Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Is evolution true?

  1. Nov 28, 2003 #1
    hi all,

    What do you think about evolution?

    I feel that it is not true due to various reasons.

    All For God.
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 28, 2003 #2
    hi benzun,
    could you state a few?

    PS: the last thread with this subject got locked
  4. Nov 28, 2003 #3
    Yes, evolution is true.

    1. It fits very nicely with Mendelian genetics and Darwin came up with it PRIOR to reading Memdel's papers.

    2. The fossil record indicates life has changed quite a bit over time, andevolution explains why better than ANYTHING else.

    3. Mutations that change phenotype can be induced in lab (I've done it).

    4. Speciation events have been observed.

    5. Makes predictions about animal behavior that have been confirmed.

    I could go on, but by all that God stuff in your post I can already see the level of thinking you operate at.
  5. Nov 28, 2003 #4
    Welcome to the PFs, rapa-nui. :smile:

    While I very much like the way you've leaid down the facts here, and I agree with you, one should be careful (IMO) of offending someone's faith in God...it's just not necessary.

    Anyway, benzun, could you perhaps state some reasons why you don't believe in evolution? Also, is it the principle of evolution (that species change over time) or the theory of evolution (basically that the principle of evolution can be applied to explain all the variety of life that we have now) that you disagree with?
  6. Nov 28, 2003 #5
    Evolution is false.

    Hi benzun_1999,
    In spite of what everyone says, evolution is false.

    1) Evolution doesn't fit nicely with Mendelian genetics, because Mendel showed that phenotypes are merely the result of different combinations of pre-existing genes. There's no new information coming into existence.

    2) There's quite a bit of dispute on that point.

    3) Try making random changes to the DNA of an organism and see if you don't end up killing it. Why? Because the information is highly coded and needs to be preserved. Organisms even have error correcting mechanisms in order to correct mistakes when DNA is being copied.

    4) In plants, speciation is the result of copying information that's already there. (I think)

    Usually the evidence for evolution is given by "similarity proves evolution". For example, some of your DNA may be similar to the DNA found in yeast.

    I think that evolution will be gone by 2020 perhaps. Evolution is one of those theories that nobody believes in and everyone knows it's false, but nobody will admit it.
  7. Nov 28, 2003 #6


    User Avatar

    Argg!! Arghhh!! NOOOO!!!

    Don't use the b-word! The mechanism of evolution itself has been proven mathematically, yes, but because evolution is a science, it is nothing about belief and we cannot state it absolutely to be true. It is simply the best we have, and it works brilliantly well.

    Mutations, anyone? Mendel did not at all exclude mutations, but it extended the realm that simple re-arrangement of genes can cause, and thus confirmed Darwin's 1st assumption of a hereditary mechanism.

    No there isn't. The only dispute comes from fundamentalist creationists who insist alternately that global conspiracies exist to manufacture fraudulent information, or selective analyse data, or are naive about the mechanism of fossilisation and expect impossible degrees of detail. There is no real scientific argument.

    This is BS. Firstly, the likelihood of mutations are different for each part of the DNA strand. Secondly, the success of viruses and cancer shows the fail rate of such mechanisms. Thirdly, there is a wealth of real evidence of such events. There seems to be ignorance of mutations in viruses giving rise to resistances, of x-ray irradiation of fruitflies producing ones with additional legs etc (and still alive), or irradiation of flower seeds to produce certain types of colour, or that many inherited genetic disorders are non-fatal, and the existence of cases of spontaneous mutations like albinoism, and that 50% of mutations are reccessive, and so have no effect until propogated, and that the existence of non-fatal dominant disorders neccessitates the introduction of new characteristics.

    That is still evolution. And this is only true for some cases.

    Sometimes I think creationists live in another universe. This is pure self-delusion, which excludes them from the continual and continually successful work that is being done in evolutionary biology.
  8. Nov 28, 2003 #7
    Evolution is FALSE!!!!!!!!!!!! If we evolved from monkeys, then why do monkeys still exist? Think about it.
    Last edited: Nov 28, 2003
  9. Nov 28, 2003 #8
    O Great One,

    You are a creationist?
  10. Nov 28, 2003 #9


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    O Great, you said

    'Tain't so McGee. Before they got so good with molecules, biologists used to get genetic variations in fruit flies and such with radiation. That was as random as you lke, and it did kill some of the bugs, but with others it made interseting and inheritable changes. Not only did they live but they had little bugs after them.

