Why do some people suggest that the Theory of Evolution is not a theory? Where are the fossils...
that prove evolution?
Do you mean it's not a theory as in it didn't happen or it's not a theory, it's a law? Some people believe in creationism (i.e. that Genesis written of in the bible actually occurred) and thus don't believe in evolution. There have been hundreds of thousands of fossils found, which show development of ancestral species into species which currently exist.
Those people are in denial, if not ignorant.
From the advances in molecular biology, biochemistry and genetics, we now know that there are tens of thousands of irreducibly complex systems on the cellular level. Biologists of 1st rank have a problem with evolution's definition of common descent of all life from on earth from a single ancestor via undirected mutation and natural selection. Even the guy who started the whole "evolution" talk said this:
"To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
Charles Darwin, "On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life," 1859, p. 155.
People consider it to be a theory of how we change but it does not answer where we came from
do you mean like the fossils of homo-sapiens like "lucy" ? or are you refering to fossils that show fish that were found that had legs?
One thing is true, SSG. Anyone who says evolution is not a theory is wrong. Evolution is a theory. Evolution is a theory that has been and continues to be constantly tested and backed by genetic evidence and fossil evidence. It is a theory that has not yet been disproven. Until it is disproven, it remains a very good theory. Creation is also a theory. But Creation, as told by the Bible, has been disproven many times. Having read a few books and gone to a few classes, I learned that the world is in fact more than a few thousand years old. That is not to say the people who wrote the Bible lied. They merely interpreted the world as they understood it before microscopes, telescopes, and radiocarbon dating were invented. At one point, it was considered Christian doctrine to think the earth was flat, because the Bible said it was. That has been disproven to the extent that no Christian believes it to be flat anymore. Before the 1500s, it was heresy to say that the earth revolved around the sun. Now it is common understanding. Now it is heresy to believe that there is a such thing as proteins that make up DNA and that after billions of years these can expand to form more complex organisms. Christianity still offers two things science cannot disprove. One is the fact that we have no idea what started the big bang. No one knows. Did God start it? The second thing is the existence of an afterlife. I vote we Christians focus on the afterlife and stop trying to slow down scientific progress for those who do not believe. Christianity needs to get out of the pseudo-science business.
As is the norm, Ms. Creationism held out in order to deceive the key lines that followed her Darwin quote - a good Christian witness, no doubt.
She quoted this: "To suppose that the eye with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest degree."
But she conveniently left out the following words of Darwin:
"Yet reason tells me, that if numerous gradations from a perfect and complex eye to one very imperfect and simple, each grade being useful to its possessor, can be shown to exist; if further, the eye does vary ever so slightly, and the variations be inherited, which is certainly the case; and if any variation or modification in the organ be ever useful to an animal under changing conditions of life, then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection, though insuperable by our imagination, can hardly be considered real."
...then the difficulty of believing that a perfect and complex eye could be formed by natural selection can hardly be considered real.
In other words, Ms. Creationism's red herring is NOT a problem - but her morals, integrity and honesty are.
LOL@Jason-I didn't realize at first that he does have a good sense of humor, and humor is exactly what you'll need to get past this topic. I hope you find your answers, and have a great day!
Evolution is very much so a theory. Just like how germs (Germ Theory of Disease, which states that microorganisms are the cause of many diseases), cells (Cell Theory, which states that cells are the basic unit of structure in every living thing), atoms (Atomic Theory, which states that matter is composed of discrete units called atoms), and plate tectonics (Plate Tectonic Theory, which describes the large scale motions of Earth's lithosphere) are also theories. Now, do you accept 100% that germs, atoms, cells, and play tectonics exist? A theory never becomes a law. A theory will remain a theory, and a law started as a law. There was never a "Second Theory of Thermodynamics", just like how there will never be a Law of Evolution.
I agree with you, Old Empressario, quite a bit but would suggest a great book on this topic for you. At some point you might enjoy reading Reflections of a Scientist by Henry Eyring. It goes into great detail on how Christianity, the theory of creation, and evolution can all quite easily complement each other.
Dude, I have fossils in my back yard that show proof of the Theory of Evolution. Why don't you visit a Natural History Museum and take some courses in Biology?
There is no reason to listen to hubbers who continually spout the same old tired arguments and questions. Go study for yourself and discover the truth.
by thetruthhurts20098 years ago
Rules of this forum, no swearing, no straw men arguments and no FSM nonsense. Most importantly remember, Ridicule is not an argument. Enjoy. If want to continue to believe you come from a rocky soup. You...
by Gaizy5 years ago
With all the evidence for the theory of evolution, why do some people still believe otherwise.Once you have got your head around the theory of evolution, it's pretty obvious that it's close to how it must work. After...
by Eng.M9 years ago
hexagonal shape of mobile cells is the most efficient shape.dividing mobile stations by these cells enabled people to communicate easily.scientists got the idea after alot of researches of other shapes capabilities.they...
by pisean2823117 years ago
was curious about what do Christians think about theory of evolution..in this forum i have found statements rejecting it by few..do everyone rejects it ?
by Julie Grimes7 years ago
With some recent archaeological discoveries in India, and in South Africa has Darwin's evolution clouded our judgment about the creation of mankind? That's the question I would like to pose to all of you this...
by Marcy Goodfleisch8 months ago
Which is true - Creationism or Evolution? Can both be right?It seems there are still arguments about whether the world was 'created' or whether it 'evolved.' What do you believe? Can you also accept the...
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.