What convinced you that Evolution is the truth?

[Valjean]

I know the Evolution belief changes from day to day, year to year, I apologize for not staying up on the latest version, this would not be a problem except that with these ever changing versions they are taught to the naive as fact.

No. the "evolution belief" -- that life changes over time -- is rock solid. It hasn't changed in over 150 years.
What changes is our knowledge of the mechanisms of the change. New details are discovered all the time. The basic facts and mechanisms remain.

Mainly the most vulnerable, our children in Public schools, and then our universities as Fact, which is wrong.

How much verified evidence must we have before we declare something a 'fact'?
The ToE is the most extensively evidenced and consilient theory in all of science. It's the very foundation of biology. Nothing in biology makes sense without it. Why shouldn't we teach the basics of human knowledge to our kids?

We discover new things in astronomy and medicine all the time, but this doesn't throw the germ theory or heliocentrism into question.

Which you even speak as most of what you have said as fact, which in most cases are nothing more than assumptions. For instance evolution has not once been proven, only variations within the same Kinds of life forms, NO PROOF of any creature evolving from one kind of creature has ever been proved to have evolved,......And you know that, so to say anything is as mythical as you call religion.

Nor has the germ theory, heliocentrism, or the 'round Earth' theory.
Only mathematics proves things. Sciences collects and interprets evidence.

Evolution is easy to demonstrate. You can do it in any high school biology lab; you can do it in your own garden or kitchen.
Speciation in nature has been observed even within a human timeframe.

Q: What are the alternative "explanations?" There are none. The only alternatives we have are stories from mythology and folklore, with scant evidence and no means of testing.

So I dont claim to be an expert on the origin of life or an expert on debunking the so called claims that evolutionist make as (Fact), but are not true.

What do origins have to to with evolution, ie: change?
Origins is a different field of study.

The link iI have attached s a well written article that uses many quotes and findings from the very ones that you quite possibly got your beliefs from.
Please read the entire article and tell me where the author who is an expert, has it wrong. He of course believes in intelligent design, not evolution, but presents facts not opinions.

http://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/The-Complexity-of-the-Cell.pdf

I look forward to your response.

The author is basically arguing from incredulity. He's overwhelmed by the complexity of it all. I've seen this before, from others in related fields.

Most the complex things he encounters in life were intentionally designed and manufactured by humans, so he falls back on the irrational and unevidenced belief that a magical but invisible designer must be responsible.
This made some sense a thousand years ago, but now we've discovered and verified the various mechanisms by which the complexity slowly builds up, the argument from magic becomes untenable.

 

[metis]

I know the Evolution belief changes from day to day, year to year,

As it should because new evidence can add to or alter what we understand. Does your religion do that?

 

[SkepticThinker]

I know the Evolution belief changes from day to day, year to year, I apologize for not staying up on the latest version, this would not be a problem except that with these ever changing versions they are taught to the naive as fact.

This is false.

Mainly the most vulnerable, our children in Public schools, and then our universities as Fact, which is wrong.

Science classrooms are where science belongs.

Which you even speak as most of what you have said as fact, which in most cases are nothing more than assumptions. For instance evolution has not once been proven, only variations within the same Kinds of life forms, NO PROOF of any creature evolving from one kind of creature has ever been proved to have evolved,......And you know that, so to say anything is as mythical as you call religion.

Nonsense. Every time there is a change in allele frequenices in a population over time, evolution has occurred.
Evolution is a demonstrable fact of life.

So I dont claim to be an expert on the origin of life

Different topic from evolution.

or an expert on debunking the so called claims that evolutionist make as (Fact), but are not true.

Let us know when you manage to do that. There is a Nobel Prize in it for you, if you're able to falsify evolution. Good luck! Nobody has managed to do it in 150+ years.

