Do you accept evolution as fact? Yes/No?

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: Vic

Do you accept evolution as fact?

I was suddenly amused by the thread title. "Do you accept evolution as fact?" sounds so much like a priest asking "Do you accept Jesus Christ as your Lord and Savior?"
Is there a difference? I sometimes wonder, especially when you see the evolution fanatics attacking as heretics those who dare to doubt (or question why it even matters)...

Uh, no. Belief in Jesus as your personal savior is a religious belief based on faith. Evolution is accepted science and has been for more than a century. Rejection of evolution is a politically/religiously motivated movement.

If you can't see the difference between the two, it is not I who is the fanatic here.

Kindly don't be a fool. I am not questioning the validity of evolution itself, as I do believe that evolution as we see it today is scientific fact. What I am questioning the manner in which its followers believe in it, and the manner in which its followers enforce that belief system.

If you can't see that difference, then you have no place to call anyone a fanatic. Or... when will you begin the inquisition for my refusal to believe in evolution exactly as you think as I should believe in it?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic
Kindly don't be a fool. I am not questioning the validity of evolution itself, as I do believe that evolution as we see it today is scientific fact. What I am questioning the manner in which its followers believe in it, and the manner in which its followers enforce that belief system.

If you can't see that difference, then you have no place to call anyone a fanatic. Or... when will you begin the inquisition for my refusal to believe in evolution exactly as you think as I should believe in it?

You're distorting things, though. People espouse evolution as fact as it's a proven fact. They may be a bit passionate in voicing their opinion but that's only because evolution seems to be under constant attack from a massive amount of ignorance from the fundamental Christian right.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: conjur
You're distorting things, though. People espouse evolution as fact as it's a proven fact. They may be a bit passionate in voicing their opinion but that's only because evolution seems to be under constant attack from a massive amount of ignorance from the fundamental Christian right.

And vice-versa. There is no question that Christianity is also under attack in this country, as both sides are certainly at war with each other. Yet are not people entitled to their own beliefs?
I can understand (though not approve of) fundamentalist religions branding as heretics those who refuse to conform to the proper belief system, but IMO it is unforgivable for those who claim to be followers of science to do the same. Fact does not require belief or acceptance -- it simply IS. Fact does not require espousing or testimonies of belief and voicing of opinion, nor does it require passion or zeal... but faith does. Think on that.
Ask yourself: why do you feel compelled that others must believe as you do?

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
You're distorting things, though. People espouse evolution as fact as it's a proven fact. They may be a bit passionate in voicing their opinion but that's only because evolution seems to be under constant attack from a massive amount of ignorance from the fundamental Christian right.

And vice-versa. There is no question that Christianity is also under attack in this country, as both sides are certainly at war with each other. Yet are not people entitled to their own beliefs?
I can understand (though not approve of) fundamentalist religions branding as heretics those who refuse to conform to the proper belief system, but IMO it is unforgivable for those who claim to be followers of science to do the same. Fact does not require belief or acceptance -- it simply IS. Fact does not require espousing or testimonies of belief and voicing of opinion... but faith does. Think on that.
Ask yourself: why do you feel compelled to force others into believing as you do?

Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: conjur
Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

Sorry if I'm talking way over your head...

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

Sorry if I'm talking way over your head...

No, you're starting to sound like you're talking out of your arse. You don't seem to understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain

Evolution is a fact

what exprenemtnal test proved this again?

It's a fact that evolution has happened, based on observational evidence.

Surely you aren't suggesting that it's merely coincidence that all possible methods of comparing organisms have agreed on the same basic hierarchical pattern of relationships among species?

Evolution is only a scientific theory....

There is no publication of standard that can provide the evidence necessary to move evolution to fact or law.

Wrong. Come on, Pack. You've read these numerous threads on this subject. You know the facts and evolution is a fact. The theory refers to the mechanics of evolution.

I agree with genetic recombination...however, tell me how I came from a pool of goo? One good freeze and that pool of goo is a pool of ice.

The problem is entropy vs evolution.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

Sorry if I'm talking way over your head...

No, you're starting to sound like you're talking out of your arse. You don't seem to understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

Said the medieval Catholic priest who claimed to have knowledge of God.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

Sorry if I'm talking way over your head...

No, you're starting to sound like you're talking out of your arse. You don't seem to understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

Said the medieval Catholic priest who claimed to have knowledge of God.

See what I mean?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
Evolution is not a belief. It's knowledge of facts. Christianity is 100% faith.

Sorry if I'm talking way over your head...

No, you're starting to sound like you're talking out of your arse. You don't seem to understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

Said the medieval Catholic priest who claimed to have knowledge of God.

See what I mean?

Heh. Now you're just being purposefully obtuse in an effort to claim a moral superiority. To be blunt, it is you who doesn't understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

Let's try this. Do you know that evolution is fact from your own knowledge and scientific discovery, or did you just read about it from books?

