TV Schedule

Theory of Evolution: proven (again!)?

  2. TheRealEdwin
  3. related topics
One of the main arguments against Darwin's Theory of Evolution is the mistaken belief that it has not or can not be proven in our lifetime. Intelligent Design proponents claim that evolution "can't be proven" because "it happens slowly, over many years." Since we can't watch it, we can't prove it; or so the argument goes

But in fact, we can watch evolution in action. That's because the correct metric isn't a clock-tick or a calendar, but successive generations. Life forms with shorter life spans can evolve into new forms in just a few years. And numerous life forms have evolved as we watched.

National Geographic reports on just such a case; the three-spine stickleback.

Scientists have been studying Lake Washington in Washington Stage since the 1950's. They weren't studying the lake to prove Darwin's Theory, they were studying the effect of pollution on the lake. The State was pumping 76 million gallons of sewage into the lake each day.

When the scientists began studying the lake, it was a cesspool. It was hard to see through the murky waters, and the bottom was covered in a slimy ooze. The tiny stickleback managed to survive in the filth; it hid from predators by sinking into the muck on the lake bed.

They stopped the sewage, and filtered the water, and scoured the lake bed clean over the last 40 years. And scientists monitored the lake's health, taking samples of all the life found in it, including the stickleback.

When the lake was a murky disaster, predators like trout couldn't see the stickleback; and if it felt threatend, it "disappeared" into the ooze. But once the waters cleared up, suddenly it could be seen by trout, and there was no place to hide.

So the species evolved heavier scales to protect them from the sharp teeth of predators. The change from one form to the other is documented.

In the first photo, you can see the beige flesh of the stickleback; in the second, you can see the protective plates it evolved, colored pink.

It's the same process that has rendered many anti-biotics powerless in just a few years; bacteria live their lives in hours, giving them thousands of generations to evolve protection against penicillin and other drugs.

Evolution is a proven fact, and anyone who tells you different is lying.
TheRealEdwin

99 responses // Theory of Evolution: proven (again!)?

  • Yep, thanks for posting this.

    You could also look at Russian Super-TB. When that came out, creationists had the audacity to say "oh that's just adaptation!" Which of course is the same thing.
    Saladin
  • It’s interesting how many people seem to neglect facts that stand before them. Take for instance the many people around the world who neglect evolution even though it has been exemplified in many instances just like this one.

    great post
    lisaab
  • its happening to everything all around us

    humans are being born without wisdom teeth for the fact that we dont need new teeth to replace our old ones now that we have better dental care.
    we are being born without appendixes too because we no longer rely on a diet of meat.

    and dont forget the apes that are fishing with spears now. they may have made the first step to becoming humans
    RoBot_rOcKer
  • Life is full of surprises...Therefore, it's entirely possible for evolution to occur during the course of one human lifetime.
    MissJonaLyn
  • http://scubuster.com/?p=393
    My assumption is that RoBot ROcKer is being facetious but I hope you like the picture of the orangutan spear fishing. I wouldn't really call learning a new skill evolution but I thought it was interesting.

    Haven't humans always been born without wisdom teeth? I only got mine in my 20s.
    observer2121
  • watch this comment being used here, here, here, here and here
    Hellooooooo!!! How do people think that we have dogs, cows, sheep, every single food that is grown in a crop. It's through selective breeding, aka evolution, that we are able to have different breeds of horses, dogs, disease resistant foods. Humans have been doing it for years and years and years and years. So not only are we able to witness evolution, we have harnessed it's power and used it to become the species that we are today.
    M_Pavlov
  • That doesn't prove anything. Some fish have harder scales than others. The ones with hard scales survived, the others got wiped out. Simple.

    Breeds are simply genotypes. Evolution would mean a different species altogether.
    handshakeheartbreak
  • Jesus Christ, it's the _same thing_.

    Don't you see that? That's what evolution is. Slow adaptations to the environment over very extended periods of time.

    That's all! Species are just classifications! You're arguing semantics! You think of life as classifications, but it's not. It's CONSTANTLY changing throughout successive generations.
    Saladin
  • Exactly Saladin. And handshake, I can give you a perfect example of a "species" that was created by man (I already did to be fair but I'll go in depth). Dog's man, dog's. They weren't always the cute little man's best friend that we think of them as. They started out as WOLVES, you know the vicious animal that systematically stalks it's prey in packs. Rant over.
    M_Pavlov
  • The main argument, I think, that evolution has yet to conclusively prove is that why is it when a mind is at peace it more often resides in joy then some sort of ambivalent type feeling. Also, why can music or a beautiful work of art provide so much bliss?

    Don't get my wrong, I totally think we evolved from one celled organisms, but I do think that love and joy cannot be fully explained using the evolutionary paradigm that science currently puts forward.
    shbhanda
  • It is actually a commonly held, but incorrect, belief that evolution happens at a steady, progressive rate. On the contrary, the fossil record is littered with examples of relatively sudden bursts of change in response to environmental change.