The link iI have attached s a well written article that uses many quotes and findings from the very ones that you quite possibly got your beliefs from.
Please read the entire article and tell me where the author who is an expert, has it wrong. He of course believes in intelligent design, not evolution, but presents facts not opinions.

http://www.esalq.usp.br/lepse/imgs/conteudo_thumb/The-Complexity-of-the-Cell.pdf

I look forward to your response.

Sounds like a page full of quote mines to me.
Complexity isn't an argument for design.

 

[Eli G]

Scientists can't even agree on human history, for example even though they have unearthed tons of archaeological evidence and written records about ancient history, there are debates about Egyptian dynasties and their dating (even if those events occurred less than a few thousands years ago)

...yet others claim to be sure of a "story" (not history) where apes become humans, based just on some fragments of bones, skulls and skeletons, and have even elaborated the order of the events that according to them have occurred in relation to these supposed biological changes in apes that they say ocurred hundreds of thousands of years ago.

It's funny how gullible some people can be when they have had their self-esteem crushed by being made to believe that they cannot think for themselves but must accept what others tell them without even trying to question it under rational analysis...

 

[Saved by grace 2]

Again, so what? Are you a child, who still needs a strong father protecting you to feel secure?
Why would a world with no religious conflict or coercion; no threat of Hell, so distress you?

I am a child of God, thru Faith in Jesus Christ, and compared to his Power and knowledge and wisdom, I am less than a child, a spec of existence in light of who he truly is. He created us, He is! before anything created came into being, he is the author of life, He designed the first cell, the first organism, and he created man in his image, and by his wisdom and Power, he breathed life into all that is made.
And God desires relationship with us. He promises for all who believe in him, that he will never leave us nor forsake us, and I have experienced his presence thousands of times, His peace, his Love, and forgiveness, and his comforting promises give me hope and empower me to live a life free of fear, anger, lust, hatred, hopelessness, Pride, greed, etc., which all mankind is in one way or another bound to before being Born again!.

These are truths I live by, and they are real truths to everyone who truly believes. You assume I am wrong because you never have believed. I can only tell you what I have come to know, by experiencing God. i would be lying to say anything else!

 

[Saved by grace 2]

Let us know when you manage to do that. There is a Nobel Prize in it for you, if you're able to falsify evolution. Good luck! Nobody has managed to do it in 150+ years.

You obviously never read a word from the article. This proves you are not interested in Truth, only what you have already made up in your mind. This article thru the factual (NOT ASSUMED) breakdown of a cell is Fact. And there are countless chemist, scientist, whom have found the same facts about cells, but yet many still refuse the facts.

And despite your Worldview, By this article ALONE Evolution has been debunked.

If you are sure that it is anything else then read, and tell me where it is wrong!

 

[Valjean]

Scientists can't even agree on human history, for example even though they have unearthed tons of archaeological evidence and written records about ancient history, there are debates about Egyptian dynasties and their dating (even if those events occurred less than a few thousands years ago)

Science and history are active investigational modalities. They gather and assess facts. Confidence levels increase as more evidence accumulates. What was speculation in the past: heliocentrism, germ theory, plate tectonics, become accepted as facts.
Yes, there is always disagreement at the peripheries, where evidence is sparse, but science is not religion. It's an active modality. Change is growth.

...yet others claim to be sure of a "story" (not history) where apes become humans, based just on some fragments of bones, skulls and skeletons, and have even elaborated the order of the events that according to them have occurred in relation to these supposed biological changes in apes that they say ocurred hundreds of thousands of years ago.

Again, the evidence that places Homo among the apes is well established, and not just from "some fragments" of bone.

It's funny how gullible some people can be when they have had their self-esteem crushed by being made to believe that they cannot think for themselves but must accept what others tell them without even trying to question it under rational analysis...

Exactly! Science encourages people to question everything; to think for themselves, and to test -- ie: try to disprove -- accepted ideas. Religion, on the other hand, actively discourages this, and requires blind acceptance of unsupported doctrine. It discourages rational analysis.