Further examples to help illustrate the difference between knowledge and faith -
Knowledge: "There is a high statistical likelihood that the sun will rise tomorrow."
Faith: "I know for fact that the sun will rise tomorrow."

Knowledge: understanding that science and religion are not incompatible.
Faith: believing with certainty that one disproves the other.

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I agree with genetic recombination...however, tell me how I came from a pool of goo? One good freeze and that pool of goo is a pool of ice.

The problem is entropy vs evolution.

#1, you're confusing abiogenesis with evolution.
#2, the way you're trying to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics would make the development of fetuses into babies capable of living outside the womb impossible, as would something as simple as the snowflake.

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: conjur
You're distorting things, though. People espouse evolution as fact as it's a proven fact. They may be a bit passionate in voicing their opinion but that's only because evolution seems to be under constant attack from a massive amount of ignorance from the fundamental Christian right.

And vice-versa. There is no question that Christianity is also under attack in this country, as both sides are certainly at war with each other. Yet are not people entitled to their own beliefs?
I can understand (though not approve of) fundamentalist religions branding as heretics those who refuse to conform to the proper belief system, but IMO it is unforgivable for those who claim to be followers of science to do the same. Fact does not require belief or acceptance -- it simply IS. Fact does not require espousing or testimonies of belief and voicing of opinion, nor does it require passion or zeal... but faith does. Think on that.
Ask yourself: why do you feel compelled that others must believe as you do?

Right, since Christians are SOOOOO persecuted in this country. You expect us to believe this crap? I'm sorry, but not letting them force their beliefs on everyone else does *NOT* constitute persecution.

Furthermore, it can hardly be said that "both sides are at war with each other" when many/most scientists are religious themselves. I've been an atheist for about five years now. I've accepted science long before I ever began having doubts in my beliefs in dieties - I was raised a southern baptist. The ones injecting religion into this are the Creationists, not the evolutionists.

I *don't* give two shits what you choose to believe in. What I care about is the fact that the religious right, through propaganda, ignorance, and misinformation, has successfully managed to lead a gullible American public to believe that evolution is a controversial scientific issue, when it's not.

One side in this debate is full of people without valid credentials (ex: "Dr." Kent Hovind - if you think Patriot University is a valid degree-granting institution, I've got a bridge to sell you), who misquote (ex. the rampant misuse and abuse of Dr. Gould's writings on the subject of punctuated equilibria), argue from ignorance on the subject (ex: the widespread obfuscation of the subject of abiogenesis and big bang cosmology with the subject of evolution), rely on straw men (ex: "if man came from monkeys, why are there still monkeys?" - two straw men in one rhetorical question), and don't bother to correct their mistakes in their published works when they are shown to be wrong (ex: Ken Ham's writings). They've even come up with intentional hoaxes (see the Paluxy tracks in Texas as an example of this)

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Vic
Heh. Now you're just being purposefully obtuse in an effort to claim a moral superiority. To be blunt, it is you who doesn't understand the difference between knowledge and faith.

Let's try this. Do you know that evolution is fact from your own knowledge and scientific discovery, or did you just read about it from books?

I read about in science texts. Texts from people that have performed experimentation and seen the results and then wrote about it.

Further examples to help illustrate the difference between knowledge and faith -
Knowledge: "There is a high statistical likelihood that the sun will rise tomorrow."
Faith: "I know for fact that the sun will rise tomorrow."

Knowledge: understanding that science and religion are not incompatible.
Faith: believing with certainty that one disproves the other.

Let's try this:

Knowledge: 1 + 1 = 2
Faith: x + y = 1

Knowledge: A lit candle will burn my hand if I place my hand in the flame.
Faith: I pray to God if I put my hand in a flame it won't get burned.


Knowledge is learning something based upon a proven fact. Or, it can also be considered something a bit more esoteric such as read a fiction novel and having knowledge of an author's style and characters and discussing meaning behind the plot.

Faith is forming opinions based upon uncertainties, unknowns, and assumptions.

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I agree with genetic recombination...however, tell me how I came from a pool of goo? One good freeze and that pool of goo is a pool of ice.

The problem is entropy vs evolution.

#1, you're confusing abiogenesis with evolution.
#2, the way you're trying to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics would make the development of fetuses into babies capable of living outside the womb impossible, as would something as simple as the snowflake.

You insist I evolved from something else....what was it? Where did that come from? and so on and so on.

What was the starting point? If the world started from nothing...a big bang if you will, how is it that life began? Or did this abiogenesis pop out a few thousand different things? Explain the chain of events that took us from goo to human.

Cells replicate themselves, why all of a sudden would nature pop things out that required a male and a female to procreate? That is inefficient. Or did the abiogenesis/evolution combination create a male thing and a female thing and they somehow knew to come together?

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I agree with genetic recombination...however, tell me how I came from a pool of goo? One good freeze and that pool of goo is a pool of ice.

