Evolution is a highly debated study of science and is often misunderstood in terms of its related applications as a science, factual discoveries, and theories of its process. First to understand this scientific endeavor one must also understand science in genera l. This is one science professor’s opinion on that subject. “To me, in a nutshell, the nature and purpose of science is to allow inquiring minds to search for answers to unknowns and to test their hypotheses by designing and performing experiments (Guathier).” Therefore, it is within the scope of purpose of science to try and answer the questions the plague mankind, and often these skilled thinkers are the best for the job. However, it is also human nature to become dogmatic and rigid in a system of ideas; especially when those systems of ideas comprise of one’s own lifetime work.
The nature of science, as eloquently put by Professor Guathier, is to find answers, solutions, and possible applications that one can ponder upon. Now it is certainly also apparent that many questions that have given way to a vast number of scientific realizations come from observation. Evolution is no mistress to this process. Personally, however, I am unaware of any applications directly related to this study of science beyond the attempt to answer one of the most controversial questions of all: Where did we come from? Apparently there are some applicable uses that have been credited to the science of evolution in regards to genetic modification and genetic engineering.(Gauthier) While I don’t doubt that evolutionary science yielded further scientific studies and questioning that lead to such discoveries I am hesitant to think that evolution itself has any real direct relevance that truly affected the outcome of such studies. I do believe that since evolutionary science began it helped scientists question other things that may have taken longer to come across without evolutionary science. However, these discoveries still would be possible in and of themselves without evolutionary science.
Evolution has gained much popularity in recent history; however, the idea is much older. “Ancient Greek philosophers such as Anaximander postulated the development of life from non-life and the evolutionary descent of man from animal.” (All About Science) Darwin popularized the idea and added logical arguments and observations to its credibility. Most notable of evolutionary observations are the fossil records. Further observations are based on similarity in genetics between different life forms, also visual similarities between different species, and well documented scientific experiments.
While some of the fossil record seems to report a lineage of human kind from an ape-like ancestor there are also fossils that lead some scientist to conjecture over the evolution of other species as well. The real selling point for the credibility of these fossil records is the time frame from which it is believed these fossils originated. Furthermore fossils are generally formed under water thus preserving the remains of a deceased life form until a sediment layer covers it and further preserves the remains. There are several other processes that create fossils, all of which involve some sort of covering of remains thus preserving it. Thus fossils have a small chance even being created in the first place, and it is very likely there are several life forms that are lost in the sea of time never to be discovered.
Other observations of evolution rely heavily on what could be considered circumstantial evidence. There are even very general definitions of evolution that almost seem to imply that growing from childhood to adult is a form of evolution. While this may well be within the scope of evolution such a definition of evolution is not really valid to the scope of evolutionary ancestry. Also it is very common to tie in observational occurrences that do not directly prove evolution such as natural selection. That is to say that while natural selection would play a part in determining what creatures’ evolution would survive to procreate and continue its lineage it does not prove evolution nor add credibility to its existence.
The fact that a human shares more than a 98% similarity with chimpanzees seems to be a strong proponent of evolutionary fact, but is still does not explain how these similarities are so diversely interpreted in physical presence. Also this does not consider the scope of which is the lack of understanding of DNA in general. Furthermore, there are also many other reported similarities between various species in terms of DNA. While it is interesting hypothesis that this is due to common ancestry, it seems more likely that the building blocks of life are comprised of similar materials in all life forms because they are the building blocks of life.
There have also been scientific experiments attempting to recreate evolution in a laboratory. Also there is a well known experiment that produced a new species of a fruit fly and this is considered to be evolutionary fact (Gauthier). However, since this was produced in a laboratory and not in nature it is most definitely not evolution of any kind, but a mutation caused by genetic engineering. There are several so called facts like these in the evolutionary field of science. It is almost like creating a half goat half man clone in a laboratory and then stating that it proves that fauns once existed. In other words it would be impossible to truly recreate evolution in a laboratory without the use of some sort of device that can accelerate time exponentially as to observe the changes of a species over time.
