Hypothesis vs Theory

Discussion of everything related to the Theory of Evolution.

Moderators: honeev, Leonid, amiradm, BioTeam

Post Reply
Mardal
Garter
Garter
Posts: 1
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 7:10 am

Hypothesis vs Theory

Post by Mardal » Sun Oct 19, 2008 7:36 am

How can the claim that humans and apes share a common ancestor be a scientific theory?

According to Wiki the definition of a scientific theory is:
A scientific theory is a well supported body of interconnected statements that explains observations and can be used to make testable predictions.


Apelike creatures have never been observed to evolved into humans

Apelike creatures evolving into humans have never been tested in an experiment

So basically my question is, what is the argument, proof or experiment that makes the ape-human common ancestor a scientific theory(or part of a scientific theory) and not just a hypothesis?

Btw im not a creationist, in fact im even an atheist
Im sorry if this has already been asked and explained on this forum. If so plz post a link.

User avatar
mith
Inland Taipan
Inland Taipan
Posts: 5345
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:14 pm
Location: Nashville, TN
Contact:

Post by mith » Sun Oct 19, 2008 4:42 pm

Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
~Niebuhr

User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)
Contact:

Post by alextemplet » Sun Oct 19, 2008 4:53 pm

Today, much of establishing evolutionary relationships is done using DNA comparisons and other such molecular evidence. Based on similarities between human and simeon genomes, scientists believe that humans and chimpanzees evolved from a common ancestor that lived about five million years ago.
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count

User avatar
AstusAleator
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:51 pm
Location: Oregon, USA

Post by AstusAleator » Tue Oct 21, 2008 3:49 pm

Since we cannot "observe" the evolutionary origin of humans, we have to extrapolate based on the evidence available such as homonid physiology, fossil records, DNA, etc. Think of it like an episode of CSI, except we can't get a confession to prove we were right all along.
What did the parasitic Candiru fish say when it finally found a host? - - "Urethra!!"

User avatar
alextemplet
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 5599
Joined: Fri Dec 23, 2005 4:50 pm
Location: South Louisiana (aka Cajun Country)
Contact:

Post by alextemplet » Tue Oct 21, 2008 4:28 pm

Ah, but we can get a confession! It was me; I let the dogs out!
Generally speaking, the more people talk about "being saved," the further away they actually are from true salvation.

~Alex
#2 Total Post Count

User avatar
AstusAleator
King Cobra
King Cobra
Posts: 1039
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 8:51 pm
Location: Oregon, USA

Post by AstusAleator » Wed Oct 22, 2008 5:05 pm

Anyway, addressing the original question:
To answer your question more clearly - It is theory that humans, apes, and goldfish all shared the same common ancestor. That theory is called the Theory of Evolution. Within that theory are many hypotheses, such as what the first vertebrates might have been, or what the "missing link" between apes and humans was.

SO - According to the Theory of Evolution, which claims that all species are the result of natural selection through descent from a common ancestor, humans and apes must have had a common ancestor. This assertion falls within the theory. Speculations as to when that ancestor existed, what it looked like, what its life was like, etc are all hypotheses.
What did the parasitic Candiru fish say when it finally found a host? - - "Urethra!!"

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests