A Letter to a Friend: Evidence for Evolution

Hi Friend,

I thought I’d follow-up on our disagreement about evolution. Before I go further, I thought I’d confirm what I think you said so I don’t put words into your mouth:

  1. Evolution has been dis-proven.
  2. Many scientists say that evolution has many holes in it and that it has not held up to scientific scrutiny.
  3. There are not enough fossils to demonstrate sufficient evidence for human evolution. You asked me to show you that fossils exist in museums.

Please let me know if I got any of that wrong because I used your comments as the basis for my research (if necessary, I’ll revise my research when I get back from my trip).

My claim is that evolution explains the earth’s diversity of life, as well as the evolution of human beings on earth. Furthermore, I claim that there is substantial evidence for those two claims. With that in mind, below is some support I found for my claims. The information is in the links, but I provided a few teaser quotes or tid-bits of information beside a few of them.
—
Level of Support for Evolution: Quote: “…in the scientific community there is essentially universal agreement that the evidence of evolution is overwhelming, and the scientific consensus supporting the modern evolutionary synthesis is nearly absolute…”

Objections to Evolution: Quote: “When Charles Darwin published his 1859 book On the Origin of Species, his theory of evolution by natural selection initially met opposition from alternate scientific theories, but came to be universally accepted by the scientific community.[2] The observation, or fact, of evolutionary processes occurring, as well as the current theory explaining that fact, have been uncontroversial among biologists for nearly a century.”

Scientific Dissent from Darwinism + the Rebuttals to those Dissents. I’m not sure about you, but I find the rebuttals to be pretty convincing.

Project Steve on Wikipedia and on its own site. Project Steve is a tongue-in-cheek response to the claim that many scientists oppose evolution. The point that Project Steve makes is that – even if the anti-evolutionist scientists were in the hundreds, that is a minute number compared to the many, many thousands who do accept evolution. The project lists over 1100 scientists named ‘Steve” who accept the theory. And that doesn’t even get into the discussion of which group of scientists have the credentials needed to assess the evidence (covered in the “dissent” link above).

Now that I’ve presented information supporting evolution as an almost universally accepted theory in the scientific community, let’s move onto your points about evidence and fossils.

Here is a list of human evolution fossils: Note that the article states there are thousands of fossils and that it outlines the progression from early mammals, to primates, to hominids (the family Homo Sapiens emerged from).

The Human Origins Exhibit at the American Museum of Natural History – I don’t know if you can find a museum of higher standing.

Another place of high regard is the Museum of Science – the link contains a database of fossils

The Smithsonian Institute is arguably one of the highest regarded museums in the world. It has many, many fossils and an amazing exhibit (online and in-person versions). Suffice to say, the Smithsonian also accepts evolution as the explanation for the diversity of life on earth.

A couple of very good university resources are the ones found at the University of California and Minnesota State University (there are lots of others).

PZ Meyers is a respected evolutionary biologist and university professor. This post contains a large number of links pointing to an immense body of evolutionary evidence.

A couple of great websites with information about evolution are Talk Origins and Panda’s Thumb.

Finally, there are tons of books written by highly respected scientists on the subject of evolution. The Smithsonian Instititute Guide to Human Origins is one I read over a year ago that I highly recommend.

I’m no expert but I think I can discern between an expert and a non-expert and that’s what I am basing my argument on – that the sources I am citing are numerous and respected within the scientific community.

I am not sure what sources you refer to when you say you know of many scientists who have proven evolution not to be valid. Therefore, I can’t pretend to judge if they are good, well-respected scientists.

Print Friendly
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Reddit
  • Twitter
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • StumbleUpon
  • email

Tags: • • • • •

September 14, 2009 · Filed Under Atheism, Understanding

Comments

4 Responses to “A Letter to a Friend: Evidence for Evolution”

  1. Paul on September 15th, 2009 at 7:35 am

    Got a chuckle when I read the title here. I had a similar conversation with a friend several years ago, and a blog post came out of it then, too:
    http://awvarchive.blogspot.com/2005/06/defence-of-evolution.html

  2. 40 Year Old Atheist on September 15th, 2009 at 9:20 am

    Ha! Hey Paul, it looks like we really have had a similar experience. Your post is much more detailed than mine. I am also lucky in that my friend understands what a theory is.

  3. Renshia on September 15th, 2009 at 2:38 pm

    I don’t know, I think you are giving to much credit to your friend here.
    to say:

    I am also lucky in that my friend understands what a theory is.

    I think this is wrong. I do not believe you friend has demonstrated in any way an understanding of how scientific theory works.  This is why he instantly rejects any effort to look at the items we present.
    To me is seems your friends idea of a theory is, you come up with an idea, look for evidence which supports it, explain away that which doesn’t as not being relevant and ignore it. Then believe it is right.
    This is completely wrong as to how a scientific theory works.
    In fact the only school of thought that allows for this type of theory generation is in religious thinking. Until he understands the difference between selecting evidence to support a belief and examining the evidence, then creating a theory based on the evidence, he will never be able to grasp the concepts you present.
    Unless you were being sarcastic, and I missed it. Then I hope at least this will help someone form a better understanding of the differences between how religion comes up with it’s theories and how scientific theories are developed.
    Good to see you back mark, hope it was a good weekend.

  4. anti_supernaturalist on September 19th, 2009 at 11:57 am

    * We need only dismantle xianity, not refute it
    There are no religious phenomena at all, only a religious interpretation of phenomena.
    The de-deification of culture (including the sciences) is our task for the next 100 years.
    the anti_supernaturalist

  • Why I Blog

    I'm here to help doubting believers let go of their fear and guilt, to provide an example of an atheist leading a happy, moral and fulfilling life, and to connect with fellow non-believers. Welcome!

  • Subscribe/Bookmark

    AddThis Social Bookmark Button Follow 40yroldatheist on Twitter subscribe

  • Navigation


  • On Youtube

  • Great Reads

  • History & Statistics

  • Favorite Articles

  • Meaning of Life Type Stuff