    M_Pavlov's point about domesticated dogs (tho prolly biased given his username, natch :)) is a perfect example.
    Justin_Gunn
  • Strictly speaking, species simply means organisms that can reproduce with each other and make fertile offspring.

    Making specific desirable traits pass on isn't evolution. (i.e. I make pretty babies, my kids make pretty babies, their kids make pretty babies) For it to qualify as evolution, there must be SIGNIFICANT change over time.

    Hard or soft when both choices are available isn't evolution. It just means one is more "popular" than the other.

    Breeds are genotypes.

    Semantics, but going by SCIENTIFIC definition, I'm right.
    handshakeheartbreak
  • Is this EVOLUTION or ADAPTATION? It sounds more like adaptation to me. Much in the same way, humans' skin is different colors because we adapted to sun exposure.
    Neecie
  • The original article is a great read, no matter what your definition of evolution is.
    yonie
  • Well, I think they'd have to show a specimen from the lake before it was polluted. If it too had harder scales then it is likely that it was the pollution of the lake that stunted the fish's growth, including the full growth of its scales. Therefore, these scientific results are incomplete and inconclusive until an in situ specimen from the lake in it's pre-pollution state could be produced and examined.

    p.s.-if the theory of evolution IS correct, we should see polar bears developing wings real soon, so that they can fly to where the ice still is, huh?
    hawaii_guy_1010
  • Is it true that some school in US are teching creationist theory? like Noah's ark and his Tirex couple?
    How can they explain the the Tirex didn't eat all poultries?
    I mean what those kids gonna be when they reach the world and discover 99% of the world believe in evolution?
    Pretty damn fucked up for sure!
    how can US gov let that happen in 21st century? shouldn't school be as justice, no faith, no believe but fact!
    alexandrek
  • BTW, there is as well another amazing evolution story in about some lezard introduced in a small island, close to bosnia i think, where scientist forgot and check 50 years later and the lezards changed there mouth, stomach and size to adapt to local flora.

    Darwin 2, Noah 0
    alexandrek
  • "Well, I think they'd have to show a specimen from the lake before it was polluted. If it too had harder scales then it is likely that it was the pollution of the lake that stunted the fish's growth, including the full growth of its scales."

    If people actually -read- the article, it would be noticed that they mentioned this as a case of "reverse evolution".
    As in, the fish used to have heavy scales before the lake was so heavily polluted. They didnt need them anymore, because they could hide in the mud, so gradually they -adapted- by losing the heavy scales.

    Now the lake is clear and they obviously need the scales again to avoid being eaten. So now they've adapted back to their ancestors' way of life.

    And for the record, strings of adaptations seem small and insignificant alone, but when you look at them over time, they are in fact the process of evolution at work. =)
    enigmatic08
  • evolution is a fact of life in my book.
    starlightblue
  • alexandrek, you may have a point, and no, I didn't read the entire article, but the fish may indeed have not been "evolving" per se, but it may have been the pollution itself that made the fish weaker and unable to grow the scales it had before when its environment was healthy. To wit, does a virus mutate into a form that can more readily attack mankind because it is aggressive against humanity and hates us (for example, the bird flu), or does it do it because it can? Are humans still evolving and if so, where are some examples and how to they better our species? Are there other species evolving now and what do they look like in mid-evolutionary state, or does it happen all at once as with viral mutations? Just curious.
    hawaii_guy_1010
  • I think that when people think of evolution, they think of frogs magically becoming mammals, or lizards becoming men somehow.

    I'd be likely to believe that perhaps the fish were stunted because of the large amounts of pollution, except that they changed their defense mechanism to go with it. IF they hadnt learned to hide in the mud, where the trout wouldnt get at them, then they would have all been eaten up and this knowledge would not have been passed through the generations.

    People want to compare evolution to the wondrously magical event that is proposed in the Bible. If you looked at it from the beginning to today, it certainly seems improbable and/or magical. But it seems much more practical and even mundane if you looked at it through mutations of crops, and the way the things like fungus adapt (or evolve) to get around these new genetically enhanced plants...or the way that bacteria have been able to overcome tried and true ways of killing them effectively...you can see millions of tiny little lives progressing through generations and adapting, evolving to overcome obstacles and survive in their own right.

    To be honest, humans dont have any reason to evolve. There is nothing for them to adapt to, in the grand scheme of things. They recreate and shape the world to fit -their- needs. They do not change with the tide or the landscape. The Evolution of Man stopped when man realized that they no longer needed to fear the wonders of nature.
    enigmatic08
  • It's amazing we still live in a world where people doubt the theory of evolution.

