Understanding evolution?

Question

Would you agree that when someone actually understands evolution, they have no choice but to 'believe' it? A lot of religious people tend to have no clue what they're talking about when it comes to evolution.

I did put 'believe' in misplaced apostrophes, in case you didn't notice that. I say believe, because people who do not understand choose to disbelieve.

"and don't just tell me it came over millions of years... life is miraculous,"

Exactly my point. Not even attempting to understand the theory. There's absolutely no justification for anyone to say that life has to have been created instantly. No evidence, nothing. On the other hand, we have a lot of evidence to conclude that "over millions of years" the most primitive one-celled organism gradually evolved into all of the life we see today, through mutation, variation, natural and artificial selection.

There are currently many hypotheses that make a solid explanation of the evolution of our senses. There's a video about the eye here: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/01/1/l_011_01.html

Answer 1

Agreed. I fail to see why people are so opposed to believing in something that is neither poorly proved nor offensive. It boggles the mind.

Answer 2

>Those who understand evolution: how many creationists have you encountered that understand evolution? Not very many. It's not like I keep track of the exact numbers, but it seems that the vast majority of creationists have at least some misunderstanding about how evolution works. >If you wish, you can provide the same for evolutionists. Most evolutionists I've met seem to have a fairly good understanding of evolutioin. I can't be entirely sure, though...it's highly likely that the evolutionists who argue the point a lot tend to have a better understanding than evolutionists who don't particularly care and don't argue about it very much.

Answer 3

It depends on what you mean by 'believe.' It also depends on what you consider to be evidence. For example, if someone explains how an equation produces a certain graph, I 'believe' it because a clear connection exists which can be independently verified. On the other hand, if a friend tells some story about why they were late, I might or might not believe it depending on the plausibility of the story and their history of honesty (or lack thereof); there might or might not be any independent information to check. Then again, I might or might not believe the promises made by a politician - not knowing whether they will be kept - based on nothing more than a limited impression of how trustworthy the person is.

In other words, scientific 'belief' based on evidence (observation) and evaluation (reason) is a different concept than religious belief.

Answer 4

Even though the model fits so tightly, Evolution is not, and cannot be absolute truth. When a person- and I know you are going to hate this - encounters God Almighty, they do encounter Absolute Truth. Truth is a person. So even when I see evidence that seems to contradict Truth, I assume that the data is either incomplete or wrongly interpreted. You have no idea how powerful and real the indwelling Christ is to a believer. It is not ignorance, but a stronger reality. Science is like dissecting a pear, measuring skin thickness, density, counting seeds, weight, mass... but dying of hunger. Then along comes a plumb young lad, and of all things, actually puts that pear in his mouth and EATS it, while the scrawny scientist looks on in disgust. Who can tell you more about that pear? Fat Boy knows almost nothing about pear facts, but unless the scientist also eats that pear he can tell you
nothing about pear life.

I would say that anyone who truly meets Christ would have no choice but to believe Him. Now don't get upset. Your question is in R&S so you have to expect this kind of answer.

Answer 5

I do understand evolution.
I have and continue to explore the data that has been found and theorized upon over and over.
The process is not simple nor straight forward. If you were knowledged about the process of evolution the simple description of "believe" cannot apply.


Get A Grip.

Answer 6

You're right, they have absolutely no clue what it's about. They're so stuck in the mind-set that it is against "God" and is evil that they can't wrap their brains around the notion that it is NEITHER against "God" or evil. It's just science. They are only willing to listen to what other people who also think it's evil have to say about it. You will never get through to those types of people, no matter how much evidence or how much proof you show. They've put a block on their brain when it comes to the subject.

Answer 7

There is sufficient evidence to connect all but a few dots. You can observe the process. You can verify some of the mechanisms (which is not true for gravity). Understanding goes beyond belief.

Answer 8

I haven't yet see a creationist who understood evolution at all.

The vast majority clearly hadn't made any attempt to. For example, notice that a couple of people right here among your respondents repeated the "it's only a theory" line - something that no-one in should be saying anymore in 2007. That objection is so obviously idiotic that even the most devout creationist should be ashamed to use it - yet we see it almost every time someone mentions evolution.

Answer 9

Erm, no, though they are few, there are actually inteligent people who understand the underlying principles of evolution and reject it... Intelligent desenting opinions do exist, they just happen to be formed based upon dogma, and happen to be ignored by the rest of the creationists because they're too open minded.

Answer 10

Absolutely right. Evolution seems to be one of those things that if you know and understand it, it's obviously correct. It's one of those beautiful, elegant, simple truths.

Sadly, that knowledge and understanding are not hard to avoid if you're hostile to the idea in the first place.

CD

Answer 11

I think that ignorance is the biggest hindrance to acceptance of evolution. I hear so many Xians tell me how impossible that it is but can't tell me why it is impossible. They say there are no transitional fossils when we have numerous, they say that it is unproven when the evidence is overwhelming.