Shouldn't Evolution be considered a religion?

Question

You have to have just as much faith in that to be true as you would a religion.

Science: systematic knowledge of the physical or material world gained through observation and experimentation.

Faith: confidence or trust in a person or thing. Belief that is not based on proof.

No one has observed something evolve firsthand. As an example, no one has observed a monkey turn into a human. No one can cause a monkey to turn into a human by experimentation. They have FAITH that the monkey turned into a human.

It's not science, it is a belief based on faith, not on observable facts or experimentation....therefore it is not science. It is a religion.

Evolution completely disregards the Scientific Method.

I'm not talking about variations within a species. I agree that happens. That is why there are different varieties of dogs. I am talking about the changing from one species to another.

It's funny that all you guys do is resort to insults and name calling. I really like the people who answer with the *drink* junk. That is pretty insightful.

The steps of the scientific method are to:
Ask a Question
Do Background Research
Construct a Hypothesis
Test Your Hypothesis by Doing an Experiment
Analyze Your Data and Draw a Conclusion
Communicate Your Results


Where are the experiments that have tested and observed evolution from one species to another species?

SIMON:

"The main problem with such phyletic gradualism is that the fossil record provides so little evidence for it. Very rarely can we trace the gradual transformation of one entire species into another through a finely graded sequence of intermediary forms."
Charles Darwin

"Most families, orders, classes, and phyla appear rather suddenly in the fossil record, often without anatomically intermediate forms smoothly interlinking evolutionarily derived descendant taxa with their presumed ancestors."
Charles Darwin

"Species that were once thought to have turned into others have been found to overlap in time with these alleged descendants. In fact, the fossil record does not convincingly document a single transition from one species to another."
Charles Darwin

Answer 1

One more thought to add on. To even question evolution can bring about cries of your being a heretic and punishment. There is numerous accounts of legitimate scientists being censored, ridiculed and punished for challenging the hierarchy. By the way the many dog breeds are caused by breeders not natural selection. I can give you names of some of these scientists who have been persecuted because of their questions if you wish. But you have possiby seen the hype. They claim Id theorists have written no peer reviewed articles and have done no lab work. They also claim that anyone who questions their religion must be using the bible. Thats another bogus claim. There are agnostics who question evolutionary theory as well. Michael Denton worte a book a number of years ago called Evolution a theory in crisis. He is an agnostic. It was some of his questions that actually swayed some evolutionists to start questioning thier faith although I believe he himself has now renewed his faith. The Washington Post broke a story about Rick Sternberg, a research scientist associated with the Smithsonian who as editor of a science journal published a peer reviewed article by Stephen Meyer questioning Darwinian orthdoxy. The Post reported that an official investigation vindicated Sternbergs formal complaint was met with a campaign of intimidation and harrassment by officials at the Smithsonian. Jonathan Wells worte a book called the Icons of evolution. He was accused of doing no peer reviewed articles or any lab work well attending his school. He was vincated of this claim but the magazine refused to print a retraction saying it wasn't their policy to print retractions.The lsit goes on and onNow many open minded scientists still participate but they do so without regognition to avoid the long arm of evolutionary monkeying around. It seems some do not like having their faith questioned. Edit: Response to LJay2000 "Neither medical schools or pharmaceuticals firms maintain divisions of evolutionary science. The fabulous advances in experimental biology have had there core dependance on new methodologies and instruments, not on intensive immersion in historical biology and Darwin's theory. Evolution is not an observable characterisitic of living organisms. What modern biologists do study are the mechanisims by which livng organisims maintain thier stability, without evolving. Organisms oscillate about in a median state; and if they deviate signifigantly from that state they die. It has been the research of these mechanisms of stability, not research guided by Darwin's theory, which has produced the major fruits of modern biology and medicine. And so I ask again, why do we invoke Darwin". Phillip Skell Why do we invoke Darwin? , The Scientist, August 29, 2005 p.10

Answer 2

No one needs 'faith' with regards to the Theory of Evolution, simply because no one 'believes' in it.

People merely agree that It is a scientific theory, meaning it is the best explanation of life based on current evidence and experiment.

As these things improve and change, so will the theory.

It is nothing like a religion, that must in order to survive, stay exactly the same as it was when first invented. Only being forced to change when overwhelmed with opposing evidence. The fact that the earth is not actually the center of the universe comes to mind. It took the church an awfully long time, and the lives of several genius's, before they finally caved in to the truth. But it was another century or so until they accepted that, not only was it not the center of the universe, it was merely a planet, like many others orbiting the Sun. Again with much persecution and punishment of those proponents of this new theory.

This will happen with evolution I am sure.

Religious leaders will find a previous 'unexplained' passage in the bible which miraculously proves the evolution is TRUE! Goddidit after all.. *sigh*

Answer 3

In order:

No.
One only needs to read some books that don't use the bible as reference, to see that evolutionary theory is science...not faith.
Go to dictionary.com and read the entire definition of each, as well as the definition of theory (hint: when used in technical or scientific terms, the definition concerning collective statement of facts is the correct one).
Evolution has been witnessed multiple times. Bacteria, finches, etc. Do a websearch.
Evolutionary theory doesn't say anything about humans coming FROM monkeys, rather alongside them with common ancestory. You'd know this if you read something that doesn't use the bible alone as source material.
It is science...just not science the way the creationist would like it. It's observable (many times within 100 years or less), it answers questions, whereas for the creationist its a tool to support a foregone conclusion, and it has been proven to be fact many times over...on all scales.