As for evolution, it's established, and only the religious question it. The only controversies are at the periphery, where new data is accumulating.

 

[Valjean]

I am a child of God, thru Faith in Jesus Christ, and compared to his Power and knowledge and wisdom, I am less than a child, a spec of existence in light of who he truly is. He created us, He is! before anything created came into being, he is the author of life, He designed the first cell, the first organism, and he created man in his image, and by his wisdom and Power, he breathed life into all that is made.
And God desires relationship with us. He promises for all who believe in him, that he will never leave us nor forsake us, and I have experienced his presence thousands of times, His peace, his Love, and forgiveness, and his comforting promises give me hope and empower me to live a life free of fear, anger, lust, hatred, hopelessness, Pride, greed, etc., which all mankind is in one way or another bound to before being Born again!.

These are truths I live by, and they are real truths to everyone who truly believes. You assume I am wrong because you never have believed. I can only tell you what I have come to know, by experiencing God. i would be lying to say anything else!

Interesting confession of unsupported, unquestioned belief, ie: faith.
So what's your point? That you'll ignore any facts or evidence that runs counter to your mythology?

 

[Valjean]

You obviously never read a word from the article. This proves you are not interested in Truth, only what you have already made up in your mind. This article thru the factual (NOT ASSUMED) breakdown of a cell is Fact. And there are countless chemist, scientist, whom have found the same facts about cells, but yet many still refuse the facts.

You obviously did not grasp the essence of the author's objection. It's an emotional reaction to complexity, and a dismissal of the known, natural mechanisms responsible for it. It's an appeal to magic.

And despite your Worldview, By this article ALONE Evolution has been debunked.

If you are sure that it is anything else then read, and tell me where it is wrong!

Don't be absurd. The article is intellectual bunkum, and you'll notice that it hasn't changed the scientific consensus a jot or a tittle.

Understand the evidence being questioned, and you'll see that the objections are specious.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Lots of life is sentient. My cat is sentient. What people claim is sapience…

Yes, you are right. Sapience is the correct word.

…but considering our history, I'm beginning to question the claim..

Well, man has developed some awesome things, certainly; but many have been used unwisely.

It’s our selfishness that seems to be doing us in, both individually & large-scale.

Define "created."

I don’t mean “poofed”! Lol.
“Put together”, like any engineer / builder would.

We're adapted to only one planet, and even if we could live on others, how would we get there? They're light-years away.

That’s why I wrote about Guidance (capital G)…
“Under the right Guidance, our scientific technology will advance to allow such travel…
(before we destroy ourselves, Revelation 11:18)….
and exploration & discovery will always be a big part of mankind’s experience.”

"As we become more populous?" Even on our own planet, our sapience has rendered our future here very much in doubt.

I understand your concerns… I regularly read the alarming articles published in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, but I don’t share those anxieties.

Perhaps, but I'm not holding my breath...

I wish I could impart to you what I’ve learned over the years from JW’s … it just might allay some of your worries.


At any rate, have a good night / day.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

Scientists can't even agree on human history, for example even though they have unearthed tons of archaeological evidence and written records about ancient history, there are debates about Egyptian dynasties and their dating (even if those events occurred less than a few thousands years ago)

...yet others claim to be sure of a "story" (not history) where apes become humans, based just on some fragments of bones, skulls and skeletons, and have even elaborated the order of the events that according to them have occurred in relation to these supposed biological changes in apes that they say ocurred hundreds of thousands of years ago.

It's funny how gullible some people can be when they have had their self-esteem crushed by being made to believe that they cannot think for themselves but must accept what others tell them without even trying to question it under rational analysis...

Funny how your complaint essentially is that we don't know everything about everything...
And then use that as an excuse to ignore everything we DO know.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

This article thru the factual (NOT ASSUMED) breakdown of a cell is Fact.

The conclusions aren't.

And there are countless chemist, scientist, whom have found the same facts about cells, but yet many still refuse the facts.