Perceivably more interesting than the facts themselves are the theories of evolution. The most well known theory of evolution is, of course, the Darwinian Theory. However, this theory is mostly outdated and new theories have arrived. Other popular theories include ‘Modern Synthesis,’ and Stephen J. Gould’s theory ‘Punctuated Equilibrium.’ All of these theories go to elaborate upon how and why the change from one thing to the next would occur. All of these theories express ideas on how or why these evolutionary occurrences happen they do not truly answer the question of where life came from or the elements required to create life originated. Furthermore they are all based on an idea that has yet to be proven.
Observations and science do concur of accepted facts that are external to evolution as a whole, but are usually intertwined with evolutionary ideas. Natural Selection was a theory proposed by Darwin that has since been declared as a fact, and is an observation that can stand independently on its own. Various other speculations based on observable occurrences are just that, speculation. There are a plethora of hypotheses on the subject of evolution yet none of them prove the idea upon which they are based. For some reason it seems with evolution the more elaborate the idea or theories behind evolution the more closely evolution begins to resemble an actual fact.
There are many flaws in the assumptions made about evolution; most of which are in regards to the general public’s lack of understanding of evolutionary ideas and facts themselves. Then there are the assumptions and ideas of scientists which are biased by basing their theories upon an idea that has yet to be proven by conventional science. Furthermore, the data gathering in terms of dating the earth and fossils are flawed as well. The most well known of which is carbon-14 dating which is based on the assumption that the carbon-14 being produced in the world is and has always been the same. This is an immensely flawed assumption as it is observable that as the earth’s protection from external influences decreases the amount of carbon-14 entering our atmosphere increases, which should logically lead to the assumption that in the past there were unknowably reduced amounts of carbon-14. This should also lead to the acceptance of the fact that carbon dating is in fact not accurate beyond that of recorded history, and imaginably within limits in this regard as well. Other forms of dating using radioactive isotopes are not any more accurate and rarely yield results that confirm each other, and also relies baseless assumptions of how much of a radioactive isotope would have been present initially. Even if you take away the time evolutionary timeline and subscribe to an idea of punctuated equilibrium the fossils more so reveal the extinction of similar life forms due to some catastrophe due to the nature of fossilization.
“Ironically, one great unsolved problem in Darwin's master work, On the Origin of Species, was just that: How and why do species originate (PBS)?” More to the point, all of these theories and ideas upon which evolution finds itself are just conjecture and not provable accurate sciences. Furthermore, it seems like this is more of a philosophical and pious belief structure which more so inhibits the advancement of scientific science rather than advance scientific endeavors. More or less it seems scientists get lucky when discovering and being able to apply new concepts based upon evolution. It would be much more logical for scientists to further investigate things that are not known through the things that are known and observable; which can be verified. Rather than wasting time on trying to prove assumptions based on assumptions it would be much more prudent to investigate the history of man and nature by looking inwardly at genetics and DNA rather than basing speculations upon dogmatic beliefs in a flawed system of ideas.
Bibliography
All About Science. "Darwin's Theory of Evolution." All About Science. .
Chavez, Miguel. The Unofficial Stephen Jay Gould Archive. 28 March 2010 .
Gauthier, Duyen. Nature of Science, Fossil Records, and theories oh my Nick Poling. ?? TBA 2010.
Howells, William. Mankind in the Making. Garden City, NY: Double DA & Company, INC., 1967.
Johnason, Donald C., Lenora C. Johanson and Blake Edgar. Ancestors. New York, NY: Random House, INC., 1994.
Moran, Laurence. "Evolution is a fact and theory." 22 January 1993. Talk Origins. 28 March 2010 .
PBS. PBS Evolution Library database. .
Weldon Owen Pty Limitied. The First Humans. New York, New York: Harper Collins Publishers, 1993.
