Give Now  »

Noon Edition

Debating Evolution

chess board

Macro Vs. Micro Evolution

One argument against the theory of evolution is that it makes claims about events no one's been able to observe or recreate.

But the claims it makes are all based on deductions that, in turn, are based on extensive testing. You see, evolution is a historical science, which means it's based on the assumption that natural systems operate the same way now as they have in the past.

The theory of evolution consists of many related hypotheses, each of which makes a prediction about some aspect of the natural world. Some of these hypotheses deal with what's known as macroevolution, or large scale changes in life, such as the ways different species are related to each other, or the origin of species, and mass extinctions.

Other hypotheses deal with microevolution, or the changes that take place within a single species.

Proof Is All Around You

The theory of evolution is extensive enough that there's no way one key experiment will make it or break it. To knock down evolutionary theory, you'd have to knock down the hypotheses that make it up. And that isn't easy to do, since many of these hypotheses are supported by extensive evidence, ranging from DNA analysis to laboratory and field investigations of living and fossil organisms, such as plants, fruit flies and dinosaurs.

So it's wrong to say that the theory of evolution isn't testable and falsifiable, because the ideas that comprise it can be tested.

Read More:

"15 Answers to Creationist Nonsense" (Scientific American)


Support For Indiana Public Media Comes From

About A Moment of Science