Nobody ignores the facts.
The problem is the conclusions based on arguments from ignorance.

And despite your Worldview, By this article ALONE Evolution has been debunked.

No.

If you are sure that it is anything else then read, and tell me where it is wrong!

It draws conclusions which are nothing but pure arguments from ignorance.

"it's complex, therefor god" - in a nutshell

 

[Altfish]

Of course this question is addressed both to theists and to atheists. Both to those who believe in evolution and those who believe it's untrue.
Explain why you, through your intelligence, reason and mind developped the awareness and the conviction that Evolution is the historical truth.

If you are a theist, please explain the theological implications, as well.

I will underline that we are not talking about Intelligence Design, here: we are talking about Darwinian evolution based upon the Darwinian principles like natural selection, etc..etc...
Thank you for participating-

I don't like the phrase "The Truth", I don't think of evolution as the truth. I think of evolution as the best explanation for the available facts.

 

[TLK Valentine]

Very true, Living things are different, So what is your opinion on how life (living things came to be.........Le't start with the building block of all living organisms. The cell.

Not just my opinion, per se,but at some point in the far distant past, a collection of amino acids formed that were chemically able to replicate themselves.... and things snowballed from there.

 

[Valjean]

I don't like the phrase "The Truth", I don't think of evolution as the truth. I think of evolution as the best explanation for the available facts.

So there is no such thing as truth?
If you don't consider something so well evidenced as evolution truth, how do you categorize the less well-evidenced things like round Earth theory, germ theory, or relativity?

I suspect you know little about the mechanisms of evolution, and less about it's supporting evidence. I suspect you oppose it only because you regard the notoriously ill-evidenced Christian mythology as truth.

 

[Altfish]

So there is no such thing as truth?
If you don't consider something so well evidenced as evolution truth, how do you categorize the less well-evidenced things like round Earth theory, germ theory, or relativity?

I suspect you know little about the mechanisms of evolution, and less about it's supporting evidence. I suspect you oppose it only because you regard the notoriously ill-evidenced Christian mythology as truth.

Truth is an absolute term.
2+2=4 is the truth (Assuming we are in base 10)
I think evolution is correct and highly unlikely to be overturned but it will be refined and thus I dislike the use of the word 'truth'.

 

[Saved by grace 2]

No, it doesn't.

As it should because new evidence can add to or alter what we understand. Does your religion do that?

 

[SkepticThinker]

Scientists can't even agree on human history

That would be historians, anthropologists, and sociologists.

So you reject those too.

So what are we at here ... you reject:
Anthropology
Sociology
Taxonomy
Anatomy
Genetics
Zoology
Biology

, for example even though they have unearthed tons of archaeological evidence and written records about ancient history, there are debates about Egyptian dynasties and their dating (even if those events occurred less than a few thousands years ago

...yet others claim to be sure of a "story" (not history) where apes become humans,

Apes didn't become humans. Humans are apes. We're also mammals.

based just on some fragments of bones, skulls and skeletons, and have even elaborated the order of the events that according to them have occurred in relation to these supposed biological changes in apes that they say ocurred hundreds of thousands of years ago.

This is an old creationist talking point from about 60 years ago. We've got much more than just bone fragments.
Plus, we have genetics and comparative genomics now.

It's funny how gullible some people can be when they have had their self-esteem crushed by being made to believe that they cannot think for themselves but must accept what others tell them without even trying to question it under rational analysis...

Indeed. Haven't seen a whole lot of thoughtful posts from you in this thread where you've actually addressed anything anyone has said to you.

Just a lot of rejection of sciences you don't seem to understand very well.

 

[SkepticThinker]

You obviously never read a word from the article.

Says the person who only responded to a teeny tiny part of my post and cut out the rest.

This proves you are not interested in Truth,

I am interested in believing in as many true things as possible, while not believing in as many false things as possible.

only what you have already made up in your mind.

