Archive-name: talk-origins/archive/part1
Posting-Frequency: every 2 weeks URL: http://www.talkorigins.org/ See reader questions & answers on this topic! - Help others by sharing your knowledge [The talk.origins FAQ Archive Announcement, Part 1 of 2] SUMMARY WWW: http://www.talkorigins.org/ FTP: ftp://ftp.ics.uci.edu/pub/ MOTIVATION Talk.origins is a Usenet newsgroup devoted to the discussion and debate of biological and physical origins. Most discussions in the newsgroup center on the creation/evolution controversy, but other topics of discussion include the origin of life, geology, biology, catastrophism, cosmology and theology. The talk.origins archive is a collection of articles and essays, most of which have appeared in talk.origins at one time or another. The primary reason for the archive's existence is to provide mainstream scientific responses to the many frequently asked questions (FAQs) and frequently rebutted assertions that appear in talk.origins. FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS The following is a list of questions that appear frequently in talk.origins. Brief answers follow each question along with a World Wide Web URL pointing to one or more relevant FAQs that answer the question in more detail. [Q.] What is the purpose of talk.origins? [A.] The purpose of talk.origins is to provide a forum for discussion of issues related to biological and physical origins. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-welcome.html [Q.] I thought evolution was just a theory. Why do you call it a fact? [A.] Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of all living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution -- genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. -- is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-fact.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#proof [Q.] Don't you have to be an atheist to accept evolution? [A.] No. Many people of Christian and other faiths accept evolution as the scientific explanation for biodiversity. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-god.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/interpretations.html [Q.] Isn't evolution just an unfalsifiable tautology? [A.] No. Evolutionary theory is in exactly the same condition as any other valid scientific theory, and many criticisms of it that rely on philosophy are misguided. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolphil.html [Q.] If evolution is true, then why are there so many gaps in the fossil record? Shouldn't there be more transitional fossils? [A.] Due to the rarity of preservation and the likelihood that speciation occurs in small populations during geologically short periods of time, transitions between species are uncommon in the fossil record. Transitions at higher taxonomic levels, however, are abundant. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/fossil-hominids.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/punc-eq.html [Q.] No one has ever directly observed evolution happening, so how do you know it's true? [A.] Evolution has been observed, both directly and indirectly. It is true. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#observe [Q.] Then why has no one ever seen a new species appear? [A.] Speciation has been observed both in the laboratory and in nature. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html [Q.] Doesn't the perfection of the human body prove Creation? [A.] No. In fact, humans (and other animals) have many suboptimal characteristics. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/jury-rigged.html [Q.] According to evolution, the diversity of life is a result of chance occurrence. Doesn't that make evolution wildly improbable? [A.] Evolution is not simply a result of random chance. It is also a result of non-random selection. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/chance.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#chance [Q.] Doesn't evolution violate the second law of thermodynamics? After all, order cannot come from disorder. [A.] Evolution does not violate the second law of thermodynamics. Order emerges from disorder all the time. Snowflakes form, trees grow, and embryos develop, etc. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-misconceptions.html#thermo [Q.] Didn't Darwin renounce evolution on his deathbed? [A.] The Darwin deathbed story is false. And in any case, it is irrelevant. A scientific theory stands or falls according to how well it is supported by the facts, not according to who believes it. [U.] http://www.ediacara.org/hope.html [Q.] Where can I learn more about evolution? [A.] You might start with the talk.origins FAQs. If, however, you want a deeper understanding of evolution, a library would be a more appropriate place to look. The FAQs listed below provide some good references. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/reading-list.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-intro-to-biology.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/evolution-definition.html [Q.] How do you know the earth is really old? Lots of evidence says it's young. [A.] According to numerous, independent dating methods, the earth is known to be approximately 4.5 billion years old. Most young-earth arguments rely on inappropriate extrapolations from a few carefully selected and often erroneous data points. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-youngearth.html [Q.] But radiometric dating methods rely on the assumptions of non- contamination and constant rates of decay. What if these assumptions are wrong? [A.] Isochron dating techniques reveal whether contamination has occurred, while numerous theoretical calculations, experiments, and astronomical observations support the notion that decay rates are constant. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/isochron-dating.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-age-of-earth.html [Q.] I heard that the speed of light has changed a lot. This means that light from galaxies billions of light years away might not be billions of years old. Is this true? [A.] Barry Setterfield's hypothesis of a decaying speed of light was based on flawed extrapolations from inaccurate measurements, many of which were taken hundreds of years ago. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/c-decay.html [Q.] If the Earth is so old, doesn't that mean the Earth's decaying magnetic field would have been unacceptably high at one time? [A.] No. The Earth's magnetic field is known to have varied in intensity and reversed in polarity numerous times throughout the planet's history. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/magfields.html [Q.] Isn't the fossil record a result of the global flood described in the Book of Genesis? [A.] No. A global flood cannot explain the sorting of fossils observed in the geological record. This was recognized even prior to the proposal of evolutionary theory. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-noahs-ark.html [Q.] What about those fossils that cut through multiple layers? [A.] They have natural explanations: tree-roots that grew into soft, underlying layers of clay, and fossils found in inclined strata. They can also be observed forming in modern environments. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/polystrate.html [Q.] What about those human footprints that appear next to dinosaur footprints? [A.] The "man-tracks" of the Paluxy Riverbed in Glen Rose, Texas were not man tracks at all. Some were eroded dinosaur tracks, and others were human carvings. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/paluxy.html [Q.] Didn't they find Noah's Ark? I saw something on TV about this. [A.] The producers of America's 1993 CBS television show, "The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark," were hoaxed. Other ark discovery claims have not been substantiated. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/ark-hoax.html [Q.] The odds against a simple cell coming into being without divine intervention are staggering. [A.] And irrelevant. Scientists don't claim that cells came into being through random processes. They are thought to have evolved from more primitive precursors. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-abiogenesis.html [Q.] Creationists are qualified and honest scientists. How can they be wrong? [A.] The quality of an argument is not determined by the credentials of its author. Even if it was, a number of well-known creationists have questionable credentials. Furthermore, many creationists have engaged in dishonest tactics like quoting out of context or making up references. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/credentials.html http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-creationists.html [Q.] What about Immanuel Velikovsky? Didn't he show that the Earth has experienced a lot of major catastrophes? [A.] No, he simply claimed that certain written legends must have described real events. [U.] http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/faqs-catastrophism.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-velikovsky.html [Q.] Where can I find more material on the Creation/Evolution debate? [A.] Contact the National Center for Science Education, or see the talk.origins archive and its "Other links" page. [U.] http://www.NatCenSciEd.org/ http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/reading-list.html http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/organizations.html http://www.talkorigins.org/origins/other-links.html [Continued in part 2] User Contributions:Part1 - Part2 [ Usenet FAQs | Web FAQs | Documents | RFC Index ] Send corrections/additions to the FAQ Maintainer: archive@talkorigins.org
Last Update March 27 2014 @ 02:12 PM
|
Comment about this article, ask questions, or add new information about this topic: