How would one disprove Evolution?

[Keeper]

For something to be a theory, there must be a way of checking its validity, correct? This does not just include evidence for it, but also evidence against it (i.e. theory: the earth rides on the back of four elephants, who in turn ride on top of a giant turtle. Evidence that proves it: Having a look to see if there is an edge. Evidence that falsifies it: Circumnavigating the globe physically and from space and finding no animals of epic proportions.) If you agree with the above statement, then what evidence would disprove Evolution. Note: Evidence against Creationism is irrelevant to this topic. Also, whether or not evidence against Evolution has been found. This is simple a questions of what would disprove it.

[nitsuJ]

Evolution has already been proven, so it's not a theory.

[ChaybaChayba]

How evolution exactly happens is still a mystery afaik. If it isn't, please feel free to enlighten me.

[slayer]

Take bugs for example... We use bug spray to kill bugs everyday. But people keep on making new bug sprays. Why? Because some bugs that survive being sprayed with these chemicals evolve and become immune to some of these chemicals, and then pass down their genes to their children. So we have to make some new bug spray when this happens. I believe that would be one way of explaining it.

[Photolysis]

How evolution exactly happens is still a mystery afaik. If it isn't, please feel free to enlighten me. Feel free to check about 150 years of biology on the subject. It might be a mystery as far as you know, but obviously this means you know nothing about the subject. Feel free to enlighten yourself rather than have stuff spoon-fed to you because you were too damn lazy to find it yourself. I mean, how staggeringly ignorant can you be? Taking a few minutes to read the wikipedia article on Evolution will tell you about several of the mechanisms, each of which has their own main article to describe it in more detail. If you had spent about 30 seconds of research you would have been able to disprove your own statement. If you agree with the above statement, then what evidence would disprove Evolution. Note: Evidence against Creationism is irrelevant to this topic. Also, whether or not evidence against Evolution has been found. This is simple a questions of what would disprove it. Finding a single fossil of a modern species out of place would instantly blow the entire theory out of the water. As would finding a single structure which is so complex that it could not have evolved by any way whatsoever*. Despite the best efforts, neither of these two things have yet been found. *A lack of creativity and imagination does not count

[ClassyElf]

To disprove evolution you would have to prove that thousands of scientists from varying fields all are creating a giant conspiracy and all are simultaneously faking all of their test results, especially the ones that prove evolution. You'd have to be a paranoid schizophrenic to believe something like that.

[ChaybaChayba]

Feel free to enlighten yourself rather than have stuff spoon-fed to you because you were too damn lazy to find it yourself. I mean, how staggeringly ignorant can you be? Taking a few minutes to read the wikipedia article on Evolution will tell you about several of the mechanisms, each of which has their own main article to describe it in more detail. If you had spent about 30 seconds of research you would have been able to disprove your own statement. So you know how evolution exactly happens but refuse to enlighten me? I've already spent way over 30 seconds of research. Just face it, nobody has a clue. And obviously you don't know either, or you would just tell me right away instead of ranting and typing all that text about how I'm too lazy to research. It would have been the same effort.

[nitsuJ]

How evolution exactly happens is still a mystery afaik. If it isn't, please feel free to enlighten me. So you know how evolution exactly happens but refuse to enlighten me? I've already spent way over 30 seconds of research. Just face it, nobody has a clue. And obviously you don't know either, or you would just tell me right away instead of ranting and typing all that text about how I'm too lazy to research. It would have been the same effort. We'll do two scenarios here, both dealing with Earth before an O-Zone layer existed. 1. Let's say something (probably prokaryotes) at the beginning of time was not resistant to radiation, therefore since we had no O-Zone the sun's radiation would kill them off, therefore they'd have a need to become resistant to survive. Evolve to resist radiation. 2. Let's take the same something (probably prokaryotes) at the beginning of time, let's say they were already strongly resistant to radiation, after the O-Zone was formed they could evolve and no longer need the same resistance to that type of strong radiation. Evolve to lose the trait of strong resistance. And don't try to argue that nothing would evolve to something "weaker," or evolve and lose the need for something, because humans are a fine example of having things we don't need. For example, we don't need our pinky toe to balance ourselves, we don't have a need for wisdom teeth, we don't have a need for our appendix. I'm sure there are other things we don't need either. Take bugs for example... We use bug spray to kill bugs everyday. But people keep on making new bug sprays. Why? Because some bugs that survive being sprayed with these chemicals evolve and become immune to some of these chemicals, and then pass down their genes to their children. So we have to make some new bug spray when this happens. I believe that would be one way of explaining it. Like with antibacterial soap, people want to use it to kill the germs, yet the bacteria will eventually evolve to become resistant to it and make super germs! ------------ Examples of evolution. What is evolution and how does it work?

