In light of the following facts, how can anyone still not accept evolution?

Question

Human beings have documented an evolutionary step taken by the Finches that Darwin used to study at the Galapagos Islands. This is not exagerrated in any way. Don't believe me? Check it out for yourself: http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2006/07/13/1683257-ap.html

I don't think people are getting my point. I never said every Christian is crazy or that God doesn't exist. I asked how anyone can not believe in evolution. Even if you say God caused evolution then that means you believe in evolution and that's fine with me.

Also, if you believe in adaptation then you believe in evolution. They have identical definitions in biological terms.

Answer 1

The catholic church accepts evolution. But feel that there was an ultimate being who set it up to make humans and the world as we see it today.

Answer 2

So because "an" (one) evolutionary step by finches has been documented, it means that everyone must instantly accept the entire evolution theory.Answer me this seriously. Evolution involves the natural adaptation of living organisms 2 an environment. How come it is that people have been living in extreme sub-zero temperatures in the N. Pole, Alaska,even in Canada & Europe since man existed, & none of them have grown natural protection to these temperatures? Why is it that the children has not been borned covered with hair or fur? The animals are born that way. Why not humans? Also why is it that alligators & sharks & turtles existed million of years before human, yet in the shorter space of time man has evolved from a crude ape-like creature 2 what we are today? All sharks & turtles & alligators did was get smaller & grow less teeth (according 2 scientists).And why in the millions of years amphibians existed they havent made up their minds about if they are going 2 live on land or water. According 2 evolution all other life made up their minds millions of years ago. These are the questions 2 answer not about some finch that grew a smaller beak.

Answer 3

So a finch now has a smaller beak. Isn't that called "adaptation," rather than evolution? It is still a finch, it did not evolve into something else. It is still just a bird, isn't it?

And a monkey is still a monkey. And a man is still a man. Except for those of us who would rather be 'monkeys.' I don't really know how to address that. I mean, I'm just a college dropout, not a great scientist or anything.

None-the-less, I rather belong to the Family of Man, but live and let live, I suppose...

H

Adaptation and evolution are not the same thing. If you live in Alaska for six months you will adapt to the climate and environment. You will not evolve into a different species, say a Polar Bear, for example.

H

Answer 4

Are you arrogant enough to believe that any human, with a finite logical capacity, could fathom the beginnings or even present reality of or universe?
At least you're not turning to superstition for answers, but human understanding is a little shallow to explain the mysteries of our universe.
How could matter come from nothing? That is an inanswerable question, it defies a property we KNOW to be true, but had to happen.
How can there be an end to our universe? How can there not be an end? Human logic is insufficient to solve such conundrums, or perhaps human logic is an intelligence of the wrong sort.
In any case, the world does change, and a couple of birds adapting or defecting means little.

PostScript
You should be able to infer that I'm an atheist just like you, not a Bible-pusher. Or maybe I'm agnostic... I'm not arrogant enough to claim I KNOW anything because you can't unless you know EVERYTHING. Ideas modify other ideas, and all are related.

Answer 5

This is a common misconception in the definition of the word. The Finch has not "evolved" it has "adapted." Yes, adaptation has been proven, evolution has not.

Evolution: Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species.

Adaptation: Alteration or adjustment in structure or habits, often hereditary, by which a species or individual improves its condition in relationship to its environment.

This Finch has not changed it's genetic make up and has not resulted in a new species, it is still a finch. The finch has altered its structure and has a small beak now, but it is still a finch. It has adapted, not evolved.

What you are suggesting is the same as the fact that humans used to have an average height around 4-5 feet, now we are 5-6 feet. By your definition, we have evolved, but alas, no we have only adapted. We are still human and the same species as we have been for thousands of years.

Answer 6

This change in the size of the beak is an adaptation, not evolution.

The unanswered question in evoution is not adaptation, which is easy to understand and do, but, how to create a new function (i.e., sonar for humans) from scratch. Existing genetic code can be used ad infinitum, and never demonstrate the unanswered hypothesis in evolution or creating new, genetic code.

The fossil record is a fact, how it happened is the unknown.

Google evolution, fact or theory, and scientists all agree the hypothesis of creating genetic code has not been proven.

As an aside, consider this:

Science gave intellectuals a basis to believe in natural, biological creation, survival of the fittest. This is an unproven and unrealistic science. This science will never be able to show how genetic code is created. It is purely a hypothesis.

This hypothesis has led to godless political philosophies, that have been and are the most oppressive that have ever existed. The nazi's had scientific justification for ethnic cleansing (jews), and many nations use this today. The godless marxists eliminate capitalists and believers and anyone else who gets in their way to create a dreary society of big brother. Open your eyes, would you like to live in Cuba or North Korea, or during Stalin's programs and Mao's revolution. 10's of millions of people sufferred and die. What happen is due to science.

Yes, fanatical believers do exist, but the message of God is to love God with all your heart, and love others as you love yourself. Some people do go off message, but the impact is small compared to what science has accomplished.

Since God is a creator, he created each of us for a reason, thus, goverment should protect individual rights and allow each of us to find our destiny.

I deeply fear Godless societies. Government should respect the free expression of religion of people and communities. Belief in a creator is vital to the health of a society.

When you have a child, just look in their eyes and tell them they are a random quirk of nature and in the grand scheme of nature, their life is meaningless. I dare you.

Answer 7

Sorry, but that is not an evolutionary step. It was natural selection allowing a bird to thrive better at another's expense. Was there a new bird created that was not a finch? Could those species of finches still breed?

All creationists believe in natural selection, it is observable science as you have pointed out. However, evolution is historical science and has NEVER been observed.

Here is a good link for the basics of how creationists view "Darwin's finches" http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v14/i3/finches.asp

Answer 8

I see that evolutionists have taken to expanding their definition of evolution outside of its original definition of animals/plants changing from one species to another. They are not including adaptations within the species. How very subtle and clever.

This piece of research is very interesting as it shows the ability of a species to adapt quickly to changes in its environment. It does not, however, show change from one species to another.

I can understand why evolutionists would extrapolate this research to see evolution as a reasonable explanation. But it is not conclusive proof.

For instance, what happens if the competitor disappears for some reason? Will the large beaked finch reappear? If it does, does this suggest that the gene for large beaks is just suppressed when necessary?

Will the smaller beaked finch continue if the larger beaked finch returns?

Again, I admire your enthusiastic response to this piece of research but don't read into this research more than it actually says. To go from this piece of research to the conclusion of evolution, while reasonable, still requires quite a bit of faith on your part. No different than the faith that I have in creationism.

Thanks for the 2 points.

Answer 9

"Bah, humbug. Some dumb scientist went and boiled the poor little finches' beaks to make 'em smaller."
Hmmm....those cute li'l finches still look pretty much like finches to me. Cuter, even, since they had their beaks bobbed. (Hmm, maybe I ought to get a nose job...)
Maybe I didn't understand, quite, just exactly what changes have to take place before we can safely say that this is a new species...
Seriously, though, as a Christian, I don't see why a new scientific discovery ought to shake my faith, or anyone else's. So, we are discovering more and more about how God did it. Isn't that a good thing? Of course, science has a heck of a long way to go...
Wake me when science figures out how to do it without God.....

Answer 10

There are too many things that evolution does not explain...the complexity of our brains, for example, could not have occurred by chance through random mutations, even over billions of years. And how does evolution explain the innate need that people feel to believe in some sort of deity? Even atheists feel the need to find reasons to contradict the existence of a God.

Answer 11

Some people have on religious blinders. I, as a Christian, accept evolution and creation. I see evolution as God's hand guiding the development of the world.

Why others don't see this, well I can't say because I can't understand someone else's thought processes