Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
The science. This is not the merit of one person or even a group of scientists, it is the work of many decades, uniting biologists-geneticists, archaeologists, anthropologists, zoologists, microbiologists … �
Microbiologists can especially vividly demonstrate how evolution works. Since generations of bacteria change very quickly, we can observe the evolution of a bacterial culture into an antibiotic-resistant superbug within a week, right before our very eyes.
But even in slow-evolving species, we can observe evolutionary changes by examining the remains and finding common ancestors, examining genes and finding them in related species.
Proven theories do not exist in principle. The theorem can be proved. Guilt or its absence in court is also possible. In the scientific method, theories are not proved, they are refuted.
For about a century, the best minds on the planet have been trying to refute the theory of natural selection or, in everyday parlance, evolution. It was not possible to refute it, but it was possible to clarify and accumulate a huge array of natural science data, which seems problematic to explain in another way.
With the development of genetics as a science, the synthetic theory of evolution lost its last internal logical contradictions and turned into a huge interdisciplinary field of knowledge, covering such areas as paleontology, geology, biology, medicine and many others.
Skepticism alone is not enough to” refute evolution ” at the moment. It is necessary to offer a different interpretation of this huge array of data, which I wrote about above. Given the above, the probability of such a refutation is indistinguishable from zero.