Sorry Religious people. Evolution is the truth. Why would you believe otherwise?

Question

See the following web site articles for the truth.
http://www.livescience.com/php/multimedia/imagedisplay/img_display.php?pic=060508_human_evolution_02.jpg&cap=The+timeline+of+human+evolution+is+long+and+controversial,+with+significant+gaps.+Experts+do+not+agree+on+many+of+the+start+and+end+points+of+various+species.+So+this+chart+involves+significant+estimates.+On+this+scale,+it+is+difficult+to+show+that+Neanderthals+have+been+gone+for+tens+of+thousands+of+years.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/space/20060724/sc_space/humanancestorsmayhavehitthegroundrunning

Wow - lot's of blind people out there. Guess what, humans are not that advanced and not that difficult to surmise we developed from other creatures. Obviously many humans (especially some who use the religious section of this site) have not developed to their full potential as of yet determined by their ability to have rational and logic thoughts and understanding of the world itself.

Answer 1

Because,like most organized religions, they are brainwashed and believe everything they are told!!(Or anything they read in a certain book ,which shall remain nameless, that has been edited over and over through the years to make it fit their agendas! Amen.

Answer 2

How you could show those two sources as 'truth' is beyond reason.

Those two sources have a lack of assurance, and it's vividly blatant.

For example:
"The timeline of human evolution is long and controversial, with significant gaps. Experts do not agree on many of the start and end points of various species. So this chart involves significant estimates. On this scale, it is difficult to show that Neanderthals have been gone for tens of thousands of years."

What is that telling me? They aren't sure of anything. They don't agree, they have poor and rare fossils, they can't rely on a dating method, they have trouble making a chart that shows what they want it to show. ( By the last sentence in the quote.)

And the second source:
Human Ancestors May Have Hit the Ground Running
"May"

"New findings raise the interesting possibility that the step from a tree-dwelling ape to a terrestrial biped might not have been as drastic as previously thought."
"interesting possibility" , "might not have been"

"Scientists find muscles gibbons use for climbing and swinging through trees might also help the apes run."
"might also"

"Humans are the upright apes, but much remains unknown as to how our ancestors first found their footing."
"but much remains unknown"

Articles like this are common. They carry the big headline and then pose speculative writing afterwards. I see them all the time. The articles are interesting, like the testing of the gibbon, but the theory is still a theory and has no accurate details that would concede the idea as a fact.

The fact is; they found fossils of creatures that seem to no longer exist. It appears that they lived a long, long time ago. They died.

All other conjecture may be called a hypothesis or can be elevated to theory, but it is fallacy to call them fact. It is by faith, trusting in the theory, that people often jump to that conclusion.

Evolution, by taking it as a fact, is a Faith. Those that abscribe to it as being fact are Faithing themselves into believing it. Just like any religion.

Answer 3

Wow, I like the first link: "The timeline of human evolution is long and controversial, with significant gaps. Experts do not agree on many of the start and end points of various species. So this chart involves significant estimates. On this scale, it is difficult to show that Neanderthals have been gone for tens of thousands of years."

And the second link starts out "New findings raise the interesting possibility that..."

Y'know, two links that state very clearly that they're not sure doesn't really add up to "truth" in anyone's book.

Answer 4

Why would I believe otherwise?

1. Inanimate matter doesn't form highly complex structures that have the purpose of supporting a living cell and then suddenly get hit with a bolt of lightning and "come alive" like out of the Frankenstein movie.

2. Once you understand how complex the DNA double helix is you realize that not only does it require an intelligent designer but it's ludicrous to think that such a structure could be radically changed by random forces in a beneficial way that would cause creatures like an amoeba, to become like a fish, like a frog, like a mouse, and then go on to become hummingbirds, and bumblebees, and elephants and aardvarks, and giraffes, and intelligent human beings.

It just doesn't work like that. Mutations are almost always either harmful or benign and even those rare mutations that are beneficial don't transform one species into a completely different species.

Macro-evolution makes about as much sense as saying that a lear jet evolved from the plane used by the Wright brothers or that the latest 3-D video games evolved from the Atari games of the 80's.

In both cases it's obvious that it required intelligent design for these different inanimate examples to come about. How much more should it be obvious that complex life forms didn't come about from some mystical force of nature when we can't even explain the origin of the "life force" to begin with much less duplicate the complex microscopic, self correcting, self duplicating systems that make up one cell in a living being?

Answer 5

Right evolution ...... so one day this group of apes gets together and decides that it would be so much more beneficial to them, survival of the fittest and all, if they had more developed brains and if their bodies were virtually hairless, so they concentrate really really hard as do their children and their childrens children and so forth. One day this part ape part human gives birth to a perfectly hairless pink little human baby- imagine the rejoicing that happened that day! Anyway, meanwhile, there is a sect of apes - descendents of some from that original group, who just somehow knew that nothing good would come of that evolutionary step, and how right they were, I mean look at all these weak minded, uneducated Christians, war over money and religion, destruction of the planet, boy were they right- so they just left well enough alone and continued on their happy lives, except a few of them thought life would be a LOT more fun if they had purple butts so those guys evolved into baboons!!
(This took place over several million years- all the while thousand and thousands of poor little lungfish are losing their lives left and right in an effort to evolve the lungs they somehow knew they would need!

I do have a question or two however, if this process of evolution took place over millions of years in small increments, then we are not looking for one missing link but millions of missing links - there is not one hole in the fossil record but millions of holes- where is the fossil record of plant evolution ??
And why, why why would a single celled organism that could split in two on its own and each live independently of each other, evolve into an organism that takes two coming together to create one new life that cannot live on its own??

You can continue saying that we are uneducated and simple minded but the fact is I have looked at the facts, with an open mind, even before I became a Christian. It takes a lot of faith to believe in evolution where the facts are just not scientific and they don't hold water. Most athiests and evolutionists I know of say they have read the Bible, what I want to know is have you read it starting out trying to disprove it or did you read it with an open mind, trying to understand and study from the point of view that it was written in instead of a modern understanding??

Hey here is a really fun article you can ponder :
Meet Gaspy - the Lungfish
http://www.reflecthisglory.org/study/did...

Answer 6

Here's something to think about. If you believe we evolved from apes or monkey or whatever, why is there no evidence of it today? Humans have something called a recessive gene. That means every so often, from generation to generation that gene will pop up. So if your great great grandmother had blue eyes and everyone else in your family has brown eyes, somewhere down the line someone in your family will have that recessive gene "pop up", and be born with blue eyes. I believe this is true even if the incident starts to occur further and further apart. So why is it we never hear of any humans having "monkey babies"? except for maybe in the National Enquirer, and if you believe those stories then you're already lost. Just my two cents.

Answer 7

People posing as "scientists" and secular humanists call the missing information or inability to explain certain pieces reality in Darwin's theory "GAPS". It takes huge faith in the unknown to fill these gaps. That is why evolution is a state sponsored religion. Evolution has no explaination for the following:

#1 The theory of evolution depends largely on the fossil record. If it was a plausible theory that explains the origins of our present day earth, then Darwin states that there must be vast number of transitional species in the fossil record. However, there are none. After 175 years since Darwin came up with his “theory” no transitional fossil have been found. There is no science of evolution in the fossil record. It is a gap in the theory of evolution that can only be overcome with “faith”.
#2 Evolution is contradicted by the Cambrian period, where science tells us that vast quantities of plants and animals appeared suddenly without any evolutionary history. Darwin and his church cannot come up with any explanation for the Cambrian period. It takes faith and devotion in the church of Darwin to get around the what science tells us about the Cambrian period
#3 Darwin’s theory said that one cell became two and so on and so on. Darwin had no idea how complex an actual cell was at the time he came up with his theory. The "creation" of complex machines that exist inside one cell cannot and will never be explained by men of “science”.
#4 The eyeball. Although he tried and Darwin was never able to explain the creation of an eyeball. I don’t need some nose picking nerd to tell me that a bunch of amino acids magically came together to form proteins and then they magically came together to form DNA and then magically over billions and billions of years where able to come up with this complex camera that blows away any Nikon out there. It takes huge faith in the hocus pocus of evolution to get around the science of an eyeball

Again you cannot observe evolution in nature. There is no data, fossil record, or scientific explanation for the actual way we came to be. All I ever see from the scientific community is a bunch of doublespeak.

Here are some links to real scientists
http://www.icr.org/article/2822/...


http://www.icr.org/article/110/...

Answer 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_of_Species
I really do not think so.http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2002-04/wuis-rtg041602.php
How about this, I don't think so.http://www.icr.org/index.php?module=home&action=resources&page=resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution&mode=print
Try some more study on the subject , especially read the last resource . This is not from a religionst point of view but scientific. Please reconsider your stand. To much conflict of interest in the scientific community for me. I will stick with Christianity. Makes more sense everytime I read a conclusive statement from the sciences.

Answer 9

(this is gonna be fun) Okay. . . let me just tell you that i am a Christian, a believer in Christ and God made the heavens and he earth!! why do people believe all this scientific stuff anywayz! i hate it when scientist try to tell me that i came form under a rock or from a chimp!!! I have faith in my Lord! i hope you are a Christian cause then you will see that you are wrong! give it a chance! God loves you even if you don't love him! God has a plan for you!!! evolution is wrong!!! and i can't figure it out, why people think that it it true!!

Answer 10

Evolution is a THEORY. In the scientific community, creationism is also a THEORY.

Any scientist worth his BS degree (Bachelor of Science--not the other) will tell you that current research shows strong evidence for creationism. However, neither, as yet, can be proved empirically.

Answer 11

Most religious people accept evolution. It's just the inerrantist nutters who go around making asinine claims about world wide floods with a single boat carrying two members of each kind on it.