Why do people disagree with the treory of evolution?

Question

Can anyone show me some valid proof that the theory of evolution is false. I can't think of anything that would disprove it except people just not wanting to believe it because of what is written in some old books that they read too much. I would like unbiased opinions even though my question is worded to sound a little bit biased.

Answer 1

There are tons of christians who claim to have proof that evolution is invalid. Just do a Google search for the subject and you'll find them - and find that none of the papers are published in actual scientific journals.

Many religious people can't separate God from Evolution. They've had their heads so filled with rhetoric of "We came from monkeys" and "How do you explain the eye" that they can't get past it. And rather than take an evolution class or even do some research, they blindly follow that.

There are plenty of religious people who *can* separate the two fields. They simply believe that God created matter, which in turn created life, which in turn created man (an all creatures). That God was the spark, but that it evolved from there.

But the greatest irony is that people yell about it only being a theory, but then call gods a fact. It's all about that mirror and being able to see yourself and your beliefs as they really are, not how someone tells you they should be.

Answer 2

Read the chapter in Ann Coulter's book, "Godless" that deals with evolution. Since you're only reading one chapter, it won't take that long. Heck, you could probably go to the nearest Borders Books, sit in a comfy chair, and read it in 20 minutes.

One thing I recall is how many scientists say that evolution simply cannot account for what they see. She cites how a flagellum could not have randomly developed, which consists of about two hundred parts. Only when you have all two hundred parts working.... and working together, does the flagellum actually work. Therefore, there is no logical reason why evolution would continue putting parts together that served no purpose.

Also, when animals were supposedly evolving from one species to the next, the intermediary ones would have been less fit to survive. If you are a squirrel, and you start devloping wings to become a bat, those wings are going to be a complete nuisance until they actually work as wings. They would make the squirrel slower, and easier prey.

Answer 3

All of the laws of science are "theories". Science is science because it COULD be unproven. Do you think relativity, gravity, thermodynamics, chemistry, etc, etc aren't real because they are all only theories as well!

"A current "theory" in science is an explanation of nature that has never been refuted and is supported empirically."

I think people often disagree with the theory of evolution because they don't understand it fully, or they're unwilling to learn about it.

I'm not religious AT ALL, but I don't think there is a way to disprove religion. You can't PROVE there isn't a God because if there was he'd be all magical and break all of the rules. I don't have a problem with that. I just think evolution is way cooler, and WHY couldn't God (who would obviously have to be a genius) come up with evolution!?

The link explains some of the arguments against evolution and why they don't work. If someone just says that god didn't make it that way, you can't prove them wrong.. just like you can't disprove a flying spaghetti monster.. thats the whole point of faith, no proof, just faith!

Answer 4

I got a lot of insight into this question when I read Stephen Jay Gould's book "Rocks of Ages". In it he talks about how for a long time, religion had all the answers about where we came from. As science developed, we began to see that there are other, (and I think better) explanations for the question. But now we have a conflict. Religion doesn't want to give up its territory to the control of science. And I guess I can't blame them...they have been making their argument for thousands of years and to be proven wrong makes them look bad. And honestly, religion does play an important role in the story of mankind. Think of the impact of the 10 Commandments on human behavior over the vast spread of time. A lot of people are behaving in a better fashion because of those 10 rules. But, sometimes, science can be snotty. I hate to see scientists who smirk at the suggestion of an Prime Mover.
I agree with Gould. Everyone should just "play in their own yard" and stop trying to control someone else's domain...Religion, that means you may have to concede that evolution is real and the earth is billions of years old. And Science, just live and let live. The idea of a Prime Mover, a Supreme Being, or a Benevolent God give comfort to the masses and has done a lot to help bring some order to society. Don't deny them that.

Answer 5

Scientific Method depends on repeatable experiments. The Scientific Method cannot prove or disprove evolution, because evolution cannot be put into a repeatable experiment. You cannot use the Historical/Evidence Method, either, because no one was there to witness it. Therefore, evolution is definitely NOT proven. In all fairness, I cannot prove the existence of God by the Scientific Method either. But there is evidence for creation: from nothing, nothing can come. Did the universe simply spring into existence all by itself? Where did all the matter for the Big Bang come from? Where did all the energy for the Big Bang come from? I don't have enough faith to believe in evolution. Creation makes more sense.

Answer 6

People at large have decided that science has been making too many inroads into questions of life and origins, taking away what was originally the providence of church and religion. It's an usurpation of authority, or so many feel. Science appears to be offering a cold and purposeless view of reality, and many people already naturally ask, "Why am I even here?" So, people choose the one that seems to grant them a special place, purpose, and destination, a clear idea of how we came into being, and why. The theory of evolution, combined with other sciences such as astrophysics and cosmology, is a reality check few want today. So, all of it is just dismised as "mere guesswork, after all, they're only theories", and people retreat to the comfortable creation stories of our ancestral forefathers. The ability of people to deny and rationalize away scientific findings is virtually limitless, it's not going to be ever possible to "prove" any such things to people if they chose not to believe in them. Even if evidence of primate common descent was brought into court, of the same high degree of reliability as current DNA testing used today (yes, it's been shown through studies of endogenous retroviral elements in primate mDNA that all primates ARE blood relatives), and the courts found in favor of the compelling evidence, people will still choose simply not to believe. They don't want scientists to be telling them anything, they want science out of their lives, except when it provides them with conveniences.

Answer 7

Every piece of creation is made up of
energy bits called "quarks."
As of now, science hasn't been able
to prove that a quark can actually come from
a quark.
Latter day experiments have only
confirmed that each quark appears to
be it's own piece of energy, and retain
it's own characteristics at given frequency
levels.

An experiment run two years ago in
Upton NY went even farther. Scientists collapsed
mass to a black hole state. Then they shot the
hole with ionized rays from gold bars. This
caused quarks to collide and creation to form.
And this was the amazing part: what came out
of the hole, was what went in. And, back in it's
original state.

Where all this goes is anybody's guess. But it
does lend credibility to that old saw, "we don't
really come from our parents. We come through
our parents."

Answer 8

Can you show me any "proof" that a theory is true?

Evolution is not scientific. Proper scientific method involves the following: You define a hypothesis, say, Bob is stupid. The null hypothesis is that Bob is not stupid. You then design an experiment to disprove that Bob is not stupid. If the data sufficiently proves Bob is not stupid, you reject the null hypothesis that Bob is not stupid, but you NEVER prove your hypothesis.

Proper scientific endeavor doesn't ever prove anything. it eliminates all other possibilities until only the truth remains.

Answer 9

Ignorance

Answer 10

There is the idea of intelligent design, like an artist created life. There is a purpose behind it other than just survival.

Evolution is purely survival oriented and does not support any greater purpose than nature.

There seems to be a clash between God and Nature in these two views.