[Photolysis]

So you know how evolution exactly happens but refuse to enlighten me? No, I refuse to waste my time reiterating what you could find out for yourself if you spent a few minutes of your time. And obviously you don't know either, or you would just tell me right away instead of ranting and typing all that text about how I'm too lazy to research. It would have been the same effort. Obviously I don't know? It would have taken the same effort to describe all the mechanisms as it would to spend a few seconds pointing you in the direction of a web page that will give you a grasp of the basics? Is there no limit to your stupidity and ignorance? Tell me, why should I have to spoon-feed you knowledge that you should be easily capable of finding for yourself? Are you seriously claiming that without me pointing out the wikipedia article you would never have thought to take a look? And that's literally 30 seconds of work at most.

[ChaybaChayba]

Ok so maybe it isn't a mystery lol. But I still find it hard to believe animals like chameleons developed their abilities through random mutations and natural selection? How do you explain that? Seems very unlikely that suddenly a group of lizards started to randomly mutate into lizards who were able to change their skin color and because of that were able to survive? I wont argue with natural selection and random mutations, but to me it seems like there is an intelligent adaptation to the environment too. No, I refuse to waste my time reiterating what you could find out for yourself if you spent a few minutes of your time. But you don't mind wasting your time ranting about wasting your time? LOL

[Photolysis]

How do you explain that? I explain it by your lack of understanding of the concepts you just mentioned: natural selection and the mutations that it acts upon. Seems very unlikely that suddenly a group of lizards started to randomly mutate into lizards who were able to change their skin color and because of that were able to survive? Again: you demonstrate you don't understand the mechanisms. I wont argue with natural selection and random mutations, but to me it seems like there is an intelligent adaptation to the environment too. You just did. But you don't mind wasting your time ranting about wasting your time? LOL If I can make you realise how ignorant you are (and your ignorance is easy to demonstrate after all), I don't consider that a huge waste of my time. It also takes far less time to do this, than to go in to intricate details about a very fleshed-out theory. When others have already taken their time to put that information on the internet, why do I need to repeat what they've said because you refuse to look for it?

[ChaybaChayba]

I explain it by your lack of understanding of the concepts you just mentioned: natural selection and the mutations that it acts upon. That is exactly what I said, but at the same time you say I lack understanding? Lol what? All I said is that imo there must be something more to it.

[nitsuJ]

Ok so maybe it isn't a mystery lol. But I still find it hard to believe animals like chameleons developed their abilities through random mutations and natural selection? How do you explain that? Seems very unlikely that suddenly a group of lizards started to randomly mutate into lizards who were able to change their skin color and because of that were able to survive? I wont argue with natural selection and random mutations, but to me it seems like there is an intelligent adaptation to the environment too. They developed the need to hide from predators, therefore they developed their camouflage techniques. Evolution doesn't happen overnight, it's a slow process.

[Photolysis]

All I said is that imo there must be something more to it. Why did I say you didn't understand it? Because if you DID then you would understand why there IS NOT A NEED for "something more". The whole point is that IT PROVIDES A COMPLETE EXPLANATION for the variety of life. If you DID understand what you just mentioned, you'd understand not only where you went wrong with your lizard example, but precisely how evolution DOES occur. That it's not a "yes or no" thing, but one based on probability. That an organism that gains a mutation which allows it to ever so slightly alter it's markings in a small area of it's body has a slightly better chance of surviving than one who does not have this ability, and over time the one that is SLIGHTLY better at surviving in it's environment becomes more common in the population. The process then repeats. The changes are (usually) tiny and cumulative. They add up. This is how everything evolves. If you had taken the time to understand the theory, I wouldn't need to tell you this. Alas.

[ChaybaChayba]

So if evolution is solely based on natural selection and survival, the human race no longer will evolve? Because we no longer have the need to survive? I mean, in our society you can even be paraplegic and still survive. Does this mean evolution has come to a complete stop? And all changes in humans will only be the result of random mutations and longer of natural selection?

[nitsuJ]

So if evolution is solely based on natural selection and survival, the human race no longer will evolve? Because we no longer have the need to survive? I mean, in our society you can even be paraplegic and still survive. Does this mean evolution has come to a complete stop? And all changes in humans will only be the result of random mutations and longer of natural selection? Evolution doesn't "stop." You seem to think evolution is instantaneous, and it's not. Humans don't have the need to go through any major evolutions right now because we're doing fine as we are. But, that doesn't rule out the possibility that evolution isn't happening to us right now, we could be evolving to become resistant to viruses/diseases or something else, who knows?

[drewmandan]

So if evolution is solely based on natural selection and survival, the human race no longer will evolve? Because we no longer have the need to survive? I mean, in our society you can even be paraplegic and still survive. Does this mean evolution has come to a complete stop? And all changes in humans will only be the result of random mutations and longer of natural selection? Some evolutionary theorists might be tempted to say that, but the more one delves into a particular science, the more one tends to lose perspective. Not that I'm advocating talking about science topics without having any science background, because just going through a university science program does give you a good solid knowledge base that laymen can never have. At any rate, my answer to the question is that evolution is still ongoing, just not in the biological form we're familiar with. For humans, evolution is now in the form of memes and technology. You might not think your toaster is an example of evolution, but it is.

[ChaybaChayba]

At any rate, my answer to the question is that evolution is still ongoing, just not in the biological form we're familiar with. For humans, evolution is now in the form of memes and technology. You might not think your toaster is an example of evolution, but it is. Yeah I think you have a really good point there, never looked at it that way.

[Marvo]

In my opinion, the evolution that is currently happening is an increase in intelligence, rather than any special physical abilities or properties. Idiocracy, which is a great movie, actually shows how evolution can go 'wrong' in a rather comical manner. The essence of the movie, is that stupid highschool football players are making more children than intelligent people, because they generally have more sex. They exampled this by showing a couple of highly intelligent humans, and a family of rednecks. The rednecks already had 3 children and the mother was pregnant with the 4th. The intelligent family didn't have any kids, and the horizon wasn't looking too good. Eventually the intelligent couple makes no children, but the redneck family makes a ton of children, and those children make more children, slowly decreasing general intelligence. All of this is, of course, VERY unlikely to happen, but it still shows how evolution can go 'wrong'.

[nitsuJ]

Not to mention the immunities humans have formed over their existance.

[Needcatscan]

In my opinion, the evolution that is currently happening is an increase in intelligence, rather than any special physical abilities or properties. Idiocracy, which is a great movie, actually shows how evolution can go 'wrong' in a rather comical manner. The essence of the movie, is that stupid highschool football players are making more children than intelligent people, because they generally have more sex. They exampled this by showing a couple of highly intelligent humans, and a family of rednecks. The rednecks already had 3 children and the mother was pregnant with the 4th. The intelligent family didn't have any kids, and the horizon wasn't looking too good. Eventually the intelligent couple makes no children, but the redneck family makes a ton of children, and those children make more children, slowly decreasing general intelligence. All of this is, of course, VERY unlikely to happen, but it still shows how evolution can go 'wrong'. I always thought the same thing, that in today's day and age, stupidity is evolutionary advantageous, because stupid people have more unprotected sex without thinking about whether they can afford the aftermath. We're doomed!

[StonedApe]

Evolution seems fairly vague to me. Basically to me it says everything always changes. And that seems true. But Chayba has a point in that it hasn't really been proven because it's to vague to be "proven". It's like people who say that global warming has been proven. Bullshit. It's way too vague and unproveable with modern scientific knowledge. Blind faith in science is as bad as blind faith in religion

[nitsuJ]

Evolution seems fairly vague to me. Basically to me it says everything always changes. And that seems true. But Chayba has a point in that it hasn't really been proven because it's to vague to be "proven". It's like people who say that global warming has been proven. Bullshit. It's way too vague and unproveable with modern scientific knowledge. Blind faith in science is as bad as blind faith in religion Scientists observe evolution in lab: http://www.drudge.com/news/108838/sc...-evolution-lab ------- http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

[StonedApe]

Yeah, I agree that things progress in some sort of order. But this doesn't prove HOW evolution happens at a larger scale, like in animals. Evolution is a theory, and I agree with it, but it hasn't been "proven". But I really don't want to get into an arguement about nothing right now.

[Marvo]

Yeah, I agree that things progress in some sort of order. But this doesn't prove HOW evolution happens at a larger scale, like in animals. Evolution is a theory, and I agree with it, but it hasn't been "proven". But I really don't want to get into an arguement about nothing right now. Your argument is opinion based and therefore invalid.