Do you believe in evolution?

Question

If you don't, what do you believe?

Answer 1

Evolution is a fact. I also believe babies are the result of sex, The earth is round and that the earth revolves around the sun.

Answer 2

Darwinism or Neo-Darwinism or what have you, generally refers to the idea that all life present on the Earth has a common ancestor… a tiny, simple, single-celled organism. I accept that evolution happens… finch's beaks change size and shape to some limited extent over time. I have no problem with evolution in that specific sense, and that is well-supported by evidence. Micro evolution is real. Call me an evolutionist if that is what is being talked about.

HOWEVER, the idea that a finch could, via the same process, become a giant purple snorklewhacker is not supported by any real evidence. It's only assumed to be true by virtue of the fact that finch's beaks change shape a little. There is just nothing in the fossil record which shows one species morphing or evolving into another new species.

Therefore I believe in a creator who designed life on our planet.

Answer 3

God.

Evolution is still a theory despite all the wishing it were otherwise.

The evolutionary progression of man was even discredited by Richard Leakey himself.

The fragmentary evidence of virtually every "missing link" is laughable. I am a professional illustrator and I could not even begin to create the imagined creatures known as cro-magnon man, homo-erectus, homo-habilis and ramapithecus and australopithecus based on the very little evidence that was supplied which was supposed to prove their existence to the world, unless of course I had a specific agenda and art direction that mandated the design from the beginning of production.

Evidence:
Leg bones....skull caps, a 2" piece of jawbone, nothing that would even offer a forensic pathologist the most remotely plausible evidence for what the evolutionary artists designed their missing links to be.

The actual evidence and showing the complete lack of evidence along with the fabricated creature designs are all that is needed to bring people out of a self imposed dungeon of ignorance propagated by evolutionists who seek nothing more than taxpayers dollars for further funding of a lost theoretical cause.

I respect scientists who can actually remain impartial, and admit they are wrong when the evidence is as flawed as it is within the evolutionary culture. I respect those who seek truth and fact based on real testable evidence and results because that is what science is supposed to stand for, not some consensus of like minded theorists. Consensus science is partisan and does a disservice to the entire world.

Religion is supposed to be based on faith, science is not, although evolutionists share the characteristic of faith with all the religions of the world because it cannot be proven and cannot be tested. Let me know when a monkey gives birth to a baby human being....the punctuated equilibrium is long overdue.

Answer 4

I see that the intellectual inheritors of Moronicus (least-respected of the ancient Greek philosophers) are out and about tonight.

There are a few important things to know about biological 'evolution'...

* DNA does NOT evolve... it experiences mutations (random).

* Organisms DO NOT evolve. Organisms are essentially the 'proxies' for altered DNA, playing out the 'game' of survival/procreation in 'meat space'. DNA whose proxy organisms manage to procreate get to move on to the next round... kind of like Jeopardy. This is where 'natural selection' plays out. 'Survival of the fittest' is a complete misapplication of the concept... it implies (and is usually interpreted to mean) faster, stronger, smarter, etc... able to take, rather than share. Granted... in some cases it MIGHT mean that. But MORE often, it means something like better camouflage... slightly better tolerance for arid conditions... a new protein that permits the use of a food source that was previously toxic to the organism... etc. THAT is 'natural selection'... ANYTHING that increases the STATISTICAL PROBABILITY that an organism will survive long enough to procreate... and that is ALL that it means.

* It is the genetic makeup of POPULATIONS of organisms (the 'gene pool') that 'evolves' (changes, over time).

Science does not 'prove' things. 'Proof' is for mathematicians, coin collectors and distillers of alcoholic beverages. Proof in science is applicable only in the 'negative' sense... i.e., hypotheses and theories must be 'falsifiable'. When scientists do experiments (to validate 'predicted' results), they are NOT trying to 'prove' they are RIGHT... they are trying to FIND OUT if they're WRONG. NOT being wrong simply builds confidence that one is on the right track... it 'proves' nothing.

Evolution is not a matter of 'belief'. I keep reading in here that "... evolution is just a theory... not a fact." That, as it turns out, is true... although the word 'just' is inappropriate, and misleading... and it indicates that people just don't understand what a scientific theory is; they seem to think that a theory is just an 'idea'. Nothing could be further from the truth.

In science, 'theories' occupy a higher level of importance than mere 'facts'... theories EXPLAIN facts. The Theory of Evolution provides an explanatory framework for the OBSERVED FACT that the genetic makeup of populations of organisms changes over time (evolves). The theory identifies two (2) mechanisms which account for such changes:

** Genetic drift... statistical variations in allele frequency within a local population, over time.

** Natural selection... the non-random replication of randomly varying replicators.

There may be OTHER mechanisms in play which have not yet been identified and accounted for, and various scientists continue to quibble about that... but NONE of what I have described above is in dispute within the scientific community. Claims to the contrary by creationists are nothing more than a red herring, designed to bamboozle their scientifically-ignorant constituency... which is VERY easy to do. That's what happens when your 'trusted' sources are professional liars whose livlihood depends on keeping their 'flock' (sheeple) steeped in gullibility, self-delusion, ignorance and irrationality.

Answer 5

Why can't you folks get it? Nobody "believes" in evolution. Evolution is a scientific theory that has produced vast amounts of evidence suggesting that it is a highly plausible explanation for the ascension of the species. It is something to study for the answers about life. It is not something to be "believed in" as if it's some fairytale religion for which there is no evidence and only ancient testimony.

Answer 6

No. Evolution is the truth. No belief needed.

2+2=4 all over the Universe. Doesn't matter if I believe it or not.

Answer 7

I think evolution is a big joke so of course I don't believe it.

I believe in creation.

Answer 8

Depends on how you define evolution.

YES if evolution = the ability of living organisms to change, grow and adapt over generations.

NO if evolution = life is not a thoughtful creation, but just arose over time on it's own from non-living material, and was ultimately shaped only by unthinking natural forces.

Answer 9

I have a little trouble believing it. Why are Chimpanzees still Chimpanzees after 2 million years? Apes still apes? Etc.

Answer 10

The evidence supporting evolution is strong, so it's not really a matter of "belief" any more than "believing" in gravity or "believing" in quantum physics or "believing" in genetics. Evidence speaks well enough for itself.