Social Question

w2pow2's avatar

What proof or evidence is there for evolution?

Asked by w2pow2 (490points) October 21st, 2009

Try to be the one to list as much evidence as possible. Or list proof that genuinely confirms evolutionary theory.

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

54 Answers

w2pow2's avatar

I confess that I am ignorant of proof for evolution. Please enlighten me.

SpatzieLover's avatar

Birds. (migration/feather color/natural selection-etc)

Really, I feel you can step out side your door and see evolution at work. Or you could just look in a mirror and see the lack of hair…

SpatzieLover's avatar

Just look at a chicken…then look at a T-rex

Look at a rhino and compare it to a triceratop

gussnarp's avatar

Human chromosome number 2. Humans have fewer chromosomes than chimps, which if evolution is true can only happen if chromosomes have fused somewhere. Human chromosome number 2 can be identified by it’s structure as the fusing of chimp chromosomes 12 and 13.

gussnarp's avatar

Here’s another good one: the bacterial flagellum. Often used as an argument against evolution by creationists, who claim it represents “irreducible complexity”, in other words, it’s so complex that it would have had to evolve in parts, but there’s no function to any of the parts. Turns out the creationists are dead wrong on this, the bacterial flagellum is made up of structures that are useful, and commonly exist in bacteria, on their own, such as the type -III secretory apparatus. BTW I should cite my source on all this: Kenneth Miller.

RedPowerLady's avatar

I know I’m going to get attacked for this but
As I understand it we can only prove adaptation and let the science suggest evolution.

Okay here is something else I understand. That when discussing evolution we can show that genes in one creature are similar to those in a more advanced creature. However they are only similar as a cousin would be. As I understand it we have yet to make the parent or grandparent connection. This means there is no direct descending link from one species to another.

Menekali's avatar

Why do we need to prove evolution in order to dis prove religion? Can’t we just leave it all at ‘we’re still working on an answer to that one’ heh?

drdoombot's avatar

I may be mistaken about this, but I believe Charles Darwin started to consider his theory of evolution on a visit to the Galapagos Islands. While there, he saw a wide variety of animals that were much different than the animals he was used to in his homeland. Upon further study, it became clear to him that the Galapagos animals, in their isolated island environment, developed unique traits to adapt to their unique surroundings. From this grew the theory that all animals on Earth developed traits that allowed them to survive in their respective environments. The mechanism that allowed this adaptation was evolution.

I’m sure I’m leaving out many important details and insights, but what I wrote above is what I recall from my high school biology class.

gussnarp's avatar

@RedPowerLady Ultimately we can’t prove anything, but we have an awful lot of evidence for evolution.

poisonedantidote's avatar

- we have observed speciation several times.

- we have genetic evidence for it.

- we have a massive fossil record that is often understated just how massive and vast it is.

- we never find mammals or more modern forms on animal fossil in the Precambrian.

- despite all animals being transitions, some are way more obvious than others, such as ostriches having hollow bones to help reduce weight even though they should not be solid.

- new diseases that where not there before.

- computer models that simulate natural selection, leading to new digital creatures that adapted to the enviroment.

- the theory is capable of making precise and repeatable predictions on what should be expected in different organizms.

- there has never been a single piece of solid contradicting evidence nore is there any other viable theory for the millions of observations we have made.

and thats just a few, you could dive in to all the details of radiometric dating, paleontology and what not. but i think that will do for now.

Lightlyseared's avatar

@RedPowerLady we can not make the “parent or grandparent” connection, only the “cousin” connection with other species because that is how they are related to us. The parents and grandparents are the species in the PAST.

RedPowerLady's avatar

@gussnarp And that is why are intellectually wheels continue to turn making those who believe and those who don’t both worthy of understanding.

Lightlyseared's avatar

@gussnarp We can prove a mathematical theorem

poisonedantidote's avatar

@gussnarp

actually, evolution is both a theory and a fact.

just like gravity, it is a fact that things fall to the ground. it is the theory of gravity that says that it falls because the earth causes a gravitational well in space. even if the theory turns out to be wrong, things will still fall to the ground.

just like if the theory of evolution is wrong, new diseases and creatures will continue to emerge.

RedPowerLady's avatar

@Lightlyseared That is not how I understand it to work. There are a lot of things in the past that we can “prove”. And whenever I have read articles on the topic they do not use the argument you just used.

Perhaps if someone told me the scientific term for what I am discussing I’d be able to look it up.

gussnarp's avatar

@Lightlyseared Depends on what your standard of proof, but I don’t want to get into that discussion. I’m just generalizing here, most things in modern science cannot be absolutely proven, that doesn’t mean that we can’t be so sure of them that we can base pretty much everything we do on them.

poisonedantidote's avatar

@Menekali

the theory of evolution, can not and will not ever be able to disprove the existence of a god. the only implication it has on religion is that it contradicts creation stories. however it does not disprove them.

and thats coming from an atheist :P

jaketheripper's avatar

has anybody seen this?