    You would of thought we would of evolved a little more ourselves by now and that people who were still stuck in the dark ages of religious dogma would of simply died out.
    jonbrooks
  • observer2121

    try and grasp this scenario

    a new skill can lead to new behaviors
    what if apes learn that they can hunt any animal with a spear, well now they have a new sorce of food, but sometimes this food isnt always there it migrates. so after the ape figures this out it begins to follow its food around, thus begining its first step to developing flat feet and a less curved spine. of course it wont happen overnight but after a few hundred thousand years then yeah it seems perfectly possible.

    and to answer your question yes we are born with all of our teeth. the idea of our wisdom teeth was that ancient human would eat shit and not have very good dental hygene, by the time they reach their 20's they could use a new set of teeth. humans since have got tooth paste dentists.

    and humans have a special knack when it comes to evolution because humans can manipulate the environment around them ie. man made lakes, air conditioning in the desert, choppng down trees building houses, medicine. we evolve and adapt to the things we make for ourselves i cant think of any other species that does that
    RoBot_rOcKer
  • Sadly, I think religious dogma is going to be around for some time. It is too emotionally appealing, in a largely indifferent world.

    Some people don't feel comfortable with the idea that unguided natural forces govern humankind, and indeed the Universe. Sometimes it just looks too perfect.

    For anyone who thinks that evolution is an incorrect way of explaining life on Earth, I would recommend they read 'The Blind Watchmaker' by Richard Dawkins.
    ltopham
  • Evolution - 357
    Intelligent Design - 0

    Now sit back and wait for the right wing evangelical nutbags to discount this as some sort of aquatic divine intervention
    Daniel_J
  • Real Edwin-

    You misquote and do not understand Intelligent Design.

    Intelligent Design is saying that behind all of the creation of the universe there is an intelligent mind.

    The type of evolution you are talking about is part of the designer's plan.
    soleil10
  • No...the burden to prove there is a "designer" behind evolution is your "cross to bare". ID offers NOTHING. All ID is is the religious answer to the ongoing proof of the theory of evolution is the most plausable answer to life. ID hasn't even been around that long. So i guess god was feeling bad for the stickleback and gave him thicker scales. Why didn't he "design" the stickleback correctly the first time? Couldn't he have seen this coming? ID at it's best is desperate. Look at the world around you, if it was indeed "designed" it was designed horrilby.
    Daniel_J
  • Whichever theory is correct, I'd say that pollution is the main factor.
    brad62
  • Polar bears need to look up to these sticklebacks. They might just learn a thing or two about adapting to the environment.
    pogschampion
  • Neecie is right--isn't this a case of adaptation?

    Evolution means evolving into another species...this fish didn't evolve into anything..it is still a fish. Its just now protected with heavier scales than before.

    Don't get me wrong, im a firm believer in evolution-this just doesn't seem to be the case....
    KristinL
  • What happens in the eager search for "proof" of evolution is that Micro-evolution is sometimes or should i say most of the time, taken as Macro-evolution. Anyone that sees the picture can see that this species has adapted to its environment which is something that happens even at the cellular level. Did this animal start walking on land? Is there distinct anatomical differences? How about the actual genetic make up? Now lets look at the human species, so because someone "evolved" into dark eyes, dark skin, tall, does that make them another species vs. short, light skin and light eyes? No!
    People will go to great lengths to disproof intelligent design and will consider anything no matter how impossible it is before accepting that God created everything in this universe.
    monavargas
  • In time, provided that we don't destroy ourselves or some cataclysm doesn't wipe us out, either science will complete it's systematic dismantling of the bible or biblical prophecy will prove true and those of us on the wrong side of Pascal's wager will feel the pain. The possibility also exists that we could all get a shock and wake up in the afterlife of one of the world's many other religious or spiritual beliefs. We're all going to find out sooner or later. :-) In the meantime, let's try and live well and agree to be tolerant of one another's beliefs.
    Hawkmang
  • As a Christian I believe that species can adapt to its surroundings. But lets go way back to who made the species. It takes you just as much faith to believe it just started out of nothing as to believe it was started by a creator. Either way you cannot explain the beginnings of existence before the "big bang".
    atommccree
  • no but we can prove the big bang's radiation echo...does anyone know if this an example of macro-evolution?
    bdub4u
  • Intelligent Design argues that the complexity of living things requires a 'Designer."

    So the more complex something is -- the more likely it is that it HAD to be designed/created by something. It simply couldn't have arisen by chance or on it's own.

    Then what created God?

    God is the most complex "thing" in the universe so obviously God must have a Designer/Creator. By the ID'ers own logic God could not have simply "appeared" on His own. Someone had to Design/Create God.

    But then who created the Designer that created the Designer?

    And on and on.

    But the ID'ers don't believe God has a Designer. They believe God just magically appeared (and this is science?)

    If the ID'ers allow that something as complex as God could simply arise without an outside Designer -- then why do they refuse to allow that things much less complex than God (humans) could have also arisen on their own?
    crob80227
  • Thanks for posting, good to know info.
    current89
  • The definition of evolution is static - evolution is the process of change in the inherited traits of a population of organisms from one generation to the next. Different interpretations are not valid arguments against evolution, like in religion (Old World vs. New World Creationism). The argument has to be based on the scientific definition, like gravity. Religion could argue that god is holding us down on the earth or the devil is holding us down on earth, but that has nothing to do with the scientific discussion of gravity.
    Pwdrskir
  • The animal is still the same animal. Where are the legs? A fish is a fish just as a bird is a bird. Fish do not become birds.Evolution is just a theory far from fact.
    mjsmith11