SUMMARY: YOUR STATEMENT BELOW IS FALSE -- EVOLUTION DOES MAKE PREDICTIONS.
Hundreds of which have been confirmed and not one has proven to be false!
... Evolutionary theory can not make predictions of the future, therefore it does not satisify all the requirements of a valid science theory. ...
This is a false objection, which has been raised and answered earlier. Both Creationist and evolution theories make predictions. For example, if all the animals were formed at the same time, then bones of dinosaurs, birds and man would be found in the same undisturbed layers of earth together as all were dying in the same decades.
Evolution states the the birds evolved from dinosaurs, and before man existed. Thus evolution predicts that the deepest (oldest) layers with dinosaur bones will not contain bones of birds or man. Bird bones will be found only in more recent layers, but long before any layer with bones of man.
Two different predictions about where these bones of different species will be found. Evolution's prediction is correct and creationist theory's prediction is false. Here from old posts are some other confirmed predictions of Evolution theory:
part of post 170:Creationist make no {confirmed} predictions and never can test anything, but Evolutionist can and do:...
For example, plant biologists have long been interested in the origins of crop plants. Wheat is an ancient crop of the Middle East. Three species exist both as wild and domesticated wheats, einkorn, emmer, and breadwheat. Archeological studies have demonstrated that einkorn is the most ancient and breadwheat appeared most recently. To plant biologists this suggested that somehow einkorn gave rise to emmer, and emmer gave rise to breadwheat (an hypothesis). Further evidence was obtained from chromosome numbers that showed einkorn with 14, emmer with 28, and breadwheat with 42. Further, the chromosomes in einkorn consisted of two sets of 7 chromosomes, designated AA. Emmer had 14 chromosomes similar in shape and size, but 14 more, so they were designated AABB. Breadwheat had chromosomes similar to emmer, but 14 more, so they were designated AABBCC. To plant biologists familiar with mechanisms of speciation, these data, the chromosome numbers and sets, suggested that the emmer and breadwheat species arose via hybridization and polyploidy (an hypothesis). The Middle Eastern flora was studied to find native grasses with a chromosome number of 14, and several goatgrasses were discovered that could be the predicted parents, the sources of the BB and CC chromosomes. To test these hypotheses, plant biologists crossed einkorn and emmer wheats with goatgrasses, which produced sterile hybrids. These were treated to produce a spontaneous doubling of the chromosome number, and as predicted, the correct crosses artificially produced both the emmer and breadwheat species. No one saw the evolution of these wheat species, but logical predictions about what happened were tested by recreating likely circumstances. Grasses are wind-pollinated, so cross-pollination between wild and cultivated grasses happens all the time. Frosts and other natural events are known to cause a doubling of chromosomes. And the hypothesized sequence of speciation matches their observed appearance in the archeological record. ...
Unfortunately, most creationist are too dumb to be able to understand the paragraph above.
Fortunately, intelligence increases one's chance of reproduction, so they are being selected against.
From:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2689745&postcount=170
Here are seven other predictions of evolutionary theory that have been confirmed by a natural, not man made, experiment:
“... However, enviromental theory does also predict what factors will speed the development of a new species. The major ones are:
(1) Isolated gene pool, so new benefitial gene for that enviroment will not be too quickly lost among a wider population
(2) Very small gene pool so new beneficial gene can quickly spread through out the small gene pool.
(3) No Predators to eat the bearer of the new beneficial gene before it can be spread into later generations.
(4) Harsh conditions so that even a slight beneficial gene may make a difference in survival. For example creatures that only can digest bananas might have a genetic change that allowed them to digest grass, but if there are lots of bananas available and that is what the bearer of the grass digestion gene learned to eat, that gene, although potentially beneficial, (4) will not offer much survival advantage,
(5) until the massive banana blight hits and 90% of the gene pool starves to death. (5)Very harsh environment conditions make even small genetic advantage very big survival advantage. - Get it selected for.
(6) Harsh condition lasting for long periods, no just a passing drought etc. but for tens of thousands of generation as significant fraction of the gene pool starving to death due to over breeding.
(7) Being trapped in a tiny areas with no means of moving to where conditions are less harsh.
These are seven predictions that evolution theory makes about what can shorten the time required for a new species to evolve. If all seven are strongly satisfied, then the rate of evolution can be speeded up by a factor of 100 (not a million years, but species evolving in 10,000 years.) It just so happened that from the end of the last ice age, about 8,000 years ago, all seven were very strongly in effect for the full 8,000 years and a new species did evolve, confirming these seven predictions of evolution theory. That species, called the preá, evolved from the guinea pig species that lives still unchanged on a much larger island only 8 Km away by boat. Not only do the preá, have quite a different appearance, size and facial features, (very tiny and flat –quite human like with no snout) etc. but the preá, cannot mate and produce fertile off springs with the guinea pig species they evolved from. – I.e. the preá, is a new species….”
From post 1016 in now locked thread:
http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=91631
For more on the preá , including a photo of one, see:
http://www.sciforums.com/showpost.php?p=2714823&postcount=266
It is obviously impossible to confirm now a prediction about the future but here is one in larger type below, based on evolution theory, I made less than a day ago:
... whales, which evolved from four legged land animals not too long ago by evolutionary time scales, have left a complete set of fossil remains of all their transition steps to creatures that can only live in the oceans. Sciforums only allows three image inserts, so I can not show every tiny step of the transition but these three show:
First the stage with large and strong hind legs more important for swimming than the tail. Probably an amphibian, which could still walk on land;
Then more recent fossils of evolving whales have greatly reduced leg bones, but they are still an attached part of the main skeleton;
This fossil was not complete (arms and shoulder bones were missing)
And finally just tiny useless calcium bone deposits (of the modern whale) that are just loosely floating inside the flesh, which is still red meat of its land animal ancestor, not fish-like flesh.
Come back in some what more than 10,000 years and these tiny useless calcium deposits will be gone, if whales have not become extinct.
Evolution is a still continuing and continuous process.* - Each generation is very much like the parents, but not exactly like the parents.
Read more details at link from which the figures were taken at:
http://www.talkorigins.org/features/whales/
...
----------
*But it is not correct to state the evolution proceeds only by chance genetic variation followed by "environmental selection" of the "fittest." Everyone recognizes that man has selected for the high milk production cow, etc. but less recognized is that totally useless vestigial features, which cost energy to make, such as the vestigial traces of the whales leg bones (the tiny "floating calcium deposits” of the third figure above) will be selected against by the evolving creature its self, not by the environment, and eventually disappear.