    Maybe you can get away with vague overgeneralization on some sites, but here you'll be jumped on with both feet.
  11. Nov 28, 2003 #10


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The misconception is so thick in here you could cut it with a monkey.

    Evolution is a fact. Evolution can be aptly defined as the change in allele frequency over time, and that behavior is an indisputable scientific fact. Allele frequency does change with time, both in man-made and natural systems. We've sequenced the DNA or organisms (hundreds of thousands of times, by now, for some species like drosophila), and watched the allele frequencies change with time. There is no room for any debate on the issue.

    - Warren
  12. Nov 28, 2003 #11
    Point of grammar: "...why do monkeys still exist?", not "...why does monkeys still exist?"
  13. Nov 28, 2003 #12


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Sorry, you're new here -- but you need to learn the lesson sometime: if you don't know what you're talking about, keep your mouth shut. Your statement is not an argument. You've erected a strawman version of evolution, and knocked it down. (In other words, evolution does not operate the way you would have others believe it does.) This is not intellectually honest.

    - Warren
  14. Nov 28, 2003 #13
    I think, therefore I evolve.

    What creationist says that God could not create evolution?

    Won't The Church gradually accept the tenets of Darwin, just like they did those of Copernicus?

    Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
    And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so ad infinitum.
  15. Nov 28, 2003 #14
    The Catholic Church resolved all conflicts with evolution back in the early 1960s with logic along these lines: a day for God might be a billion years in human terms. Who are we to suppose He reakons time as we do? Also: while the proto-human thing that formed the "clay" from which He created man may have evolved from something ape-like, it didnt become man untill he touched it with a spark of divinity.

    I think that after the great embarrassment caused by Galileo the Catholic Church has tried to keep a finger on the pulse of science and "adjust" how literally the Bible is to be taken. I was raised Catholic and taught by nuns in grammar school in such a way as to believe completely in the Bible and in science and evolution with a total lack of conflict between the two.
  16. Nov 28, 2003 #15
    We didn't evolve from any existing monkey. Humans and monkeys share a common ancestral species, which was different from any existing human or monkey species, and which is now extinct. (For that matter, humans and everything else alive on this planet share common ancestors, not just monkeys.)
  17. Nov 28, 2003 #16
    I know exactly what I'm talking about.
  18. Nov 28, 2003 #17
    Evolution is not some magical force that happens simeltaneously in all members of a species at once, it happens in small, isolated groups.

    The evidence all points to humans not evolving from monkeys, but apes.

    Here's how it happened:
    Africa's sahara desert is expanding and overtaking some rainforest area. You have a group of small apes (very chimpanzee like, or infact chimpanzees) which lived in the rainforest and spent most of their lives in the trees. Due to the expanding desert, there's less food and things which normally didn't prey on chimpanzees began to. Some chimpanzees left the jungle in order to not be eaten and started living in the grasslands. In the grasslands, the chimpanzees who were taller or could stand up the straightest had the best chance of spotting a predator and then running from it and therefore surviving to breed longer than the shorter, more hunched over chimps. The taller and more erect chimps lived longer and bred more, their offspring did the same, and pretty soon, the whole population of this small group og grassland chimps were relatively taller and more erect than the chimps which stayed in the rainforest.

    That's just how it all got started, I could go into it way more, but that would take scores od thousands of typed characters, and I'm not in the mood to type that much now.

    Aside from that, look at the flu, every year it evolves an immunity to last years vaccine and a new one must be developed. Unless of course, god is giving the flu virus upgrades each year :\

    I've heard in alot of places that there's alot of evidence supporting an isolated group of chimpanzees in africe began the evolution to humans...
  19. Nov 28, 2003 #18
    Evolution is a concept that applies to populations, not individuals: a population evolves simply when the statistical distribution of alleles changes. As such, entire populations are always evolving: whenever any individual is born or dies, the statistics change.

    The evidence all points to humans not evolving from monkeys, but apes.

    If you mean literal chimpanzees, that could interbreed with chimpanzees today, then no. If you mean something chimpanzee-like, then maybe, depending on what you mean by that.
  20. Nov 28, 2003 #19
    I've read alot about it and seen a few special on the discovery/history channel, and many sources have said it was chimpanzees.
  21. Nov 29, 2003 #20
    Hey wasteofO2, I just gotta ask whats up with that picture?
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook