Atheists: Why do you believe in Evolution?

Question

Please don't answer simply; "Because it's the truth!"

Hey Roman soldier I want to email you.

Please if you wish to squarely debate email me.

Answer 1

To begin with, being an atheist does not automatically mean one believes in evolution, the Big Bang theory, abiogenesis, etc. An atheist is simply one who lacks a belief in the supernatural. Personally, I believe in evolution because it seems to be the most reliable explanation based on the evidence thus far. The thing with science is that is flexible enough to admit it's wrong should sufficient data become available. Unlike most religions, which are dogmatic and unchanging, science allows for such. With evolution, you can see proof, such as naturla selection, speciation, mutation, etc.

Biological evolution is a change in the genetic characteristics of a population over time. That this happens is a fact. Biological evolution also refers to the common descent of living organisms from shared ancestors. The evidence for historical evolution -- genetic, fossil, anatomical, etc. -- is so overwhelming that it is also considered a fact. The theory of evolution describes the mechanisms that cause evolution. So evolution is both a fact and a theory.

First, we should clarify what "evolution" means. Like so many other words, it has more than one meaning. Its strict biological definition is "a change in allele frequencies over time." By that definition, evolution is an indisputable fact. Most people seem to associate the word "evolution" mainly with common descent, the theory that all life arose from one common ancestor. Many people believe that there is enough evidence to call this a fact, too. However, common descent is still not the theory of evolution, but just a fraction of it (and a part of several quite different theories as well). The theory of evolution not only says that life evolved, it also includes mechanisms, like mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift, which go a long way towards explaining how life evolved.

Calling the theory of evolution "only a theory" is, strictly speaking, true, but the idea it tries to convey is completely wrong. The argument rests on a confusion between what "theory" means in informal usage and in a scientific context. A theory, in the scientific sense, is "a coherent group of general propositions used as principles of explanation for a class of phenomena" [Random House American College Dictionary]. The term does not imply tentativeness or lack of certainty. Generally speaking, scientific theories differ from scientific laws only in that laws can be expressed more tersely. Being a theory implies self-consistency, agreement with observations, and usefulness. (Creationism fails to be a theory mainly because of the last point; it makes few or no specific claims about what we would expect to find, so it can't be used for anything. When it does make falsifiable predictions, they prove to be false.)

Lack of proof isn't a weakness, either. On the contrary, claiming infallibility for one's conclusions is a sign of hubris. Nothing in the real world has ever been rigorously proved, or ever will be. Proof, in the mathematical sense, is possible only if you have the luxury of defining the universe you're operating in. In the real world, we must deal with levels of certainty based on observed evidence. The more and better evidence we have for something, the more certainty we assign to it; when there is enough evidence, we label the something a fact, even though it still isn't 100% certain.

What evolution has is what any good scientific claim has--evidence, and lots of it. Evolution is supported by a wide range of observations throughout the fields of genetics, anatomy, ecology, animal behavior, paleontology, and others. If you wish to challenge the theory of evolution, you must address that evidence. You must show that the evidence is either wrong or irrelevant or that it fits another theory better. Of course, to do this, you must know both the theory and the evidence.

These are not the only misconceptions about evolution by any means. Other common misunderstandings include how geological dating techniques work, implications to morality and religion, the meaning of "uniformitarianism," and many more. To address all these objections here would be impossible.

But consider: About a hundred years ago, scientists, who were then mostly creationists, looked at the world to figure out how God did things. These creationists came to the conclusions of an old earth and species originating by evolution. Since then, thousands of scientists have been studying evolution with increasingly more sophisticated tools. Many of these scientists have excellent understandings of the laws of thermodynamics, how fossil finds are interpreted, etc., and finding a better alternative to evolution would win them fame and fortune. Sometimes their work has changed our understanding of significant details of how evolution operates, but the theory of evolution still has essentially unanimous agreement from the people who work on it.

Answer 2

Charlton Heston called --- He wants his parallel world back--- Is there a movie called Planet Of the Single celled Life form--- OOHH - They are still making that on mars---- Just because Kepler found multiply Goldie Lock Zones-- Does not mean the universe is more understood Now than 2800 years ago--- The lord hung the world on nothing--- ( ya know -- like he has no beginning )--- the big bang may be sillier though--- A least science makes sense --That all elements necessary for life are contained in any single star ---- This Is the view of Nasa-- Brilliant educated astrophysics experts--- all credits to research on knowledge ...Most people do not realize what they accomplish--Its like sket shooting a target traveling at the speed of light Now that's science--- Why is this always the same question by CHRISTICS--------- WE BLIEVE NASA +++NOT THEORY --- We Believe accomplishment -- Not ideas.. How is a theory of a deity that has no BEGINNIG Not an idea or a theory---- We believe the known ONLY --- YHWH is supernatural and pagans see that as unknown---- We realize you have positively identified the super natural--- PLEASE REMAIN THERE

Answer 3

Atheism is a belief, and evolution is a scientific theory. They are not mutally inclusive.

Anyway people believe in evolution because there is evidence for it and it provides the best explanation we have that explains the diversity of life on Earth. Got a better theory? Show people the evidence.

Anyway evidence for evolution includes:
-The Fossil Record
-Vestigial organs
-We have seen evolution happen in our lifetimes. Viruses and bacteria evolve at an alarming rate, with some bacteria becoming resistant to our anti-biotics.
-Genetic similiarities between similar species suggest a common ancestor

Answer 4

If you believe in God, you believe in evolution. Read the creation story from Moses' awareness level at the time. The six days were the six stages of evolution required to start and support life on an uninhabitable planet.

Why do Religious Empires and scientists fight so much? The Bible is full of scientific inclinations.

Answer 5

First of all, atheists are not the sole group to hold evolution as truth. There are many people of varying faiths who believe in a "god driven" version of evolution.

And frankly, the answer IS: because its the truth. Thousands upon thousands of pieces of empirical evidence not only lend credibility, but prove, evolution as the way that humans (and every other living thing for that matter) came to be as they are today.

Answer 6

Because it is a THEORY that makes SENSE. As more EVIDENCE is gathered the theory is revised and refined. Peer reviews, measuring results against the real world are all part of the scientific method used in expanding this theory. Evolution is not static it becomes clearer and clearer with every new fossil that is discovered.

Answer 7

I believe that Darwin's theory of evolution explains many things. There are some gaps in evidence but those are likely to be filled in time. The fascinating thing about science is that the knowledge expands and expands, making possible lap-top computers and iPods.
The sad thing about most religions is that their knowledge is, at best, static and most often their knowledge base is shrinking.
It is sad that we cannot celebrate the religion of our forefathers by following the advice of Jesus in our conduct with others. Christians and Jews and Muslims are engaged in power and control issues. It's sad.

Answer 8

I'm not an atheist: i just feel like science has so much money to dig and make assessments of archaeology that it is good to have supporting evidence in anything in the world today~we bite on allot of bare hooks out there and faith is a sample of everything, because there are no absolutes to make safety nets with out flaws

Answer 9

Given the preponderance of physical evidence, it seems the most logical answer. It's not like we blinked here in an instant... that would be too hokus-pokus for me.
Even if there was some god that created us in his image, I think the idea of the big bang through to evoluton could still fit in that realm of God's intent. Don't you?

Answer 10

There is a lot of evidence for evolution.There have been a thousand books, magazines and newspaper articles written which support evolution.