darwin's only production. Just before he died he produced a treatise on earthworms that is still relevant today.

Chingling

" Survival of the fittest. "

Many Muslims and Orthodox Jews do not " believe " in evolution. Of course the truth does not need you belief to be true and something can be true whether you believe it or not.

I should re-word this question.

Is there an atheist that doesn't agree with evolution?

There may be an atheist that does not agree with evolutionary theory, but what difference would that make?

If there was someone out there I would like to hear his views on evolution.

The idea of acquired characteristics. For instance. The idea that a blacksmith, who would develop enormous muscles due to his trade, could pass these physical attributes on to his children.

They began to believe that wealth was a sign of "survival of the fittest."

hunting and gathering, pastoralism and nomadism, agricultural, and finally a stage of commerce

European males were estimated to have measured about 1,83m (6 ft) some 40.000 years ago. About 10.000 years ago, climate change and the adoption of agriculture caused a reduction to about 1,62m (5ft4). 600 years ago, European males were about 1.65m in length, as the Little Ice Age hitting Europe and general poverty coincided. Since then, a steadily improving diet has allowed the average European male to grow to an average of 1.75m (5ft9).

Note that these figures are for European males only, and do not apply to women or humans from other descent.

iuhiufeciohiu ieic i

evolve

I do not think so, as ratites have no keel and have a flat sternum. Ostriches are an example of this large flightless bird that could not fly even if it had large enough wings. No keel to anchor the flight muscles.

Slight anatomical changes over significant amounts of time resulting in new species and adaptations is precisely what evolution is. Having a knowledge of certain anatomies allows for comparison. Take orangutan anatomy for example. It is extremely similar to human anatomy, but there are certain differences that tell us that humans are not descendants from orangutans. Also, the fossil record on which evolution evidence is so well based, relies largely on classifying anatomical characteristics.

Not at all. Though some anthropological conclusions may have been changed.

The ultimate allopatric ( geographic ) speciation. If you had a population of quite similar organisms in a area that split the population into two or more populations when continental drift occurred you would have different mutations and changing environments putting selective pressure on two or more populations now.