What evidence exists on Iceland that supports the theory of evolution?

Given Darwin’s Theory of Evolution, what scientific evidence best supports evolution by natural selection?

• Answer:

  1. The fossil record clearly demonstrates in an unambiguous way that animals have been changing over time. It clearly shows speciation and evolution. The dating of rocks is verified by several different methods. We would have to throw out the book on nuclear physics, chemistry, and geology to deny the ages. 2. There are several types of evidence involving genetics beyond the ones I listed. a. Humans have a different number of chromosomes than the other great apes but the evidence is very compelling that one of our chromosomes is the result of fusion of two ape chromosomes. It is beyond difficult to explain the fused chromosome without admitting that humans and apes share a common ancestor. http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm b. Mitochondrial DNA studies have been done on thousands of different species. There is a section of DNA on the mitochondria that doesn't code for proteins and is free to randomly accumulate mutations. It is used as a sort of clock to show evolutionary relationships. When they sequence a few hundred base-pairs as is common, the odds of one of those sequences occurring randomly is one over a number with hundreds of zeros. The sequences show humans are 91% similar to chimps. We are less closely related to gorillas. They are not just randomly different. They are different in a way that suggests a common ancestor of humans and chimps. Chimps and humans share many of the differences between themselves and gorillas but have had enough time to accumulate many separate differences. That pattern is consistent with all other animals. It is powerful mathematical proof of evolution. c. Many genes and genetic markers are shared by closely related animals. Some genes are maintained by virtually all animals but the number of genes that are similar or the same increases as they are more closely related. That also applies to non-coding regions so the argument that a similar animal will have similar genes is just distortion of actual data. 3. The logic in the writings of Darwin was so persuasive that it is impossible to ignore without just ignoring the evidence. We can see it in our domesticated animals and it is silly to think that nature can't select desirable characteristics. We know the time frames involved and we see how animals, including people, are adapted with regional differences. If there are persuasive arguments about errors in Darwin's simple logic, I haven't heard them.