We know you misunderstand evolution based on the statements and questions you have given here.
-
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?
- Thread starter reddogs
- Start date
We know you misunderstand evolution based on the statements and questions you have given here.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
The evidence is in your posts.
For example, you said "You have been deceived into thinking that fossil records of extinct creatures prove evolution. extinction does not equal evolution." whereas nobody claims that extinction equals evolution and the fossil record is only a small part of the evidence for evolution and even that isn't all about extinct creatures.
LightofTruth
Well-Known Member
Even if bones are found that suggest an ape-like creature walked upright, it still is no proof that it was an ancestor of man.
ratiocinator
Lightly seared on the reality grill.
Ignorance again. Nobody claims that just finding some bones of an ape-like creature walked upright is enough evidence - and science doesn't do proof (more evidence of your ignorance of the subject).
The whole case for evolution in general and the relationship between humans and other apes in particular, could be made from genetics, without referring to a single fossil.
Well, there were no humans at the time and the creatures following were *more* similar to humans, eventually showing the existence of modern humans.
That strongly suggests actual ancestry, don't you think?
And to this, let's add the genetic analysis that we can do that shows the relatedness of humans and other apes.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
Recognize that what, precisely, has been demonstrated?
How does anyone measure whether or not a scientist recognizes that something has been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt? Did some ask each scientist that question, in those words?
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Jim
Nets of Wonder
Kangaroo Feathers
Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Jim
Nets of Wonder
In response to a request for definitions:
I’m trying to find out what this means, and where it came from. These are the answers that I’ve received so far:
- Meaning of “scientific community”: Following one of the links above, I found link to a discussion of that on Wikipedia.
- Meaning of “support for evolution”: Recognize that it has been demonstrated to 'beyond a reasonable doubt' or better that biological species change over time due to changes in their genetics via mutation and natural selection.
- Meaning of “universal”: Above 95% acceptance.
- Where is this coming from: A link to a Pew poll, a link to a blog post about the same poll, a link to a Web page that says nothing about how many scientists support evolution, a link to a Wikipedia page, and a statement that polls have also been done by the American Association for the Advancement of Science and by some biological groups.
I’ll have some more questions after I do some more research.
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
Why, because you say so? Why do you think your empty declarations should be taken as unquestioned gospel? Are you an expert in evolutionary biology?
ecco
Veteran Member
Do you accept plate tectonics? Do you accept it because you believe that the scientists who developed the concept had proper education and training? Do you accept it because you understand that, when it was first proposed, there was opposition to it? Do you accept it because you accept that opposing views were researched and, over time, discarded?
I could ask the same about the structure of the atom.
I could ask the same about germ theory.
I could ask the same about heliocentricity.
I could ask the same about gravity.
Did you personally do enough research to dig deeply or did you come to accept the consensus of the scientists involved?
ecco
Veteran Member
Would you make a comment like...
I want to find out more details about this. What is “the scientific community”? What does “universal” mean? How was it determined that the support is universal? How was “support for heliocentricty” defined and measured? That’s why I’m asking for a source.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
So you are saying that your great grandfather was not a human being. Nor are your cousins. What are they? Dogs? You insult your own kin.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
You really need to learn the basics of science. You make such poor strawman arguments that you only make your side look even worse.
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
That's okay. as long as they aren't <shudder> Australians
Subduction Zone
Veteran Member
And all humans are apes. You need to work on your analogy skills too.
Jim
Nets of Wonder
All the answers that I’ve seen here to my question about where that’s coming from lead to some opinion polls: a Pew poll, an AAAS poll, and some unspecified polls of biologists. I’ll be studying the Pew poll and the AAAS poll, and then I might have more questions.