You have no idea of the scientific method.

EDIT: You fail to take into account the variances made for scientific fields, such as archeology, which can only be viewed after the fact. Evolutionary study is reliant on these kinds of discovery. Something else you fail to take into account, is the time-frame involved in the evolutionary changes, which result in speciation. Scientists simply don't have the lifespan to perform examples of speciation, to the satisfaction of their detractors.

Finally, while you have stated the basics of the scientific method, I'll illustrate the difference in how science operates against how those opposed to evolution use it.

Scientists ask a question, perform work and test it, then present it for verification and debate before forming a conclusion. Creation 'scientists' ask a question, form the conclusion that 'god did it', and then set about finding the means to verify the conclusion. When it comes time to verify the information, they only submit it to those who agree with the foredrawn conclusion, and then claim that "it must be so."

Big difference.

Answer 4

Evolution does in fact use the scientific method. There has been observation and experimentation that has supported evolution. I think if you did some research you would find this out. Also, if a monkey turned into a human, it would prove evolution wrong. You don't seem to understand evolution or how it relates to science.

And FYI, dog breeds do in fact support evolution. Unless you can find a mechanism in biology and genetics that would stop small changes within a species from causing speciation, it has been shown to work. Ring species are a good example of this.

Answer 5

Well, all dogs can trace their ancestors to the wolf, and foxes and trace their ancestors to the wolf also, let see a wolf to dog and a wolf to fox, one species change into two species while the original is still around, why don't you think the dog shows don't allow wolfs, there not a dog species, or how about when a lion and a tiger have an offspring, isn't that a new species of a cat?

Evolution is a theory, a very good scientific theory, not a faith base system of belief like religion.

Answer 6

Nobody has witnessed the complete developmental cycle of any stars, either. But people have, by using the scientific method, discovered the most probable nature of that development by making mathematical models that agree with all the known laws of physics and with all the observational data.

You don't always have to see a whole process unfold in one place to get a good idea of what that process does as it goes through its stages. You can see it in bits and pieces, and then put them together in a way that provides a plausible and logical progression, consistent with the laws of nature and with what you have seen.

That's not "faith." That's something else, which we might call "heavily documented inference." That's what evolution (both stellar and biological) consists of.

Christian beliefs - as well as any other religious belief that would compete with science in explaining human origins - does not attempt to put together a plausible, logical explanation in accordance with empirically valid natural laws and consistent with observed data. No. Instead, religious belief asserts ancient dogma by the authority of a deity whose existence is in dispute, which means that the authority is also in dispute.

Christians do not dispute the validity of the laws of nature. Science has made the practical uses of those laws abundantly clear... so clear that any Christians who might doubt the facts can be invited to stick his tongue into a light bulb electric socket and receive a convincing demonstration when the switch is turned on.

But the existence of gods, of any god, is very much in dispute, and the religious cannot do likewise. They cannot provide any convincing demonstration that God exists. That's why it takes faith to believe in gods, but evolution can be accepted without the necessity of faith.

And what is faith, if not foolishness?

Answer 7

Evolution is not a religion. Unfortunately, Biblical Creationism is a religion, and one of the few religions that endorse lying.

Evolution has been observed and can be demonstrated in experiments.

Despite the dishonest assertions of Creationists, no evolutionary theory has stated that monkeys turned into humans. It states they both descended from a common ancestor and there is extensive evidence to support that.

There is no violation to the scientific method, just lies use to support discredited religious doctrine. The anatomic record predicted molecular results for non-structural genes.

Answer 8

No.

The evidence is in the fossil record. I can not help it if you chose to be deliberately ignorant of that.

No one has seen continents collide. Does that mean Plate Tectonic theory is wrong?

No one has ever physically seen two deuterium atoms fuse. Do you deny that nuclear fusion happens? Have you seen the pictures from Bikini atoll?

there are a multitude of observable facts that all support evolution. There are zero facts that disprove it.

Just because you chose to ignore these facts does not make them go away.


Evolution is science. That is why thousands of scientists use it every day to make predictions. Predictions that have so far have turned out to be 100% accurate.

Answer 9

No. It is not religion.

Your question is so ridiculous, I don't even know where to start.

Seems you don't like our answers. Try reading a book. We have tried to spoon feed you evolution, and still hear things like "we came from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys". It really is very unimportant what you think. Science and the rest of the world see it as science.

I hope you never get sick and need any medicine that is made on the principles of evolutionary biology. When that new bird flu comes along you can just get sick and die with out the vaccine that was developed with just those principals.

Answer 10

By using my systematic knowledge of the physical and material world gained through observation and experimentation, I am prepared to propose the following hypothesis:

You are a fundythumping troll.

It is, in my estimation, unreasonable to assume that even in THIS country someone could be so poorly educated, unless they made a conscious decision to be so for religious reasons.

Answer 11

They analyzed the DNA and discovered that we have 96% of the same DNA and then they traced that process back to a common ancestor. There is no faith. It is a physical process. But then why am I telling you this. Just to have asked the question that you did means that you do not have the intelligence to even begin to understand my answer. Anything more sophisticated would be so far over your head you would drown.