Quote:
Originally Posted by zebrazebrazebraSHAFT
Biological evolution is just as factual as the theory of gravity. We know approximately when life appeared on the earth, that it diversified over time, species are related via common ancestors, and that natural selection (Charles Darwin's theory of the origin of species) is the main force behind how species change and adapt over time. Those things are facts of evolution.
Just curious, what type of evidence would change your mind about Darwin's theory not being a fact?
|
Let me downplay it a little first. I don't put too much importance on my opinion on the subject, as it doesn't really affect anyone else. And as I said, it's the best explanation we have. But I wouldn't give a book saying gravity doesn't exist the time of day. Gravity is a daily observable, testable phenomenon. Darwin's theory is an interpretation of left over evidences. I still pick up books for and against Darwin's theory and I still find both viewpoints really interesting.
I think the main things that will need to be addressed in the future are whether or not there are limits to what natural selection can produce. There's some question about information actually being added through mutation. (The only real counter argument to that is that opponents aren't being specific enough as to what "information" actually is). I already mentioned irreducible complexity. And (this extends a little past Darwin's theory) a somewhat decent explanation for how life began. There really isn't a viable theory out there.
The more of those that get answered, the more solid my confidence in the theory will become. The attacks are really a good thing in my mind anyway. At the very least, it's just going to chisel and refine the theory into something better.