1
$\begingroup$

Theory of evolution states that organisms are evolved into other more advanced ones over time because there are some traits in modern organisms resemble with organisms existing before (from fossil record). But it might be possible that each organism has created independently of each other. why similarities mean evolutionary relationship?

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Theory of evolution states that organisms are evolved into other more advanced ones over time Nope that's not what the theory of evolution is stating, mainly because the expression "more advanced" does not mean much and also is a loaded expression. You might want to start with an intro course to evolutionary biology to understand what the theory of evolution says. Understanding Evolution is a very introductory course you might like. $\endgroup$ – Remi.b Jul 15 '17 at 16:08
  • $\begingroup$ @Remi.b Alright I will have a look at what theory of evolution states but the basic thing is humans are thought to have evolved from chimpanzees. What I want to know is chimpanzees might resemble to humans but why chimpanzees are considered ancestor of humans? It might be possible that humans and chimpanzees created individually? $\endgroup$ – AksaK Jul 15 '17 at 16:15
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Approaching the question from the other direction, we understand how evolution could happen (similar mechanisms are used in e.g. computer genetic algorithms), and see some examples of ongoing evolution, like antibiotic resistance in bacteria. But we don't see new creatures being created ab initio, and have no evidence for any mechanism by which they could be created. $\endgroup$ – jamesqf Jul 15 '17 at 17:38
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AksaK chimpanzee are NOT considered the ancestors of humans, they SHARE a common ancestor with humans, kind of how you and your cousin share an common ancestor. That ancestor is believed to look more like chimpanzee than us humans, but does not mean much. $\endgroup$ – John Jul 17 '17 at 4:10
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Clangorous Chimera: OTOH, there are some people here who mark perfectly good answers as "not an answer". $\endgroup$ – jamesqf Jul 17 '17 at 18:43
7
$\begingroup$

I will answer by explaining some misconceptions in your original question:

Theory of evolution states that organisms are evolved into other more advanced ones over time

Nope that's not what the theory of evolution is stating, mainly because the expression "more advanced" does not mean much and also is a loaded expression. You might want to start with an intro course to evolutionary biology to understand what the theory of evolution says. Understanding Evolution is a very introductory course you might like

@Remi.b Alright I will have a look at what theory of evolution states but the basic thing is humans are thought to have evolved from chimpanzees. What I want to know is chimpanzees might resemble to humans but why chimpanzees are considered ancestor of humans? It might be possible that humans and chimpanzees created individually?

No, the theory of evolution does not state that humans evolved from chimpanzees. It says that humans and chimpanzees / bonobos have a common ancestor (about 6 millions years ago) that was not a human, nor was it a chimpanzee or a bonobo.

You can find an introduction to phylogenetics in this post and you can find online tools to visualize the tree of life in this post.

Philosophical issue in your question

The theory of evolution makes predictions that have been tested and demonstrated correct. You are asking why would creationism would not lead to the same predictions. For this purpose, one need to know what predictions would creationism make but this is very much undefined. If you can point to specific predictions that creationism would make, then we could tell you whether we have a counter evidence. The issue is that there is always a way to say, everything has been designed so that it looks like evolution is at play even if species were created anew. But this is not falsifiable.

So, maybe you might want to make specific predictions, that in your opinion, would be congruent with creationism but not with the theory of evolution and then we can tell you if we have evidence to support this prediction.

Related posts

While it does not directly answer your question (because IMO, for semantic issue, the question is unanswerable), you might want to have a look at Is evolution a fact? and Demonstrable and repeatable examples of evolution

$\endgroup$
4
$\begingroup$

The main reason organisms not believed to be created independently, (besides no evidence for a creator to do creating) is that organisms do not just share similarities but they share similarities in a predictable pattern. Similarities are not random but follow a pattern that only makes sense if it is due to small changes over long periods of time in an ancestors/descendants branching tree of relationships. Two similar creatures will be equally similar to a third, and those three will be equally similar to a fourth and so on ans so forth in a nested pattern, not just a random assortment.

Humans might happen to be very similar to chimpanzees and vice versa by chance alone, but the chance of both humans and chimps also being very similar to gorilla is much less likely, them being similar in the same ways is even less likely, and the chance of all three also each being very similar to orangutan is even less likely, ect and so forth through the entirety of life. The chances of this arrangement of traits and genes happening by chance (aka without any actual relatedness or common origin) is so astronomically small it is difficult for us to even conceive of events that uniquely unlikely. There is a better chance of all your atoms happening to sync up so you fall/phase through your chair and plummet to the center of the earth in the next few minutes. In fact the entire field of Cladistics is about testing and mapping these relationships, and one of the things they constantly test against is a the possibility of an random or convergent assortment of trait.

This pattern also mirrors the pattern of human driven evolution (artificial selection) in which organisms are bred from other ancestral organisms through small changes by encouraging individuals with certain traits to reproduce and discouraging others, which at the time was far more well understood, which is how they recognized it. It is also why three chapters of Darwin's book was about show pigeon breeding.

And all that is before you get into things like the mathematical predictability of evolution, the fossil record, or directly observed evolution.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Another factor is that when we do see distantly-related organisms having a very similar appearance, we can often identify the evolutionary pressures that would lead to that similarity. E.g. dolphins and ichthyosaurs look much the same because of hydrodynamics. $\endgroup$ – jamesqf Jul 30 '17 at 19:19

protected by Remi.b Jul 17 '17 at 4:33

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.