• 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?

Kangaroo Feathers

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Polymath257 said:
Archeology and, more importantly, paleontology. The latter of which, by the way, supports evolutionary theory.
Click to expand...
One can't help but feel using archaeology in place of paleontology, and evolution in place of abiogenesis, is a bit of a red flag. I hope we can impart a little bit of information, at least.
 
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
Kangaroo Feathers said:
One can't help but feel using archaeology in place of paleontology, and evolution in place of abiogenesis, is a bit of a red flag. I hope we can impart a little bit of information, at least.
Click to expand...


Sometimes it seems that creationists have a view of evolution that is sort of like a science fiction piece where some individual undergoes metamorphosis and becomes a completely different sort of organism and that gives a new species.

So, when they ask about 'complete species', they really do envision evolution claiming that crocoducks should exist. I'm not sure *why* they have this image (well, except for the creationist propaganda), but it seems to be very common.

Of course that is not, nor has it ever been, what evolutionary biology claims. And, of course, it ignores that 'metamorphosis' happens between stages of the life cycle *within* a species...
 
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
LightofTruth said:
What was man before he was man?
Click to expand...

The ancestors of modern humans were another type of great ape. Certainly, Homo erectus was in our ancestry. Neanderthals were more cousins.

Before that, they were other types of primates. Before that, other types of mammals. before that, other types of vertebrates, etc.

In general, your question isn't particularly meaningful without a time scale. A million years? 10 million years? 50 million years? 100 million years?

All will have different answers.
 
Polymath257

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
LightofTruth said:
While you dabble in evolution there is an ULTIMATE question behind it. And the answer is GOD!
Click to expand...


And what 'ultimate question' does that answer? And if you don't dispute evolutiion and the Big Bang (i.e, the relevant science), I really don't care what your religious views are. In that sense, I am an apatheist.
 
Kangaroo Feathers

Kangaroo Feathers

Yea, it is written in the Book of Cyril...
Polymath257 said:
Sometimes it seems that creationists have a view of evolution that is sort of like a science fiction piece where some individual undergoes metamorphosis and becomes a completely different sort of organism and that gives a new species.

So, when they ask about 'complete species', they really do envision evolution claiming that crocoducks should exist. I'm not sure *why* they have this image (well, except for the creationist propaganda), but it seems to be very common.

Of course that is not, nor has it ever been, what evolutionary biology claims. And, of course, it ignores that 'metamorphosis' happens between stages of the life cycle *within* a species...
Click to expand...
It's a lot easier to dismiss a strawman, so that's what their pastors and authority figures tell them evolution is, then they breeze into threads like this, full of righteous, condescending piety, ready to tell all the stupid evolutionists about how stupid their theory is because of all the glaring flaws their pastors and authority figures told them about, only to be told by people actually familiar with the actual theory "um, yeah, that isn't what evolution is". Usually it takes them a couple of passes at the straw dummy, while the actual evolutionists stand a good distance away saying "that isn;t us, we're actually over here" to get it. Then they either abandon the exercise, or resort to doubling down on quote mines and misinformation. I'm not yet sure which way this one will go.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top