What Makes a Theory - Essay Example

What makes a theory? A theory originates from a hypothesis that is an active assumption explaining the manner we see something. Scientists then perform numerous experiments to test and verify the assumption or reveal the correlation of the assumption with the particular hypothesis (Carey et al. 514). For a long time, if the hypothesis manages to hold up to the scrutiny and the various tests and experiments, then scientists all together start calling it a theory. We can be sure about the validity of a theory on failure to disapprove the hypothesis and that no any other hypothesis that can produce similar results. A theory does not enjoy immunity since it is possible to discard it if technological advancements allow for improved methods of experimentation that reveals the reality about the condition in test. The question remains whether over the years; evolution continues to satisfy the condition described. There are problems that inhibit anybody from validating evolution as a real scientific theory. To begin, there is absence of a direct and observable experimentation that one can perform regarding the theory. While scientists can measure and examine bones, decode DNA, study mutations and discover similarities in the morphology of living organisms, it is impossible to test evolutionary events that occurred in the past. The idea that living organisms evolved over many years in the past is therefore, a belief since it is impossible to conduct any test to prove or dissapprove it. Some scientists who support the evolution theory argue that ‘natural selection’ is an example of ongoing evolution in the current times that over many years in the past caused the various transformations (Dobzhansky 125). However, the truth is that natural selection is only capable of acting on the genetic potential, which already subsists. Therefore, it means that what one can visualize from natural selection cannot amount to a universal descent. To continue, all the various tests conducted to verify the theory do not distinctively and necessarily, align to the view. Each of them contains an alternate as well as an explanation that is equally, viable. A valid theory requires that all the experiments conducted to confirm the theory must correspond to a single particular hypothesis (Carey et al. 514). Failure to meet this condition then means that the experiment is incapable of establishing legitimacy. The evolutionary idea does not have that legitimacy. Facts invalidating the theory The idea that living organisms evolved extracts most of its evidence from the process of natural selection. However, natural selection is scientifically not reliable in confirming the idea since there are numerous observations that invalidate it. To begin with, the DNA molecule in both animals and plants can allow very selctive breeding to obtain the required outcomes. For example, in all dogs, the DNA molecule contains numerous recessive characteristics. It is possible to obtain the desired characteristic in an offspring by selecting dogs with that specific characteristic (Shapiro 92). Through a continueos process of selective breeding, it is possible to finally, develop a new breed of dogs. This is similar to the idea of ‘survival of the fittest’ since many types of dogs can develop in this manner. However, the process of selective breeding of dogs will never develop to a cat. This invalidates the evolution theory since natural selection cannot work outside the limit set by DNA. It is thus possible to have new variations of the same specy but impossible to develop a new different specy. If the idea of ‘natural selection’ were correct, then Eskimos would develop fur to help them keep warm. In addition, humans living in the tropical regions would develop silvery skin to help them to keep cool but instead they are very black, which absorbs heat. On the other hand, humans that live in the Northern latitude regions would develop a black skin, which absorbs heat to help keep warm but instead they have white skin. More specifically, humans in Russia and Nordic states have blood hair, white skin as well as blue eyes that are all in contrary to the idea of natural selection that evolution relies on (Mesoudi et. al. 5). To continue, evolution theory claims that the availability of many species is a proof to the process of gradual changes that occurred in the past. This idea is non-scientific and devoid of logic and reason. The individuals that supports evolution present pictures of species that look similar and claim that they must have evolved from each other and once shared a common ancestor. Taking an example of the human family tree, petrified bones and skulls exist from diverse species of apes and monkeys that are extinct. The evolutionists present carefully, chosen skulls and bones to trace the gradual transformation from a monkey to the modern man. This procedure is only possible with man because of the large number of extinct ape and monkey species. They have never repeated the same procedure with other species from other animals such as elephants and giraffes. Evolution is thus not scientific because the proof provided does not remain valid in all other similar conditions (Corbin and Anselm 3). For the theory to be scientific, it must be able to produce the same effect with all other species apart from man. Many years ago, scientists held that the cell was the smallest or simplest living form. Evolution holds that probably life began after lightning struck water in a pond causing some molecules to join randomly, where by chance formed a cell. The living cell then later advanced in several stages to complex forms of life. This view is incorrect since modern laboratories with advanced methods of experimentation are not capable of creating a cell. In deed, scientists have not yet been able to create a single molecule of left-hand protein found in all animals. Evolution theory suggests that life originated from inorganic matter, which is an idea that is totally, unrealistic. Scientists with the most equipped laboratories have totally, failed to change inorganic matter into a living cell. The simplest one cell creature contains numerous atoms that form numerous molecules arranged in a specific pattern to perform specific functions (Shapiro 93). For example, it has a system for producing energy, a housing that provides protection to the inner parts, a system to allow some materials in and out of the housing, a system of reproduction and overall system of control. Evolution is yet to explain how all this came into being. Evolution theory does not account for the condition regarding the male sperm and the female egg in humans and other mammals. The human male has XY sex chromosomes while the female has XX chromosomes. It is thus only male that can cause the reproduction of male offspring from the Y chromosome since X chromosome is for female offspring. The eggs in female develop very early in the ovaries while the offspring is still in the womb. According to the evolution theory, environmental factors induce changes in the offspring. Nevertheless, it has not provided an explanation on how the environment affects changes in the structure of the chromosomes while the offspring is in the mother’s womb (Lederman et al. 504). In this case, females will not be part of the theory. On the other hand, the formation of sperms in males occurs in the testes everyday. This short period between the formation of sperm and fertilization of the female egg in the oviduct raises serious questions on the validity of the theory of evolution since changes take time to occur. According to the idea presented by the second law of thermodynamics, it is impossible for organization to flow from disorder. This means that it is impossible for lower or complex organisms to re-arrange to form a higher organism, which is contrary to the theory of evolution (Lederman et al. 505). This is therefore, incorrect since the second law of thermodynamics is scientifically, valid, as no any test has proved it wrong. This is evident through the slow deterioration of the universe into a lower state rather than higher. Genes in animals, humans, insects as well as plants are also continuously becoming inferior rather than showing improvements. These observations continue to validate the second law of thermodynamics while invalidating the theory of evolution. Conclusion Modern science has clearly invalidated the ideas presented by the theory of evolution. A number of questions exist that the theory is yet to provide answers based on the new scientific inventions in the modern world. This ranges from the manner reproduction occurs upto the means that characteristics pass from parents to offsprings. Modern science stresses with proper evidence that the physical environment has no significant role in the biological changes and developments that occur in living organisms. Works Cited Carey, Susan, et al. "‘An experiment is when you try it and see if it works’: a study of grade 7 students’ understanding of the construction of scientific knowledge." International Journal of Science Education 11.5 (1989): 514-529. Corbin, Juliet M., and Anselm Strauss. "Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons and evaluative criteria." Qualitative sociology 13.1 (1990): 3-21. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. "Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution." (1973): 125-129. Lederman, Norm G., et al. "Views of nature of science questionnaire: Toward valid and meaningful assessment of learners conceptions of nature of science." Journal of research in science teaching 39.6 (2002): 497-521. Mesoudi, Alex, Andrew Whiten, and Kevin N. Laland. "Perspective: Is human cultural evolution Darwinian? Evidence reviewed from the perspective of The Origin of Species." Evolution 58.1 (2004): 1-11. Shapiro, James A. "A 21st century view of evolution: genome system architecture, repetitive DNA, and natural genetic engineering." Gene 345.1 (2005): 91-100. Read More