It starts with a hypothesis of observed phenomenon, then a theory as to why, but to get to a proven fact, as I understood it, it needs to be proven by reproducing it scientifically. Don't get me wrong, I'm not opposed to the theory, I just don't believe it's a proven fact. IMHO to prove it, a living organism needs to be produced in a test tube, or whatever.
"Evolution is a fact, an observed phenomenon, and Darwin's theory is the most supported and proven explanation".
Yes, it is the most supported and so is the savanna theory of early hominids. Elaine Morgan and others proposed the aquatic theory, for which she was ridiculed by the establishment scientific community. Now her theory is by far the most logical as the savanna theory is proven erroneous by the botanists. They proved there was no savanna in Africa at the time of Lucy, the first found bipedal hominid. Africa was a flooded continent with islands at that time, Lucy was a semi aquatic hominid.
Just pointing out that there is much to learn and prove and many times the scientific establishment is very reluctant to change their preconceived views. I posted some information on aquatic adaptations below.
Want DP delivered to your inbox daily? Subscribe here: