0
Evolution
The scientific theory according to which populations change gradually through a process of natural selection.
5,264 Questions
What is the significance of chromosome 2 in human evolution?
The evidence strongly supports the concept that chromosome II is the head-to-head fusion of two great ape chromosomes. Since we split from chimpanzees it appears that 24 pairs of chromosomes in the great ape linage became 23 pairs. The genes are very similar and do very similar things. There is telomere material in the center of this chromosome and there are two centromere sites, though one is inactive. This shows quite well are common ancestry with the great apes.
Is anthropology and evolution the same thing?
Well, in the sense that if you do anthropology without evolutionary underpinning and without the theory that explains much of the fact of evolution you might as well not do anthropology at all.
There is a bid divide in anthropology now. Between the cultural anthropologists, who are incoherently dropping not only evolution but the scientific method, and the physical, or biological anthropologists who are trying the save the reputation of this social science as science.
Where and when did the first plant evolve?
Fossils of the earliest land plants come from the Ordovician period (roughly 450 million years ago).
What does a animal producer mean?
An animal producer is an animal that produce foods to eat by itself. Do you know what is the meaning of producer ? If you know, then you will know what is the meaning of an animal producer.
What roll does environment can play in evolution?
Environment is the sum conditions affecting life in all the biotic and a biotic components in ecology that include the physical surroundings,climate and other life forms.Rapid climatic changes in prehistorical times has forced other life form to seek better surroundings for survival.Environmental change has brought about a change to outsource resources for life sustenance and through evolutions environment has important role to play.
Why can Darwin's idea be described as dangerous?
As Daniel Dennet tells it Darwin's dangerous idea is an universal acid cutting through superstitious thinking and long held beliefs.
Too bad, as the theory of evolution by natural selection is upheld by the evidence, so people need to join the real world or stay in delusion. A choice people need to make, but to the theory, which is real or not on it's merits, it does not matter what you believe but what you can support with the evidence.
The earliest known Echinoderm is from the Vendian period 560 million years ago. Starfish branched off sometime after this, possibly in the Ordovician.
What are kangaroos' ancestors?
Kangaroos belong to the family known as the macropods.
All macropods are believed to have descended from the animal known as Wabularoo naughtoni.
The Wabularoo naughtoni was a medium sized herbivorous macropod, weighing an estimated 7kg, found in open forest environments of the region now known as Riversleigh in northwestern Queensland.
For many years, it was believed that the ancestor of the modern kangaroo was the Giant short-faced kangaroo, but recent research from the University of Adelaide has proven this was not the case, as there is no genetic link between the Giant short-faced kangaroo and the macropods we now know today.
What effect did Charles Darwin's theory have on human history?
Biology became a true science with the theory of evolution by natural selection becoming the bedrock of biology. Now the species problem was solved and sense was brought to the disparate areas of natural history observations.
Biology became the major science it is today and all of humanity was affected by the results in medical to behavioral science that were directly inspired by the theory of evolution by natural selection
Other answers from our community:Evolution as a fact The attempts of the author of the question to "steer" the reader into a "creationist state of mind" are obvious, and since the "guidance toward creationism" was included, discussion will address the question and will touch on creationist ideas.
