why do people believe Evolution?

Question

There is absolutely no Imperical evidence for it and yet the still push it in school

Answer 1

cause in our society we really need to exlude God in whatever the Govt. is invovlved with.....that's why they push it in school.

Why do people beleive in it because they do not know the statistics of carbon dating....it's only that accurate up to 6000 years.....

I also do not understand how people can believe that we at one point started as a single celled orginizim and then formed into what we are today....first off how can the two sexs become......and work so perfectly?!?!? also being a chemist i don't understand how the chemical side of this would work....becuase if animals evolved that means the earth did too and plants...which i also don't understand how they would work...but at least they are A-sexual.

Answer 2

Do you mean "empirical" evidence? Note: You might want to buy a dictionary when and if you start buying and reading books.

There are mountains of empirical evidence, and it has been bourne out across disciplines over the last 100+ years. When Charles Darwin first published, he could not have forseen the future of the biological sciences, and genetics in particular, and these new disciplines have not only not contradicted the general thesis, they have supported it and added more information about how evolution takes place.

People believe it for pretty much the same reason they believe the Earth is not flat: contrary to the creation myth in Genesis (see 'firmament" etc) and popularly held religous dogma prior to the 15th century, the Earth was not flat. The rest of the creation mythos of those ancient documents haven't done any better in the wake of advances in scientific knowledge.

Have a nice day.

Answer 3

Where did you not learn how to spell? Empirical. Evolution does not require empirical evidence, it has enough factual evidence to show that it is a valid theory. But I guess that in addition to not knowing how to spell the word, you have no understanding of what the word means. Without consulting a dictionary I would say that empirical means coming up with a conclusion due to seeing results that point toward that conclusion. Evolution is based on facts, not on empirical evidence.

Answer 4

Evolution
Gravity is a fact, not a theory. Isaac Newton had a theory about gravity. It was pretty correct but not complete and has been improved by Albert Einstein. That's science working.

Combustion is a fact, not a theory. Becher and Stahl had a theory about combustion. Lavoisier had a better one. It was fairly correct but not complete and has been improved. That's science working.

Evolution is a fact, not a theory. Jean-Baptiste Lamarck had a theory about evolution. Charles Darwin had a better one. It was fairly correct but not complete and has been improved. That's science working.

The evidence for evolution covers hundreds of library shelves in publications like Journal of Biology, Journal of Biological Chemistry, Science, Nature, Comptes Rendues, Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the USA and hundreds of other journals in English, French, Russian, German, Japanese, Chinese, Italian and Spanish just to name some. These include every geological, biological and medical topic known to humans and are chock-a-block full of facts that support evolution directly or are consistent with it.

The evidence for evolution is also all around us and includes everyday “non-scientific” observations

1. The anatomical arrangements of land mammals are analogous to each other. For instance, horses breathe through their mouths or two nostrils just as humans do, rather than through holes in their sides. Fish, reptiles, birds and mammals have two eyes and one mouth. Lizards, humans and eagles have four limbs, one heart, one set of lungs, one set of digestive organs, one brain, two ears and so on and so forth. These numbers do not vary across very wide differences in environment and immediate heredity.

2. Nearly all land animals (excepting insects, spiders etc) have red blood.

3. Pig insulin has been used to treat human diabetes.

The evidence for creation consists of an old English translation of a 2500 year old book written by people who had never been outside their own country and now thoroughly misinterpreted by a few, mainly American based pastors whose education is mostly in a peculiar form of theology.

The physical evidence cited by creationists such as the bombardier beetle, the Paluxy footprints and a few dozen other phenomena has been thoroughly debunked many times. In some cases the "evidence" has been concocted and at worst is no more than a direct lie. Most of the material they cite as evidence for intelligent design is nothing of the kind and in some cases actually shows that the design is faulty. The human eye is a glaring example of faulty "design" .

Some creationists have claimed that there is conspiracy against them and that scientists are hiding the truth. Sheer paranoia and no different in kind from the nonsense promoted by alien abduction ratbags. There are millions of scientists of one kind or another today. If the truth were being hidden by scientists there must be thousands of them in on it. Some must have come out with real testable evidence that the truth is being hidden by now. The only secure conspiracy is a conspiracy of one.