I've "made up mind" based on the evidence. I am open to change my mind at any time, based on the evidence. I've yet to see any good evidence indicating any god(s) exist. Do you have any?

This article thru the factual (NOT ASSUMED) breakdown of a cell is Fact. And there are countless chemist, scientist, whom have found the same facts about cells, but yet many still refuse the facts.

This post was in response to, "Let us know when you manage to do that. There is a Nobel Prize in it for you, if you're able to falsify evolution. Good luck! Nobody has managed to do it in 150+ years."

Any scientist worth their salt knows how to gather data and publish their findings. If any of these "countless chemist, scientist" that you refer to had been able to falsify evolution, they'd be getting a Nobel Prize for turning biology on its head. The fact of the matter is, nobody has been able to falsify evolution thus far, and it remains one of the best evidenced scientific theories in existence. It is the backbone of biology.

And despite your Worldview, By this article ALONE Evolution has been debunked.

You have no idea what my worldview is.

See above about your "evolution has been debunked" claim. It's nonsense.

If you are sure that it is anything else then read, and tell me where it is wrong!

Let me know when you can actually respond to all the points in my posts rather than just cutting out the ones you don't like and ignoring them.

 

[Saved by grace 2]

LET'S TALK ABOUT REAL SCIENCE;
One of the basic reasons why the theory of evolution cannot explain how the cell came into existence is the "irreducible complexity" in it. A living cell maintains itself with the harmonious co-operation of many organelles. If only one of these organelles fails to function, the cell cannot remain alive. The cell does not have the chance to wait for unconscious mechanisms like natural selection or mutation to permit it to develop. Thus, the first cell on earth was necessarily a complete cell possessing all the required organelles and functions, and this definitely means that this cell had to have been created.

So moving to the actual functioning components of the cell that make it work. These crucial accidents, as you believe, are absolutely necessary to function in unison with one another within a very short period of time, lest although they may somehow form separately (by your assumed accidental miracles) all other vital parts of the cell need to simultaneously come into existence at the same time, or they will become useless and die!
So much for billions of years happening while each individual part comes to life for no apparent reason, and just waitng around to connect and function together, to then POOF (but remember, no intelligent design involved) a cell has evolved!! Because that is what evolution is correct "Change".


The Protein
WHICH IS ONLY ONE of the building-blocks of a cell. The formation, under natural conditions, of just one single protein out of the thousands of complex protein molecules making up the cell is impossible. Proteins are giant molecules consisting of smaller units called "amino acids" that are arranged in a particular sequence in certain quantities and structures. These units
constitute the building blocks of a living protein. The simplest protein is composed of 50 amino acids, but there are some that contain thousands.

The fact that it is quite impossible for the functional structure of proteins to come about by chance can easily be observed even by simple probability calculations that anybody can understand. For instance, an average-sized protein molecule composed of 288 amino acids, and contains twelve different types of amino acids can be arranged in 10300 different ways. (This is an astronomically huge number, consisting of 1 followed by 300 zeros.) Of all these possible sequences, only one forms the desired protein molecule. The rest of them are amino-acid chains that are either totally useless or else potentially harmful to living things. In other words, the probability of the formation of only one protein molecule is "1 in 10300". The probability of this "1" to occur is practically nil. (In practice, probabilities smaller than 1 over 1050 are thought of as "zero probability").

When we proceed one step further in the evolutionary scheme of life, we observe that one single protein means nothing by itself. One of the smallest bacteria ever discovered, Mycoplasma hominis H39, contains 600 "types" of proteins. In this case, we would have to repeat the probability calculations we have made above for one protein for each of these 600 different types of proteins. The result beggars even the concept of impossibility.

Please tell me the errors ABOVE!, BUT NOT with vague comments, Please state real facts that refute them!

Not just my opinion, per se,but at some point in the far distant past, a collection of amino acids formed that were chemically able to replicate themselves.... and things snowballed from there.