Qingu's avatar

We have observed species evolving into other species.

Everything we know about genetics makes no sense without the framework of evolution.

But that’s recent. Even in Darwin’s day, the fossil record provided ample evidence for evolution. But evolution isn’t just a set of facts or a list of evidence, it is a framework to make sense of all the observed data. There is no other feasible framework to explain the fossil record, the wide variety of species, or the genetic and cellular make-up of all organisms.

Qingu's avatar

@poisonedantidote, if you define “God” as “the guy who specially created every single animal one-by-one and then put them in front of a man he made out of clay,” then yes, evolution does disprove that god, because that never happened.

virtualist's avatar

….. the existence of both apes( they have ~99.5% same DNA as humans) and individuals like ‘yourselves’ as well as Richard Dawkins, Einstein, Hawking, the Alvin Ailey Dance Troupe, Cormac McCarthy…......

dpworkin's avatar

Start by reading The Voyage of the Beagle, then move on to Origin of the Species and the Descent of Man, and when you have digested those, you can move on to some respected exegeses of that volume, which I will be pleased to recommend after you’ve done the preliminary reading. You cannot expect to get a satisfactory answer to this question without a great deal of work.

Of course it is not absolutely necessary that you read Darwin as a primary source, but I highly recommend you do for the most complete understanding.

poisonedantidote's avatar

@Qingu

No, it does not disprove that god. or any other. all it takes is for the believer to claim that the creation story is merely metaphorical and symbolical and the whole thing still stands.

Furthermore, even if we say that it is a literal creationist fundamentalist view of the story, while the story is disproven, we can not say with any degree of certainty that the story was ever an original part of the text, or if the entire thing is actually a prank by god, or if the creation story was literally true, just that it did not happen 6000 years ago.

Yes, evolution does deal a damaging blow to any literal creation story. but it is not sufficent to bare the status of proof.

Qingu's avatar

Here’s a list of the “givens” that we have observed:

• All living things are made out of cells, which are made out of a few kinds of naturally-occurring chemical elements.

• All cells have cell walls made out of a fatty substance called lipid bilayers.

• All cells have a “code” in the form of DNA. The pattern of chemicals in DNA react to form proteins, which make up most of an organism’s “body.”

• When a cell reproduces, the new cell gets a copy of the DNA.

• Sometimes, the DNA copies incorrectly in a few places. This means that the new organism’s DNA will form proteins in a different way than the old organism. This means the new organism will have a different “body” than the old organism.

• Some “bodies” are better at surviving in an environment than others.

• Those bodies will reproduce their DNA more than other bodies.

• Some cells form groups that seem to work together, such as slime molds.

• The cells in such a group are better able to survive if they specialize in certain tasks. For example, in slime molds, only a few cells in the group reproduce. Others grow stalks to support the reproducing cells, so their spores can fly further away.

• Thus, a “group” of cells can resemble a single body. Another example is the sponge. What is a sponge? It’s basically a group of single cells. But the cells work together closely enough that some scientists call the sponge an “animal,” a single body. You can put a sponge through a fine-mesh strainer and all the individual cells will come back together.

• Multicellular plants and animals are still made of groups of cells, which contain identical DNA, which codes for the proteins that make up the plant and animal body. Changes to the DNA of a plant or animal’s DNA causes changes in the bodies of plants and animals.

• Some animals and plants reproduce similar to how cells reproduce. They “bud off” new bodies. Some jellyfish and corals do this.

• Many animals and plants use sexual reproduction. Just like the slime mold, only a few cells in the body are specialized to reproduce. Sexual reproduction—unlike the other kind—also “mixes up” the DNA of the new organism. This creates more variety in animal and plant bodies.

• Some animals have hard parts in their body, like bones or shells, made out of absorbed minerals. On rare occasions, these hard parts form fossils.

• Scientists have dug up all kinds of fossils. In general, you can lay out fossils from deeper layers of rock next to fossils from shallower layers and compare them.

• If you compare the fossils, in general, they form a sort of trajectory or direction, where it’s easy to see how new “body plans” come from older ones.

• Thanks to modern genetics, we can compare the DNA of living species directly.

• These comparisons generally line up with the comparisons we’ve made from the fossils.

• We have also observed changes in various plant and animal DNA leading to changing body plans over time, causing so great changes that the new plant/animal no longer mates with the old plant/animal. This is called “speciation.”

______________________

That’s an extremely, extremely, simplified list of many of the things we know and have observed about the natural world.

Evolution just ties them all together. It says that different organisms come about through mutation (changes in DNA) and natural selection (certain body plans surviving and reproducing more than others).

Qingu's avatar

@pdworkin, I don’t think he should read Darwin’s work. That’s like saying “if you want to understand why physics is true, read Newton’s Principia Mathematica.”