The reason many people take evolution as fact is because it is. Modern evolutionary synthesis (MES) is the current "state of the art" model. And because of the overwhelming quantity of evidence supporting it, evolution, that is, MES, is taken as fact by almost all the scientific community. The assembled facts do not include any specifics as regards the mechanism behind the genesis of life itself. It is interesting to note that the competing theory offered by creationists has no detailed information in this regard either. Both camps suggest that lightning animated mud or the like, and that's it. But because of the lack of even a single shred of emperical evidence, there is absolutely no proof whatsoever that points to a "greater being" (an über-intelligent and technologically advanced unidentified alien life form?) as the cause of that lightning bolt. The idea of MES is extraordinarily unpopular with creationist theoreticians because it presents such an immense barrier to any "real" proof of their own ideas, particularly if they wish an endorsement as "science" and not philosophy. The creationist strategy to (re)model creationism as something that could be "passed off" as scientific (under the "new and improved" label of Intelligent Design, or ID) is documented in Kitzmiller vs. Dover Area School District. Nowhere in MES is there any theoretical speculation that denies God. And God is not disproved by any aspect of MES. Most advanced thinkers accept evolution as a fact the way it is presented in MES. And the ranks of those who agree with MES include great numbers of non-believers and Christians alike. Links are provided. Answer Darwin never really doubted the validity of his theory once fully developed in his mind. Some have circulated the idea that he 'repented on his death-bed', although this appears to have no basis in fact and should not be given any credibility as an argument. In any case, even if Darwin did 'repent' on his death-bed that would not have any effect on the validity or otherwise of his theory. It is either scientific or it is not.
What is true is that he expressed some reservations about the fossil record which at that time, did not show the many transitional forms which his theory predicted. He believed that in time these gaps would be filled as many more fossils were uncovered.
"Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory. The explanation lies, as I believe, in the extreme imperfection of the geological record."
Charles Darwin, 'On the imperfection of the geological record', Chapter X, The Origin of Species, J.M Dent & Sons Ltd, London, 1971, pp. 292-293.
Darwin also made some other statements which could be taken to mean that he was uncertain about his theory. Some have also taken the great length of time that it took him to publish the 'origin' as meaning this. It would appear that such ideas are unfounded, although he did express himself thus:
"For I am well aware that scarcely a single point is discussed in this volume on which facts cannot be adduced, often apparently leading to conclusions directly opposite to those at which I have arrived. A fair result can be obtained only by fully stating and balancing the facts and arguments on both sides of each question; and this is here impossible."
Charles Darwin, 1859, Introduction to Origin of Species,p2. Also quoted in 'John Lofton's Journal', The Washington Times, 8 February 1984. Answer {Note: Before making the comment below I wish to state categorically that I am not in favor of Creation being taught in public schools.}
Answer
One reason I believe that many people take evolution as fact is simply because this is what they have been taught in school whether it be the public system or elsewhere. This would apply at whichever level of education is being referred to. I am here talking about the majority. Most people would therefore have no knowledge of: 1. Problems with the theory of evolution itself -as stated by evolutionists themselves 2. Any alternative scientific theories and their contents and arguments. Included in this ignorance is not just a lack of knowledge of alternative theories, but of data used to support the theory of evolution which has been found to be either fraudulent or no longer scientifically defensible in the light of new data. Since a number of frauds such as the Peppered Moths of England and Haeckel's doctrine of Embryonic Recapitulation have been exposed relatively recently, many people are simply unaware of this. So in the popular mind the original finding still stands. As well, many new discoveries are lauded as 'missing links' when discovered, with much fanfare, even though the evidence may only be fragmentary. Further evidence and scientific investigation often overturns the original findings, yet this 'scientific correction' does not receive the same attention or publicity. Pakicetus would be one example of this.
Further to this, the education system fails to present any of the various problems with the data and scientific laws which contradict evolution.
Answer
The question alludes to the argument from design which was in Darwin's day put forward by William Paley. It has been suggested that one of Darwin's reasons for putting forward his theory was to refute the arguments of Paley.
What did Charles Darwin accomplish?
he accomplished the origin of species and he tryed to recover from a mysterious illness......
What are the theories of psycholinguistics?
Psycholinguistics deals with languages and how they are learned. Popular theories of psycolinguistics deal with whether children know language instinctively or whether it must be learned.
How were black people created?
black and white people was create from a higher power Who is God and we all as equal as famouse,poor,middel class but at the end of the day we are a team
Answer:
Ya, everyone who was ever created, was just as equal as the next person - black, white, red, yellow, retarded, austistic, dislexic, male or female. We are all equal. We are all different. And people who cannot understand or cope with that fact, have a real problem on their hands.
