To those who don't believe in evolution: could you explain in your own words...?

Question

... what you know/understand of the theory?

I've read a lot of nonsense on Y!A like "why are there still monkeys around if they became humans?" and "no one's actually witnessed a lizard turn into a mammal".

Why shouldn't evolution be more probable than God "poofing" creatures out of thin air?

I'm agnostic, not an atheist, if you want to bi...cker about that...

Note: biochemist Michael J. Behe, Ph.D.'s theory was proven false in 2005, as it was found the "simple organism" he used in his work could function without the "unique elements", because the simple organisms had many simpler and many more complex cousins who could function with and without the same elements...

Careful about copy-pasting...

I should have said "resume" instead of "explain". Rephrasing the concept of evolution shouldn't take more than 3-4 paragraphs. A little effort, please?

Answer 1

They do not have to be exclusive of each other. I am VERY religious and I believe in evolution. Any scientist worth their salt will tell you evolution does not disprove God. It doesn't even disprove the Bible. It only disproves the LITERAL interpretation of Genesis. Big difference.
Of course the science supports it. Not all aspects of it, but a good bit of it. I can't even begin to explain the complexities and magic of it all though. It's amazing how its all so precise. I see the divine in that. Some people don't. It's a matter of view. :)

Answer 2

I will tell you why I don't belive in evoluiton. First you must realize that not all scientist belive in evoltuon. 1000's of highly ranked scientists across the U.S. are having doubts due to the complexity of life. For example the cell. The very samllest living unit is so radically advanced that we can't build anything today (with our intelligece) to match its complexity. The odd's of a cell coming into being by chance are 1:10^100
(that number is larger than the proposed number of all matter in the universe!!!!) It would be like the world was covered with blind people holding rubix cubes all solving the cube at the exact same moment.... in otherwords a matmatical 0.

Also many of the "proofs" of Darwinism are false. here are a few examples

1) The Miller experiment has many scientist doubtful. Many scientist now belive that earths atmostphere was far different than the one proposed in the experiment. They ran the test again with the new proposed atmosphere and you know what they got? An acid that eats protines!

2) Darwins tree of life is more like a field of grass. In the fossil record there are bacteria, bacteria, and then BOOM the cambrian explosion. This is not a slow evolution process but rather a rapid expansion of life. This is obviosly a problem for the millions of years needed to evolve in the theory of evolution.

3)Haeckle's Embroys- This is often described as the best evidence for evolution. However these pictures are faked (misleads, doctured, if you prefer). This is not news to todays scientist. They have know about this for YEARS. Yet they still teach it in the classroom. Haeckle did not use just early years in the embroys. He used many different times of development. Now remember they are sapposed to be most similar in the early stages of development but this is just not true. And the so called "gills" in the development. They are not gills. Fish don't even have gills at this stage of development. Folds in the skin maybe, spinal chord perhaps, I don't know but they are not gills.

4)The Archaeopteryx fossile- It is not even close to a half bird half reptile. It has modern bird characteristcs. So its just a bird not a reptile. Paleontologist pretty much agree that the Archaeopteryx is not the ancestor to modern birds.

5)"Java man"- Im sure that you have heard of this one the missing link between man and ape. The only remains we have of Java is a skull cap, a femur, three teeth, and a great deal of imagination.

6) The big bang- The scientist suggest that the universe came from a quantum vacum. They use this to try and get the universe out of nothing sice the universe cannot be infinatly old (otherwise all the energy in the universe would have been used up). However this is not a case of something from nothing. Where did the vacuum come from? All they have done is push the problem back even further. Now Stephen Hawking has made a model of a universe that can be infinatly old by folding back on itself. However this is not a realistic universe (he said it himself). It is not realistic because in order for it to work mathmatically you have to use imaginary numbers, which obviosly do not exist.


So those are my evidences aginst evoluton. Now lets talk about creationalism

Now I know you wanted only my knowledge of evoltuon but I will bring up the mind.

The human brain is one of the great unknowns in science. But lets honestly think about it. If my brain is just random chance then there is absoluty no reason why atomic particals in my head would have thoughs that I can control. There would be no reason for intrelligence, love, or personality. It is my belife that the brain is an interaction point for the soul to function in the material world.

I hope this is what you were looking for.

Christ be with you.

Answer 3

Thank you DuckPhup I was beginning to think that nobody would give the old smack down.

SIGH... Where do I even start! So much ignorance and so much mis-information. First, ever notice how people who answer this type of question shoot out the old "discredit all scientists" card? I am surprised they didn't use the "darwin deathbed" excuse this time. HA Also many of them don't seem to understand the difference between Abiogenesis as opposed to Evolutionary biology.. Darwin never even touched on the origin of life, it was the origin of "species" I do hope people know what the difference is. Also the "primordial soup" is just one HYPOTHESIS... nobody has ever claimed it was the only explanation and is the absolute truth, the Miller experiments were just a way to test the hypothesis. I guess some people would rather we didnt search for an explanation. Panspermia is yet another hypothesis for something all of us humans are ignorant about.. the difference is religion claims it has all the answers, science admits we do not and keeps looking.