The poor mugs who actually believe the creationists have been warned to ignore counter arguments as the work of Satan. Of course they have. If they saw they were being sold a bill of shoddy goods their financial contributions might peter out.

Answer 5

-There is absolutely no Imperical evidence for it and yet the still push it in school -

You need to do some research. There is a very clear line of relationships between us and the great apes. Australapithicus, neanderthals, homo erectus.....if thats not evolution i then i don't know what is....

Answer 6

People accept evolution because there IS evidence for it. Overwhelming evidence from the fossil record, the human and animal genomes, retroviruses, geologic records, studies on bacteria, and so on. The evidence is there and it is convincing, no matter how much you want to bury your head in the sand and insist it isn't there.

Answer 7

We need something to believe in.
We know where lightning comes from; it aint some god.
So, we're doing our best with our Gnosis.
Does it cover all fo the great mysteries?
No.
But if Copernicus and Galileo were right, then why not Darwin?
Better than the totally unpaulsible smut in the Good Book.
No, we understand metaphor, and that's up to the theologians to explain or deny.

Answer 8

Yeah, that whole evolution thing is a load of crap. Like how single celled organisms crawled out of the primordial ooze and slowly evolved into multi-cellular organisms, and then into larger more complex organisms. I comletely believe some random book that was written by a bunch of hippies.

Answer 9

You might want to do some research before you post stuff like this. There is proof of evolution, lots of it. There is no proof of God or intelligent design, yet people still believe that crap. Evolution is a fact.

Answer 10

There's actually quite a bit of empirical evidence for it. Talkorigins.org lists 30 different testable predictions that have been supported by physical evidence.

Here's a sample.

IDEA: Similar animals share common descent
PREDICTION: We should see groups defined by certain features that fit wholly into broader groups defined by other features. In other words, if we presumed that backbones evolved before feathers, then all or most feathered animals should have backbones, but not all backboned animals would have feathers.
EVIDENCE: Birds, the only animals with feathers, all fit into the group defined by having backbones. (Interestingly, the opposite would have been evidence as well. In other words, if all backboned animals had feathers, but not all feathered animals had backbones, we would still have a group within a group. This would not suggest that evolution was bunk, but that feathers evolved before backbones. The only evidence that would fail to support evolution is if all the features were distributed randomly: animals with backbones but not feathers, animals with feathers without backbones, animals with both, AND animals with neither.)

IDEA: All current living things are descended from common ancestors.
PREDICTION: "Transitional" species, with some but not all of the features of ancestral groups plus later groups, must have existed.
EVIDENCE: Many examples of transitional species can be found. For instance, mammal jaws attach to the skull one way, but reptile jaws attach a different way. There are fossilized animals called therapsids, whose jaws appear to attach a little bit the reptilian way, and a little bit the mammalian way.

IDEA: Changes causing groups to diverge from parental groups occurred at distinctly different points of time.
PREDICTION: The fossil record should show ancestral groups (as suggested by traits within traits -- see first question) appearing in older rock than descendent groups.
EVIDENCE: The geological evidence of rock ages correlates closely with the emergence of sub-groups. For example, vertebrate animals are a broader group than mammals, and (animals with backbones) appear in earlier rock than (animals with backbones and mammalian skeletons).

IDEA: Animals with similar lineages should have similar DNA.
PREDICTION: Some genes are present in all life forms, but they can have slight variations. It is predicted that the variations should correlate with morphologically predicted lineages.
EVIDENCE: A protein called cytochrome C is present in all living things and has numerous different forms that all function equally well. Humans and chimpanzees possess the exact same cytochrome C sequence. (Protein sequences are determined by DNA.) The sequence that they share differs from other mammals by about 10 pieces, but it differs from the sequence in yeast by about 51 pieces.

The website below goes into much, much mroe detail. Suffice to say, although we cannot test the whole of evolution, we CAN make predictions based on aspects of the theory and search for evidence to support or refute those predictions.

Answer 11

There is a ton of emperical evidence for evolution. There is no emperical evidence for creationism or intelligent design.
As for why people believe in it, it does not tell you to have faith and ask no questions. It invites questions