What Predictions can be made using Evol Theory? (Darwin, doom)

[Random]

Well?

If Evolution has been observed, hypothesised, tested, publicised and verified en route to being a widely accepted Theory, then what Predictions can be made about the future of nature and the world with it?

As an adjacent question, what predictive models can result from Evolutionary theory as opposed to Creationist ideas?

[Fluffy]

I'm not entirely clear on the difference between a "prediction" and a "predictive model". Could you give an example of each in some other area of science?

Also predictions in science are not purely about the future and so I don't understand the inclusion of this stipulation. For example, palaeontology rarely makes predictions about the future but can make several predictions about the past that are then supported through further evidence.

[logician]

Originally Posted by Random

Well?

If Evolution has been observed, hypothesised, tested, publicised and verified en route to being a widely accepted Theory, then what Predictions can be made about the future of nature and the world with it?

As an adjacent question, what predictive models can result from Evolutionary theory as opposed to Creationist ideas?

One only needs to read the stats about species extinctions now taking place to know that we're responsible for an ongoing extinction event that may equal the Creatious in proportion by the time its over. The loss of biodiversity already is staggering, and a monumental disaster as far as life is concerned on a global scale. Considering who is in charge(politically), and what little is being done about it now, I don't expect things to improve significantly.

[Random]

Originally Posted by Fluffy

I'm not entirely clear on the difference between a "prediction" and a "predictive model". Could you give an example of each in some other area of science? Also predictions in science are not purely about the future and so I don't understand the inclusion of this stipulation.

Yes well, there is really no need to be obtrusive and difficult about such a simple question. I am referring to the predictive potence of Evol theory.

The difference between a predictive model and a prediction is the same as between how and will be, but mere slings and arrows and serves no fuction for the purposes of this question. Okies?

[Random]

Originally Posted by logician

One only needs to read the stats about species extinctions now taking place to know that we're responsible for an ongoing extinction event that may equal the Creatious in proportion by the time its over. The loss of biodiversity already is staggering, and a monumental disaster as far as life is concerned on a global scale. Considering who is in charge(politically), and what little is being done about it now, I don't expect things to improve significantly.

So Evol spells doom so long as man keeps trying to "improve conditions", and failing to do so whilst messing with the ecosystem? We're doomed basically, is that it?

Nice answer, though. Frubals.

[Fluffy]

Okay cool sorry. I honestly didn't mean to be obtrusive .

Here is a short list from talkorigins of predictions that have been made by evolutionary theory and subsequently been verified:

• Darwin predicted, based on homologies with African apes, that human ancestors arose in Africa. That prediction has been supported by fossil and genetic evidence (Ingman et al. 2000).
• Theory predicted that organisms in heterogeneous and rapidly changing environments should have higher mutation rates. This has been found in the case of bacteria infecting the lungs of chronic cystic fibrosis patients (Oliver et al. 2000).
• Predator-prey dynamics are altered in predictable ways by evolution of the prey (Yoshida et al. 2003).
• Ernst Mayr predicted in 1954 that speciation should be accompanied with faster genetic evolution. A phylogenetic analysis has supported this prediction (Webster et al. 2003).
• Several authors predicted characteristics of the ancestor of craniates. On the basis of a detailed study, they found the fossil Haikouella "fit these predictions closely" (Mallatt and Chen 2003).
• Evolution predicts that different sets of character data should still give the same phylogenetic trees. This has been confirmed informally myriad times and quantitatively, with different protein sequences, by Penny et al. (1982).
• Insect wings evolved from gills, with an intermediate stage of skimming on the water surface. Since the primitive surface-skimming condition is widespread among stoneflies, J. H. Marden predicted that stoneflies would likely retain other primitive traits, too. This prediction led to the discovery in stoneflies of functional hemocyanin, used for oxygen transport in other arthropods but never before found in insects (Hagner-Holler et al. 2004; Marden 2005).

[3.14]

well it is highly likely that animals will develop stronger immune systems to cope with the destruction of the eco systeem and the weaker species will die out because they can't handel the polution
also since man is ever encrothing on animals domain animals will alter there instincts around humans either becoming more domestic or more aggresive

[Random]

Originally Posted by 3.14

well it is highly likely that animals will develop stronger immune systems to cope with the destruction of the eco systeem and the weaker species will die out because they can't handel the polution
also since man is ever encrothing on animals domain animals will alter there instincts around humans either becoming more domestic or more aggresive

That's nice, thanks. Frubals.

[fantôme profane]

The theory of evolution predicts that organisms will be able to adapt to their environment through small genetic changes from one generation to the next.

The first thing that springs to my mind is viruses. The theory of evolution predicts that many viruses will be able to adapt to the kind of vaccines and treatments that we currently use and in time these treatments will lose their effectiveness.

I really can’t say what creationist models would predict in this case, I suppose it depends on what kind of creationist model you are using. I suppose that all creationist models would predict whatever happens to viruses would be according to the will of “God”, whether they die, change, become more virulent or whatever would all be according to what “God” wants. I do know that one prevalent creationist models denies the possibility of new genetic information. If this is true then medical science could eventually find some kind of anti-viral treatment that would wipe out these deadly viruses and they would not be able to adapt.


I realize that you are asking about future predictions, but I have to point out that DNA itself was one of the biggest predictions made from a Darwinian model of evolution. The theory points to the necessity of a common method of transmitting hereditary traits, one that allows for high fidelity information transmission, and yet allows for occasional errors.

The creationist model doesn’t predict DNA.