[coffee260]

Could you please explain to me just one theory of evolution that is not in dispute and has been totally proven? I am neither pro nor anti-evolution. I just can not find it within my better judgment to put my faith for truth in evolution because I can not find a consistent set of facts that actually lead to a definitive conclusion and I have no idea what intelligent design can prove other than you can not from disorder achieve order. Evolution claims the exact opposite. That right their blows evolution away for me.

I believe evolution on a macro level exists. The proof is everywhere. But as for micro-evolution, I am sorry, either their is something wrong with me or something wrong this theory. I consider myself fine. P.S. I'm still trying to digest the whole "atoms never being seen" thingy. But thats just me!!

[jec41]

Could you please explain to me just one theory of evolution that is not in dispute and has been totally proven?

Can you name one thought of anything by anyone that that is proved or is absolute and can not be refuted.

[shuckmaster]

The problem most fence sitters have with understanding the theory of evolution is that the critics always ignore the basic central principles and divert the conversation by dwelling on the most obscure way out tangent. The evos then go into great detail giving the most likely explanation for this extreme tangent and the casual lurker is totally baffled by the argument and no closer to understanding the basic principles.

Over multiple generations, interbreeding populations gradually change their features as the ongoing process of replication, heritable difference, and natural selection adjusts the surviving population to severe pressures caused by changes in the environment. Adverse pressure can come from any combination of war/predators, disease, starvation/drought, or natural disasters including meteor strike or inevitable large scale climate change, etc.

When overall situations are good, the population breeds and multiplies becoming more heritably diverse in the process. When situations are bad, these pressures become the most severe and the only survivors to seed the next generation will be the few whose heritable differences makes the difference in whether they are 'selected' to live while the masses die. The future generations will thus all be adapted to the the distinct inherited features of the groups survivors and will tend to hold those features even when they are no longer necessary to survive the next inevitable environmental crises.

Darwin's theory states that whenever an interbreeding population is somehow geographically separated into two different groups which can't reconnect to interbreed, each group will thereafter face different environmental challenges and evolve in different ways. This process will continue indefinitely until each group is eventually so different that the two groups will no longer interbred if they ever again come in contact with each other. Once that step occurs, there will no longer be a cross mating to recombine the two groups and the process of evolving into different species will be complete.

I hope this helps...

[PatrickHenry]

I believe evolution on a macro level exists. The proof is everywhere. But as for micro-evolution ...

Micro-evolution, Macro-evolution, and Speciation.

[dread78645]

I believe evolution on a macro level exists. The proof is everywhere. But as for micro-evolution, I am sorry, ...

I think you got your 'talking-points' all mixed up ...

[RunningWolf]

//I can not find a consistent set of facts that actually lead to a definitive conclusion//

This is the same kind of observation that led me to reject this toe theory, although I doubt I really ever took it on completely anyway .

Wolf