If believed, doesn't the theory of evolution require a person to know things they cannot know?

Question

such as how dead matter became live matter

Ashley, Atheist machine, ibushido: insults only prove to me that you have no case.

Answer 1

By not believing in evolution and abiogenesis, you would base your beliefs on things that you know to be untrue. Evolution developed because people realized what was said in the bible was untrue.

Answer 2

1) The theory of evolution is not belief. It is the best description of how science understands the process of evolution (which, by the way, is a confirmed fact--organisms do evolve).

2) As a said scientific theory, it is based on a number of convergent hypotheses and measurable, naturally occurring facts. In fact, the theory of evolution rests on only three basic tenets: a) all living organisms are capable of reproducing; b) all living organisms are based on a genetic code that is mutable; c) natural selection (and other forces) affect the ratio of mutations that are prevalent in a population, causing species level changes to take place in the affected groups.

3) The fact that the theory of evolution has measurable, naturally occurring evidence to back it means there is no "belief" involved, and, by proxy, no "faith", either, regardless of what naysayers might claim.

4) The theory of evolution itself has nothing to do with life origins. So your additional details on "how dead matter became live matter" isn't really clear. The only place I know of that happening is in the Bible (which, incidentially, has nothing to do with evolution, either).

5) The "insults" don't prove that certain people don't have a case. It only proves that their case is not easy for you to hear, and that they could be more tactful in presenting it.

Answer 3

the single fact that darwin did not know the the chimpanzee existed even though he predicted it did should give one the slight insight to explore the facts of evolution. Evolution is not based on faith its is based on years of study of trees, animals, lesser living things, viruses, rocks and the earth itself. The people that wrote the bible did not study the earth because the made so many wrong assumptions based on their limited knowledge. Some say that an all knowing God inspired the bible but when the earth is in the center of things and the sun is just a light for day how can anyone be convince that an all knowing anything inspired the text.

Answer 4

No, what it requires a person to know is that there are some things they cannot know, since the vanished world of our predecessor beings has left only traces of skeletons in rock and genetic heritage in our DNA. Evolution is not factual because we know every detail of every deceased life form there has ever been - it is factual because the vast amount of information we have accumulated on such life all points to one, and only one conclusion.

That is true of any forensic science, which paleontology is kind of like. You can know who the killer is without going back in time to witness the murder.

Answer 5

No. The theory of evolution doesn't say anything about having ancestral/hereditary knowledge.

Answer 6

This question could mean a lot of different things. Some deeply philosophical, others scientific nonsensical.. I'll reserve my answer pending clarification.

Answer 7

I think you mean if accepted, not believed. And I can't think of any part to the theory that isn't known. If it isn't known, then it is usually not part of a theory. Theories are explanations of known phenomena.

Answer 8

If believed, doesn't the myth of creation require a person to know things they cannot know?

Answer 9

The scientific theory of evolution does not require belief, only knowledge and understanding, which obviously you don't have.

Answer 10

Nope.

Evolution doesn't require knowing anything...just surviving long enough to pass on your genes more effectively than your competition.

Simple-effective-factual