Also, I don’t think evolution “takes a lot of work” to intuitively understand. The theory itself is pretty simple. In fact, that’s what makes it such a good theory—that a simple, intuitive idea can explain such a tremendously broad range of observations.

OpryLeigh's avatar

Humans have a tailbone. The tail is no longer there but we still have the remnants.

dpworkin's avatar

I prefer to read primary sources. When I began to study Psychology, I read the complete edition of the Standard Works of Sigmund Freud first. It’s just a preference. No one in academia really reads Freud any longer.

poisonedantidote's avatar

@Leanne1986

Indeed, some deformities actually lead to humans being born with tails to this very day.

human tail

dpworkin's avatar

I thought of a nice one – your canines have very, very deep roots, a vestige of the time when they were longer than your other teeth, and used for ripping and tearing. They needed to be anchored. The length is gone, the anchor remains.

Also fingerprints and footprints are vestiges of the time when you needed them for brachiation. A neonate’s grasping reflex also demonstrates our prior arboreality. Premature infants have more intense reflexes, because ontogeny (sort of) recapitulates phylogeny.

drdoombot's avatar

@pdworkin My canines are longer than my other teeth. I’ve been accused of vampirism often.

dpworkin's avatar

do you rip and tear?

drdoombot's avatar

Only when politely asked to.

dpworkin's avatar

I am askeered o’ you

Fred931's avatar

Those weird people who hang out around NYC subways with 10 times the normal amount of body hair.

fireinthepriory's avatar

Here’s a really understandable example that I promise has been relevant in your own life. The flu vaccine. Every year, scientists have to make a new flu vaccine. Why? Because the virus has evolved from its previous form, and the vaccine that makes you resistant to last year’s strain will no longer protect against this year’s. The definition of evolution (simply put, a change in the “genetics” of an organism over generations) has occurred in this example. And it happens every year.

While “evolution” is considered a theory in terms of the mechanisms that drive it, evolution in terms of its simplest definition (as I stated above) has been observed – and really, you can’t argue with that!

dpworkin's avatar

The story of the Peppered Moth is also very nearly contemporary, and quite instructive. I heard this one as an example many times in school, and it is always quite compelling.

DarkScribe's avatar

Simple. The obvious fact that there is no God and we had to get here somehow.

benjaminlevi's avatar

@DarkScribe GA!

On a more serious note, to “prove” evolution is real, all you need to do is prove that allele frequencies change over time.

virtualist's avatar

….....we’re talkin’ about something about 2 billion y old on earth…... evolution as an engine for continued survival.

…... and some have also needed the evolution of the magical answers in the form of cave art and magical virgins which are comforting for the puzzled and frightened.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

A Google search will give you a lifetime of resources on evolution. Try this book – I have not read it myself, but Google Books says it is the “premier undergraduate text in the study of evolution”.

@DarkScribe What if we all appeared 10 seconds ago with an intact memory, in an act of unparalleled quantum probability? Well, its about as plausible as creation at least….

DarkScribe's avatar

@FireMadeFlesh What if we all appeared 10 seconds ago with an intact memory, in an act of unparalleled quantum probability?

I could wait another couple of hours before needing to feed the parking meter. You are right – that would be handy.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

@DarkScribe Ahh, but our newly materialised parking cop distinctly remembers seeing you park there five hours ago! I wonder how metaphysical arguments would go down in a court of law – “your honour, the accused cannot have committed the crime in question, because at that time we cannot be sure he existed, nor that the crime occurred in a valid construct of reality.”

mattbrowne's avatar

Comparative genomics.

Here’s a simple example:

Great apes like the chimp and gorilla got 48 chromosomes. Humans got 46. How can this be? Well, you need to know a little about telomeres and centromeres. And chromosome fusion.

Qingu's avatar

Also: if all of this reads a bit too technical and you’d like something more intuitive, I think these videos of primates are pretty amazing. They’re from a BBC series, “The Life of Mammals.”

The first one shows orangutans using tools, on their own, simply mimicking humans they saw. The second one shows how we might have evolved to walk upright from chimplike ancestors.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPXuVW_AJdw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDoontpXm54

w2pow2's avatar

Thanks for the great answers everyone! I have an additional question:

In the geologic column, there’s limestone quite a bit of times. If I had a piece of limestone in my hands, how can I tell what time period of limestone it is?

gussnarp's avatar

Embedded fossils would be one clue.

w2pow2's avatar

What would be other clues? And how can you tell the age of the fossil?

SpatzieLover's avatar

@w2pow2 There are plenty of link if you look up “Age dating limestone” on the Net.

w2pow2's avatar

I’ve looked, and there is still some info that I can’t seem to find.
How did scientists date the geologic column before carbon dating?
And how do you determine the age of a fossil?

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther