Scientists do not prove things.
Lamarck's theory is long refuted as acquired characteristics and the use and disuse concepts are not explanations for evolution of populations.
Not at all. Though some anthropological conclusions may have been changed.
The theory of evolution was originally presented by Charles Darwin. Since the time of Darwin, there have been many other scientists who have contributed to evolutionary theory. One notable evolutionary scientist of the 21st century is Richard Dawkins.
Lamarck's law of use and disuse, proposed by the French biologist Jean-Baptiste Lamarck in the early 19th century, suggests that traits or characteristics that are frequently used by an organism become stronger or more developed, while those that are not used may weaken or diminish over time. This idea implies that organisms can pass on acquired characteristics to their offspring. Although Lamarck's theory was a precursor to the modern understanding of evolution, it has largely been discredited in favor of Darwinian natural selection.
Charles Darwin was one of the first influential scientists to support the evolution theory. On his voyages he came across the Galapagos islands which had a group of birds. He noticed that although these birds were of the same species at first, that they having been separated across the islands, developed different characteristics and soon were no longer able to interbreed. This was the start of the theory of evolution for Charles Darwin as he explained their change of characteristics by saying that they evolved.
Lamarck's theory of evolution has been largely rejected because it proposed that organisms could pass on traits acquired during their lifetime to their offspring, a concept known as inheritance of acquired characteristics. Modern genetics and evolutionary biology, particularly through the work of Charles Darwin and the development of the theory of natural selection, have shown that genetic variation arises through mutations and is inherited through genes, not acquired traits. Additionally, empirical evidence has consistently supported Darwinian evolution over Lamarckian ideas.
Lamarck's hypothesis of the inheritance of acquired characteristics has been largely disproven. Scientific research has shown that physical changes acquired during an organism's lifetime are typically not passed on to offspring. Additionally, Lamarck's idea of evolution occurring in a linear, progressive manner has also been challenged by the modern understanding of evolution as a more complex and branching process.
Charles Darwin. His theory is The Theory of Natarual Seletion. A theory that has been proved even today
Well, that's not possible. It is called a theory because it can't be definitively proved. For instance, we know gravity exists, so it is a scientific law, but there is no definite proof for evolution, so it is just a theory.
It does not appear that the book The Genetical Theory of Evolution has ever been published anywhere, so it does not appear to have an author.
Mostly by explaining why these creationist criticisms are based in an incomplete understanding of the principles of knowledge and an insufficient knowledge of the relevant data. Creationists say that one of the main problems of Darwin's theory of evolution is that evolution cannot be proved. They say that the reason why it cannot be proved is because no one was there to observe the process of evolution. They call it a "theory" in the sense of an hypothesis. Scientists say that nothing is 'proved' in science, in the sense of mathematical proof. All theories are judged by the abundance and quality of the evidence in their favor. 'Being there' is not a requirement for theories of stellar fusion or of the internal workings of the atom. What matters is that the evidence can be observed in the present. And the word "theory", in science, does not carry the same meaning as used in the colloquial sense, of 'hypothesis' or 'guess'. A scientific theory is an explanation of some phenomenon or phenomena that has been extensively tested, and for which no contrary evidence exists.
Larmark's theory was based on the idea that organisms inherited characteristics that they had acquired in life - so, if you have a scar your offspring will have scars. Darwin's theory assumed that offspring inherited characteristics from their parents, but they were more likely to survive to breed if there was advantage to those characteristics.
Evolution, Atomic Theory
Tribal communities are good examples of evolutionary theory of government, because the family unit is often important but overseen by a leader. A biblical example is the 12 tribes of Jacob because the head of the family formed the larger government. Each tribe was headed by one of Jacobs son, and Jacob ruled over them all.
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.
Why do you believe 2+2=4? Because it has been proved through logic, facts, and reasoning. Now why would you believe in evolution? Same reason. Granted a theory such as evolution is more complex than proving why 2+2=4, but the principles are the same.
Some Christians do believe in Evolution. Others do not. For those who do, they believe it the same way as any. Those who do not, argue that without Adam and Eve having fallen in the garden of Eden, there would have been no reason for Christ to sacrifice himself. Their "theory" then, is that the heavens and Earth were created as described in Genesis. There is only one theory of evolution, that particular one proved by science. The majority of Christianity accepts this theory as being correct, and makes no claim as to its own theory (which would in fact, only be a hypothesis until overwhelming evidence was gathered).
The theory of evolution was proposed by Charles Darwin in his book "On the Origin of Species" published in 1859. However, the idea of evolution had been discussed by earlier naturalists and scientists before Darwin.