The problem is entropy vs evolution.

#1, you're confusing abiogenesis with evolution.
#2, the way you're trying to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics would make the development of fetuses into babies capable of living outside the womb impossible, as would something as simple as the snowflake.

You insist I evolved from something else....what was it? Where did that come from? and so on and so on.

What was the starting point? If the world started from nothing...a big bang if you will, how is it that life began? Or did this abiogenesis pop out a few thousand different things? Explain the chain of events that took us from goo to human.

Cells replicate themselves, why all of a sudden would nature pop things out that required a male and a female to procreate? That is inefficient. Or did the abiogenesis/evolution combination create a male thing and a female thing and they somehow knew to come together?

You should know that I will charge you money if you want me to educate you on the topic so badly. I admit you do need education VERY badly, but I hardly have the time to provide it for free.

Ironically, the evolution of hominid species is actually one of the most well-documented lines of evolution we have...

 

[dmcowen674]

Originally posted by: dgevert

What I care about is the fact that the religious right, through propaganda, ignorance, and misinformation, has successfully managed to lead a gullible American public to believe that evolution is a controversial scientific issue, when it's not.

You care??? :shocked:

 

[Gaard]

Hey, genius, evolution isn't science. That's why its called a theory.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Gaard
Hey, genius, evolution isn't science. That's why its called a theory.

heh heh

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
I agree with genetic recombination...however, tell me how I came from a pool of goo? One good freeze and that pool of goo is a pool of ice.

The problem is entropy vs evolution.

#1, you're confusing abiogenesis with evolution.
#2, the way you're trying to use the 2nd law of thermodynamics would make the development of fetuses into babies capable of living outside the womb impossible, as would something as simple as the snowflake.

You insist I evolved from something else....what was it? Where did that come from? and so on and so on.

What was the starting point? If the world started from nothing...a big bang if you will, how is it that life began? Or did this abiogenesis pop out a few thousand different things? Explain the chain of events that took us from goo to human.

Cells replicate themselves, why all of a sudden would nature pop things out that required a male and a female to procreate? That is inefficient. Or did the abiogenesis/evolution combination create a male thing and a female thing and they somehow knew to come together?

You should know that I will charge you money if you want me to educate you on the topic so badly. I admit you do need education VERY badly, but I hardly have the time to provide it for free.

Ironically, the evolution of hominid species is actually one of the most well-documented lines of evolution we have...

Yeah, Ive seen that drawing that shows a monkeyman evolving to a human...but! what about before the monkey man? And what about the monkey woman?

 

[Gaard]

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo

Originally posted by: dgevert
You should know that I will charge you money if you want me to educate you on the topic so badly. I admit you do need education VERY badly, but I hardly have the time to provide it for free.

Ironically, the evolution of hominid species is actually one of the most well-documented lines of evolution we have...

Yeah, Ive seen that drawing that shows a monkeyman evolving to a human...but! what about before the monkey man? And what about the monkey woman?

Just a matter of finding the fossil record for that time period.

Or, hey, perhaps some alien race seeded us from that point onward.

 

[dgevert]

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Yeah, Ive seen that drawing that shows a monkeyman evolving to a human...but! what about before the monkey man? And what about the monkey woman?

Jebus, save me from your brain-dead followers, please...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...c/images/hominids2.jpg

Care to tell me where the "monkeys" (cough straw man cough) end and the humans begin?

Or maybe you'd like to explain this?

 

[GoPackGo]

Originally posted by: dgevert

Originally posted by: GoPackGo
Yeah, Ive seen that drawing that shows a monkeyman evolving to a human...but! what about before the monkey man? And what about the monkey woman?

Jebus, save me from your brain-dead followers, please...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faq...c/images/hominids2.jpg

Care to tell me where the "monkeys" (cough straw man cough) end and the humans begin?

Or maybe you'd like to explain this?

So are you telling me that the creatures whos skulls these are came from the goo?

What I want you to explain is Goo to First Creature in Picture.

 

[Vic]

Meh. The ignorance, denial, and outright lying in this thread is outstanding.

If you "*don't* give two shits", then WTF are you posting in this thread for and why are you so emotional about it?

Everyone wants to have their cake and eat it too, I guess. :roll:

Anyway, I think modern science is just as good a religion as any other.

 

[MadRat]

The FACT that we observe similarities among species does not change the FACT that no direct evidence proves the validity of the theory. So its a FACT that there is no link between any two species, right down to the genetic level. There have been plenty of common genomes, but no definitive branches. The "missing links" always exist when the science behind the theories are scrutinized. So what we have here is a bunch of zealous agnostics fervently trying to cram fiction down the population's throat.

Whether you believe in Christ or not has no bearing on the FACT that Evolution is a theory. But it sure would seem that the people taking jabs at christians are adamite that there is a link between denying Evolution as a fact and otherwise. Last time I checked christians weren't the only ones who believes in a Creation theory.