Is Darwin's evolutionary theory correct?

13 Answers

Relevance
  • 2 months ago

    it depends,but as for now,his theory is being proven by us the existing human race

    meaning his theory might be true

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Darwin didn't come up with common descent.  He came up with natural selection.  And he was right. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Cowboy
    Lv 6
    2 months ago

    We moved on from just Darwin in the 1950s - current evolutionary theory is now call the Modern Synthesis - and yeah, it's correct...

    https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/...

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    It's the best and simplest theory we have to explain all the observations. That's good enough for me. Also for the SCOTUS and for any biologist who hasn't been brainwashed by religious bigots who reason a priori, rather than a posteriori. You can't bend facts to fit preconceptions if you want to make any progress.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • 2 months ago

    Yes. The Genetical Theory of Natural Selection is a book by Ronald Fisher which combines Mendelian genetics with Charles Darwin's theory of natural selection, with Fisher being the first to argue that "Mendelism therefore validates Darwinism". First published in 1930 by The Clarendon Press, it is one of the most important books of the modern synthesis, and helped define population genetics. It is commonly cited in biology books, outlining many concepts that are still considered important. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    No, it is as incorrect as the theory of the flat Earth, given that it denies reality.

    The theory of the flat Earth claims that the Earth is flat, while in reality the Earth is round. The theory of evolution claims that change of organisms can lead to rapid physiological transformation or de novo creation, while in reality this doesn't happen. For e.g., the theory claims that dog-like mammals evolved into whales in about 10 million years. So, a rapid physiological transformation happened (limbs into fins, ears into biosonar...). It also claims that within about 15 million years (Cambrian), a simple tubular and frond-shaped organisms evolved into many of the major modern phyla. So, a rapid physiological de novo creation happened (new organs and organ systems). However in reality, change of organisms never leads to such transformations or creations. Namely, from the time of splitting off from the most recent common ancestor until today, all the existing species have undergone a lot of change. Humans and chimps have been changing form more than 5 million years. Lemurs for more than 40 million years. Rats for 100 million years. Crocodiles 200 million years. Yet, no organism has been observed that has physiological transformations, let alone organs or organ systems, not present in another organism of the same species. So, in reality, no matter how long a species changes, zero physiological transformations or de novo creations happen. The theory however claims the opposite — that this can happen in an evolutionary blink of an eye. That's reality denial. And that's why evolutionary theory is as incorrect as the theory of the flat Earth.

    • ...Show all comments
    • οικος
      Lv 7
      2 months agoReport

      Evolution generally takes a long time but occasionally there are rapid changes, like the London Underground Mosquito. And if you want changes in organs, look at birds and compare them to animals of any other class. Found any others with air sacs, for example?

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Zirp
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    hey, if you have a better theory that better explains all observations, there's a nobel-prize waiting for you

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • 2 months ago

    Mostly.  It's been modified slightly as people discuss the relative weight of genetic drift versus selection.

    We also know more about the molecular basis of variation.

    • ...Show all comments
    • JazSinc
      Lv 7
      2 months agoReport

      Small isolated populations are a huge part of the history of many species, including our own.  Founder effect, bottlenecking, reproductive isolation.  These have given us hundreds of species of Hawaiian fruit flies instead of only a few.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • humpty
    Lv 7
    2 months ago

    The best book on the subject is Richard Dawkins' "The Greatest Show On Earth," which explains Darwin's work in detail and shows how subsequent expreiment and study has proven the trheory to be valid. Very readable.

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
  • Anonymous
    2 months ago

    scientifically yes, however not all ppl believe it. 

    • Commenter avatarLog in to reply to the answers
Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.