how can someone disagree with evolution??

Question

how can someone disagree with science?

Answer 1

It is not science.
Look at every evolution website, and every so-called scientific proof. If you do not see the same words I always see, words like suggests, or we now believe, or any of the other many speculative words used, you must in fact admit that you evolutionists are more credulous than the worst fundie.

Here are some copies excerpts:
1.Lines of evidence: The science of evolution
The theory of evolution is broadly accepted by scientists — and for good reason! Learn about the diverse and numerous lines of evidence that support the theory of evolution.

Notice the use of words like theory, broadly accepted?
These words are apparently easily glossed over by the more than credulous believers in evolution.

Answer 2

I can easily take evolution with a grain of salt, mostly because, to me, I don't take the concepts of science in the same context as religious dogma. What I mean is this, Evolution is a theory, it's a reasonable idea to explain the evidence, but it has no backing by experimentation.

This means, it can be subject to change, revision, or even scrapping it totally if a better theory comes along. While many scientists accept it as a good explanation, it really is nothing more than a good explanation. So, I can't really be more than an agnostic on this, and say, Sounds good.

Now, before the "Rational Skeptic Fundamentalists" freak over this answer. I'm not saying evolution is wrong, in fact, it's the best explanation so far, and has many points and merits, but science is about constant questioning, and, sometimes, even shifting and changing. It's not about eternal, unchanging truths, because truth to science is a truth that is changed or thrown away if it no longer fits the evidence, or a better truth comes long.

Luminiferous Ether, Spontaneous Generation of Life, Bleeding, Piltdown Man, these are all scientific truths that were discarded. At one time, these were truths, and now, they are laughed at. In the future, what science teaches today could be considered laughable. Don't make the mistake, and treat what is scientific truth today as something on the same level as dogma, it's not.

Hail Eris! All Hail Discordia!

Answer 3

Well, i'm an Evolutionist and i have to tell you. Science disagrees with itself from time to time. It is not absolute truth, it changes and alters as time goes by and as our view of the world improves.
As concerning evolution:
Although there are (still) some holes in it, there is no valid scientific reason to disagree with it today, tomorow, who knows what scientists will find out and evolution could be considered a concept as flawed as that the earth is flat. Still that is not what we are witnessing. Everyday new scientific discoveries on genetics, molecuar biology, biogeography etc shows us that the evolution theory is pretty acurate and it must be the process that originated diversity.

Still people don't always believe or dissbelief stuff based only on rational observation and the facts presented to them (just see how many atheist there are just here on R&S). The way they were raised and emotional factors always count.

Answer 4

Science has its philosophical approach and as a philosophy it has its limits. At its core, Science is a way for people to agree with each other as opposed to Personal Truths.

So lets assume evolution is true and human beings evolved the ability to Reason. This is helpful for it to survive, correct? But no more would a tiger would say his sharp claws and teeth would. Or a hawk's keen eyesight. Each animal would claim that the way the evolved and survived is the best way to approach the world. Yet we know each is justified in their own way. Why then, would Reason have a monopoly on truth? Just because the majority people agree? We see Science being modified over the centuries.

By no means do I wish to suggest Science is false because its predictive power is ...well, powerful. Yet as a scientist myself, I do not boast that Reason alone can be used to see the world. All I can say is "I know nothing, this is what Reason has lead me to believe but I should remain humble as to not degrade other truths"

As a matter of approach, through science however, evolution is the best explanation of the external world. This intelligent design crap is ridiculous. NOt that it cant be true, but not in the eye of Science's approach.

Answer 5

A lot of people don't understand that you cant answer scientific questions with religious answer! Vice-versa, you can't answer questions of religion with scientific answers! Science can't answer the question "Does God exist?" Religion can't answer the question "Why is grass green?" Lately I've been studying Intelligent Design Theory. To me it is religion trying to scientifically prove the existence of God. They claim God MUST exist because of how complex and improbable life and existence really are. On the other hand you have stupid scientists saying there is irrefutable evidence that an Intelligent Designer does not exist. I don't know how someone can disagree with the evidence that living beings change over time, and that genetic diversity and natural selection play major roles in these changes.

Answer 6

It's not so much disagreeing with Science, since science itself is filled with people who doubt each other and try to prove the other person wrong.

The thing that puzzles me is how people can think science is somehow out to get them and their church.

Answer 7

Some people are brought up to believe one thing, and they find it very difficult to accept any other explanation. Obviously, the most logical explanation for how the world exists is the theory of evolution, but religion isn't always based on logic, it's more based on faith. I guess it's just a hard thing for people to grasp if they've been brought up to think something else their whole life.

Answer 8

Easily. You see, unfortunately, evolution is only given a cursory run-through in school, so many of the important concepts, findings, evidence, etc. remains largely unknown to most people. Additionally, many of the most knowledgeable people on the subject are terrible communicators. If an individual was so inclined, he or she could learn about evolution and its support, but how many people are really willing to do that?

It is a lack of effective communication of the theory combined with the lack of desire to learn more that causes people to ignore the validity of the Theory of Evolution.

Answer 9

By not knowing anything about it.

By refusing to try to understand it.

By being more committed to a religious belief then the truth.

By maintaining the false opinion in your mind that if evolution is true, then your religion must be false.

All these things are part of denial.


The only form of denial I've ever seen as strong as evolution denial, is Holocaust denial.

Answer 10

I don't know about disagreeing as such, but questioning is certainly the very underpinning of science.

Answer 11

heres an example. "sir after years of research we've discovered that we evolved from monkeys who share 99% of our dna. here's some data" "no i disagree with you facts! a guy poofed onto earth and made a woman out of his spine. and thats final! get those facts out of my face!"