Now as far as the fish being squished by a rock that is ridiculous... I cant even believe anyone would come up with that, a physical injury is not genetically heritable. That statement shows a complete and utter lack of understanding of evolutionary biology. No wonder these people are so adamant they dont even know what they are talking about... you have to be pretty convinced to argue against something you dont even comprehend or care to learn about.

I mean just look at irreducible complexity, it doesnt even make sense, nor does it stand up to rigorous scientific testing. The bacterial flagellum was an example used by Behe it has been found that this structure functions just fine without many of the pieces so to speak and is in fact reducibly complex... Also blood clotting.. dont even get me started.. the same blood clotting system minus many parts functions just fine in other species. According to the very definition of IC.. it is a system "composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning" Both examples cited by the man who hypothesized IC have been proven to function just fine missing many parts. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irreducible_complexity#Stated_examples
Jeff C
About how old the earth is.. seriously? do you know how rock forms? do you understand how fossils are made? do you know how fossil fuel is formed??(you do know what fossil fuel is right?) If you answered YES to any of those questions then you can't possibly believe the earth is 6000 years old. If you answered NO I suggest you get some books and read up on it, then you wont seem so ignorant next time. Up to our skyscrapers in bones? You do know what predation and scavenging as well as decomposition are.. don't you? Here let me reduce the complexity for you.. A person dies, insects, beetles, worms, maggots all begin the decomposition process, then a fox, wolf, bear, Carrion bird comes along and eats some, creatures like the Lammergeier eat bones exclusively, other mammals crack open bones for the marrow inside, and not only that bones being organic material break down. The only way bones are preserved is if they fall by chance into the perfect environment for preservation ie dry desert, or silt. I have found the bones of many animals in the woods and most of them almost turn to dust when you pick them up.. especially if they have been sitting in the sun. 99% of the time you never find them because there are alot of hungry animals in the woods.. ever notice how you dont see tons of bones piled up from deer etc?? Also just so you know the layer of soil is built up every year by decaying plant matter etc so eventually bones are buried if they are not eaten first. Not to mention the fact that even primitive man had funeral practices surrounding death that included cremation and burial.

PS To "HOAX" some fish CAN walk on the ground, like the Mudskipper.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mudskipper
some fish can breathe air even, like the Lungfish.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lungfish

Also Monkeys CAN swim, havent you ever seen those monkeys that get in the hot springs? and anyway what does a monkeys ability to swim have anything to do with anything?? http://www.flickr.com/photos/atomicyak/281423911/

Answer 4

Hi and good morning Gwen...This is my opinion on your question. I consider myself as a Christian however I do have my own thoughts and ideals when it comes to the Scriptures and the words written in the Bible. Now I'm not saying that what was written in the Bible is false or untrue I'm just saying that I look at things from an open-mind point of view and realistically speaking. I believe in my God and I do believe that God created all things but I also believe that evolution had a hand in the development of certain life and species also. God started life but I feel that evolution finished where God left off. Make any sense? I believe that the ideal of evolution isn't completely wrong nor do I believe the Bible is wrong. I just feel that both sides could possibly be in the creation. Have a great day!

Answer 5

I can understand your reasoning.I believe in God the Creator of all things.He had no beginning ,always existed.He is everywhere present in His complete fulness.He is allpowerful and can do all things.A dicillion years ago there was God.If you take this tremendous number to its own power then the answer is still the same.God has always created things.It is a mystery and nobody can explain it to you.Evolution has many unexplained answers.Mankind was very much the same 10,000 years ago in physichal form.If you go to micro biology I understand you can see many generations in a day.However my dear friend I am a carpenter and not a scientist.I know one thing for sure that is in order to bring anything into existanse you need intelligence,plan,materials and ability.It is in this area that evolution fails with answers.

Answer 6

Why shouldn't evolution be more probable than God "poofing" creatures out of thin air?


If you believe in God, why cant you believe his word? why is that so hard. Do you think that A God that could create everything , can not get his instruction book to his people?

Answer 7

Evolution is something totally different than the theory.

I do not believe that people have evolved. I believe in the Bible record. We all are made from the same stuff.

Answer 8

Well, I understand as much as I do, not all, but still, as for believing in Evolution, the only way we would believe in it is that we believe it is the most plausible of all explanations for the creation of the species of the Earth....Creationists, I hate to say it but...some might understand a LOT about it, more than me, BUT most of them have no idea on WHAT it even says....

Answer 9

Believe in evolution? Nobody "believes" in evolution. As atheists we consider the theory of evolution the most plausible explanation for the ascension of the species but we don't "believe" in evolution.

Answer 10

if you do not believe that God did that then , why in the world woyuld you believe the rest of the bible.... if he would lie about creation then, what right do we have to believe him...NONE.. except, if you look at all the evolution stuff you see that they are the liars.... Creation is built on faith... and you may not be a christian... but you can at least tell they (evolution) is feeding you lies.... There are tons of anwsers in the Bible.... all you have to do is look....