How can the scientific community accept The Theory of Evolution when it can not be scientifically applied?

Question

Evolution is not a science in that they cannot utilize the scientific the method to test it out. It can neither be repeated by other scientists nor can the end result be observed. Why are scientists so resistant to drop this hypothesis and strive for another answer?

Answer 1

All of this:

"Evolution is not a science in that they cannot utilize the scientific the method to test it out. It can neither be repeated by other scientists nor can the end result be observed"

is a lie. Pure and simple. Just exactly the opposite of what the truth is. It's like claiming that the sky is green with purple stripes. It's wrong, wrong, wrong.

Answer 2

Evolution can be applied, and has been applied in many different ways. Evolution can be repeated, and it can be observed. Evolution has been directly observed in populations throughout the world, both in the wild, and in controlled experiments.



One researcher has been observing populations of E. coli for the last 20 years, and has observed significant changes in those populations.



Scientists have no reason to abandon the theory of evolution because it's been massively successful.



Apparently you've been misinformed. Where did you get the idea that evolution can't be applied?

Answer 3

Evolution can be applied in real time and on purpose. A really interesting study was done by some Russian who were trying to breed foxes who were easier to deal with, ironically for the purposes of collecting their fur. They selected the foxes who did not shy away from human contact and bred those. What they found was that not only did the resulting foxes have gentler personalities, but they also had changes in color. For some reason, those two things were tied together.



I don't remember examples off the top of my head, but there are several examples of evolutionary occurring in the wild today.

Answer 4

You're wrong. It has been observed directly (e.g. in nylon-eating flavobacteria or radiotrophic fungi) or indirectly (through the fossil record). It offers explanations for phenomena that cannot be explained by some other theories (e.g. ring species - which we have observed - are highly incompatible with creationism, but certainly support evolution).