What is the difference between a scientific theory and scientific law?
Scientific theory is a well supported by evidence set of principles that explain and predict natural phenomenon.
A scientific law explains what some phenomenon does scientifically and under the same conditions.
Genetic mutations are essential to evolution and help species develop new, useful characteristics and traits .............................................................................................. Because they can
Answer: Mutationare important because they were postulated as a possible source of genetic variation to ennable natural selection to have material to work changes in organisms. This mechanism of variation was seen as vital to evolution from the time that the implications of genetics as discovered by Mendel was realised.
Unfortunately for evolution, there has never been discovered a single example of a mutation adding new genetic information (although occasionally mutations are beneficial, which is not always the same thing). Richard Dawkins was asked about this very issue in an interview and could not provide one single example of an information-adding mutation. This is no small problem for their is a staggering amount of new information necessary to be written into the DNA to change a microbe into a microbiologist (for example).
Actually mutations are universally shown to be causing genetic degradation in all multicellular life, In humans this is believed conservatively to amount to 100 new mutations per person per generation. Mostly these mutations are small such that natural selection does not 'see' them to eliminate them and so they accumulate in the genome of mankind like rust on a car. The rate of mutation which we observe today would lead to the extinction of the entire human race in a much shorter period of time than is commonly realised. This knowledge led one evolutionary geneticist to ask 'why are we not all dead already?'
According to geneticist Dr John Sandford, from Cornell University, there is close to unanimous agreement among geneticists regarding human genetic degradation, even though most continue to believe in evolution. Sandford cites recent papers by geneticists such as Muller, Noal, Kondrashov, Nachmann/Crowell, Walker/Keightley, Crow, Lynch et al, Howell, Loewe and Sandford himself (in print). Sandford highlights Loewe's contention in a paper published in 2010 (in The Proceedings of the National Academy of Science) that there is a fitness decline of between 3-5% per generation. Sandford himself from his modeling believes it is not as dire. Another geneticist, Robert Carter, points out that the key issue is not that there are no beneficial mutations but that the deleterious ones are so subtle that they are not selected against, and so the net effect is downhill.
Modern genetics has made it clear that there are constant small random changes in the genetic make-up of a species.
Natural selection showed that in a species population with small differences between individuals, some of those differences would give survival advantages, and others would give survival disadvantages.
The members of the population with survival advantages would tend to out-breed the less advantaged members, leading to a shift towards that advantage being the norm for the population.
Recent work on biogeography has showed how in a single species population, different habitats will interact differently with the different members of the same population, leading to regional differences in the populations, and ultimately to the formation of a new species.
Dou you believe life is evolved?
Scientists have discovered that the heavier elements are actually created when stars explode. This is just one more piece evidence for naturalistic origins models, as it explains how the elements we are built from originated. There is a good show called Earth Investigated which gives a lot more information about the formation of the planets, and about evolution.
How is theory of evolution of Darwin and Hugo deVries different?
Darwin considered evolution to be caused due to :
1)small changes/variations that occured
2)these variations were directed specifically towards adapting to the environment(directional)
3)evolution was a slow process
De Vries believed that evolution occured by:
1)large changes that occured
2)these changes were mutations and were stochastic or random, not directional
3)evolution occured in fits and starts and was not a slow ongoing process
What are facts that disprove evolution?
No facts currently known to science contradict the fundamental theses of evolutionary theory.
What is the endosymbiotic theory?
The Endosymbiotic Theory is a theory about how mitochondria and chloroplasts formed. The theory suggests that both the mitochondria and chloroplasts were once prokaryotic cells that were ingested but not digested by eukaryotic cells. This would explain why both have their own DNA.
Chemical evolution is thought to have caused the first cells to spontaneously generate over a very long period of time.
Sneasel evolves into weavile at night with a razor claw. Sneasel evolves into weavile at night with a razor claw.
