• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Does anyone believe in Evolution anymore?

Jim

Nets of Wonder
Research community: those doing active research in biology. Universal: above 95% acceptance. Support: recognize it has been demonstrated to 'beyond a reasonable doubt' or better.

Again, pretty much *any* random search will find this. Notice some don't limit to research scientists, which decreases the acceptance numbers.

Overwhelming Support for Human Evolution Among Scientists.
Evolution on the Front Line
Level of support for evolution - Wikipedia
Thank you. Those links were very helpful, not only for the questions I was asking, but some others I’ve been wondering about. You helped me find everything I was looking for. Thank you.
 

Jim

Nets of Wonder
So the textbooks selected for biology courses at (research) universities are a pretty good way to determine the views of research scientists at this level of material.
I don’t see that at all. I don’t see any reason to think that there would be any close correlation between what books are chosen for biology courses, and the views of people who do the research.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
From years of dealing with creationists I think that that is merely massive projection on the part of the creationists that make that claim. They would have to take evolution on faith since they refuse to learn even the basics of science. They then assume that others are guilty of their sins.
Why is evolution no longer about the origin of species?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Why is evolution no longer about the origin of species?
It is about the origin of species. You don't seem to understand that phrase. And yet you have been denying the fact that you share a common ancestor with other apes all along. The species that was our common ancestor with chimps and bonobos existed about seven million years ago. Since then there quite a few new species arose in both of our lines.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
It is about the origin of species. You don't seem to understand that phrase. And yet you have been denying the fact that you share a common ancestor with other apes all along. The species that was our common ancestor with chimps and bonobos existed about seven million years ago. Since then there quite a few new species arose in both of our lines.
What's the common ancestor of all apes?
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
I guess that solves it.
Perhaps you should learn what an ape is. You appear to have an outdated concept of one.

Here are some traits of apes, tell me if they sound familiar:

  • hair instead of fur
  • fingernails instead of claws
  • opposable thumbs
  • higher brain-to-body size ratio/high level of intelligence
  • prehensility (ability to grasp with fingers and/or toes)
  • padded digits with fingerprints
  • binocular vision i.e. both eyes focus on one object (depth perception)
  • reduced olfactory sense and dependent on vision more than smell
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
What's the common ancestor of all apes?

Hard to say. We have not found the fossil specimen yet and we may never do so. Many species leave no fossil evidence at all. Why does it matter? Do you need to know who your great grandfather is to be able to tell that you are related to your second cousins?
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Hard to say. We have not found the fossil specimen yet and we may never do so. Many species leave no fossil evidence at all. Why does it matter? Do you need to know who your great grandfather is to be able to tell that you are related to your second cousins?
My great grandfather wasn't an ape and neither are any cousins. Your argument fails.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
This is rather silly. All humans are apes - that's the accepted biological classification. You can't just change the language to suit your favourite myths.
Humans are actually called man and woman. That has always been the accepted classification.
 
Last edited:

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
My great grandfather wasn't an ape and neither are any cousins. Your argument fails.


Yes, technically they were apes also. But, more interestingly, if you go back 50,000 generations, your ancestors were a *different* sort of ape. Biological species change over time.
 

LightofTruth

Well-Known Member
Yes, technically they were apes also. But, more interestingly, if you go back 50,000 generations, your ancestors were a *different* sort of ape. Biological species change over time.
You have been deceived into thinking that fossil records of extinct creatures prove evolution. extinction does not equal evolution.
 

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
You have been deceived into thinking that fossil records of extinct creatures prove evolution. extinction does not equal evolution.


Once again, I look at the total evidence, not just the fossil record. The fossil record is certainly enough to prove that species change over time, though. But genetics provides much more information and an ability to model evolutionary changes and thereby to test our ideas in detail.

Nobody has said that *extinction* proves evolution. What proves evolution is how the species change from one period of time to another.

So, why do you think the fossil record does NOT prove that biological species change over time?
 
Top