My Fiancee is a devout Christian - and we've debated Evolution before, and it's hard to really have her see/accept that the possibility exists for such things...her thought is that it is a decent theory at best, but a flight of improbable fancy nonetheless in reality.

At the end of the day, it's going to depend solely on one's religious/philosophical outlooks on life and whether or not you can accept certain ideas/thoughts within the concept of evolution above all else. It's not really got a clear cut argument for either side, so it's a tricky beast to argue one way or the other.

*sigh*

Theories in science have a mountain of evidence to back them up making them accurate (if not perfect) explanations of phenomena based on the available evidence, as opposed to a hypothesis which would be what everyone who's not a scientist would think a "theory" is. (Yes it's confusing, don't shoot the messenger.)

The theory of evolution is not a hypothesis - it's known to be flawed (in fact no scientific theory is guaranteed perfect) but it's by far the most accurate explanation we've got to explain the history of the planet. There are no other theories competing with it currently, only hypotheses with no significant evidence.

</topic>

My geenral understanding is that scientific theories/explanations are, essentially, educated guesses that have not been disproved by rigourous tests, and as such end up as our "best guess" for an explanation of what's going on.

As for setting someone straight if they don't consider evolution to be true, while you may be able to point ot a greater supply of supporting evidence for the theory of evolution being essentially correct, how do you tend to feel when someone starts trying to "ser you straight" regarding the existence of God (for or against depending on own personal beliefs)?

Feels like a different issue. Whether someone accepts evolution is less a matter of beliefs and more a matter of education and ignorance, while the existence of God is a topic much more murky.

My Fiancee is a devout Christian - and we've debated Evolution before, and it's hard to really have her see/accept that the possibility exists for such things...her thought is that it is a decent theory at best, but a flight of improbable fancy nonetheless in reality.

I see what you're saying, but there's also the fact that a lot of devout Christians do believe in evolution. For instance, the pope. Out of curiosity, is your fiancee a fundamentalist?

At the end of the day, it's going to depend solely on one's
religious/philosophical outlooks on life and whether or not you can
accept certain ideas/thoughts within the concept of evolution above all
else. It's not really got a clear cut argument for either side, so it's
a tricky beast to argue one way or the other.

See, that's the problem: It's not a religious/philosophical issue. It is a scientific question, and the weight of science is behind evolution, and there are clear-cut arguments that evolution is true. What's "tricky" is the extent to which people will blithely ignore the facts.

*sigh*

Theories in science have a mountain of evidence to back them up making
them accurate (if not perfect) explanations of phenomena based on the
available evidence, as opposed to a hypothesis which would be what
everyone who's not a scientist would think a "theory" is. (Yes it's
confusing, don't shoot the messenger.)

The theory of evolution is not a hypothesis - it's known to be flawed
(in fact no scientific theory is guaranteed perfect) but it's by far
the most accurate explanation we've got to explain the history of the
planet. There are no other theories competing with it currently, only
hypotheses with no significant evidence.

Heh. I know this. I know this well. The thread title was meant to be taken ironically, in case I wasn't clear enough about that. Evolution is a "theory" like gravity is a "theory." I wouldn't say it's flawed, but we do have major questions about how exactly it works... just like we have about gravity.

My
geenral understanding is that scientific theories/explanations are,
essentially, educated guesses that have not been disproved by rigourous
tests, and as such end up as our "best guess" for an explanation of
what's going on.

That's not quite right. You're right about the rigorous proof, but theories have more weight than just "best guesses." A "hypothesis" would be closer to that definition. This page does a pretty good job of explaining what a theory is.

As for setting someone straight if they don't
consider evolution to be true, while you may be able to point ot a
greater supply of supporting evidence for the theory of evolution being
essentially correct, how do you tend to feel when someone starts trying
to "ser you straight" regarding the existence of God (for or against
depending on own personal beliefs)?

The difference being that evolution is definitely true. The jury's still out on "God." Personally, as an atheist, I find God a silly notion, though I can understand why some people disagree. All of my family are Catholics and I've had religious education all my life, up to college-level theology and philosophy courses (I minored in philosophy at a Catholic school and studied under professors of various faiths), so I'm well acquainted with people trying to "set me straight."

I don't particularly take interest in the philosophy's of religion, as it deals too much in either 'what comes afterwards' or 'what has gone before' rather than the here and now, which when you think about it is the more important side to life.. you know.. the bit where you live it.  But just because I think I know how something works, dose not make it any less spectacular.  Only grants me the tools to appreciate every side of its beauty.

"I figure it will only take six days to lay the ground work."

"Or Four Hundred Billion Years..."

"Depends on who's counting. And 'how', for that matter."

I don't particularly take interest in the philosophy's of religion,

Again, it's an issue of science, not religion or philosophy.

source

Again, it's an issue of science, not religion or philosophy.

But the dispute exists, like it or not...and saying it doesn't won't help matters. religion and Philosophy come into it because the bible is in direct opposition to the whole idea of evolution, and there's a lot of people who would rather put faith into....Faith, rather than the facts of science! It's still very much a matter of Personal belief V Scientific proof!

i for one strongly disagree to the very thought of evolution. i wont accept it as fact no matter how many theories others will try to convince me of it. and you cant really say "you're correcting someone" there's no proof that its right. to say that the only perfect proof is a "missing link" is too convienent and adds more doubt to the subject. 

i really dont know how to explain it to you, but when you try to talk about it to people like me it wont get into our heads, it just sounds like a joke to us.

Except it really isn't a joke...it's actually quite legitimate as a concept.

I guess my question has been answered.

Rather depressingly, mind you, but there we are...

god would've mentioned it if it was real, and if you dont belive in god than belive in the human mind. i strongly resist the idea of cavemen cause that means we are to consider past civilizations inferior to us which is something i cant accept.
humans arent animals never were, we always had the abilities we do now. just cause we made internet and cars we should start thinking we're advance? i belive past humans surpassed our technology today. there is no possible way for us to confirm anything, humans existed for a very long time how can we possibly claim to have figured out our origin of existance?

as for why i think its a joke, maybe cause the thought is limited. religious people belive in angels demons heaven and hell and miracles and great beasts .... in other words we belive in the most exterem ideas, a simple answer might not be something our heads can accept. and there's no way to prove we are wrong XD

God would hardly reveal his secret to his creation - it would defy the point of us learning and dealing with things on our own!

 For somebody who accepts extreme ideas, it's ironic that something like this is a problem, when it could just as easily be tied into such extremes as you would want!

but you are forgetting an important aspect of our belief, we think we are higher life forms by following god, better than demons and other creatures. and we belive animals die without going to heaven or hell so how can we possibly agree to the idea of us being animals? and of course god already mentioned how we humans came about, so no he wont hide our origin. if god created heaven and hell and so much more other great things and gave us a pupose than our existance is special and we humans are wonderful creations with much more to us than we understand.

as for those 1000 recorded years that's exactly what's odd, how come we advanced so quickly in the last few hundered years while taking so long before? something is not accurate about history.

and honestly do you think its good for humans to degrade themselves by placing themselves next to animals? we are higher in much more than one way if we start to see ourselves with relations to apes we might start letting go of morals ethics and culture. its one of the worst ideas ever thought of in my opinion. 

That's not quite right. You're right about the rigorous proof, but
theories have more weight than just "best guesses." A "hypothesis" would
be closer to that definition. This page does a pretty good job of explaining what a theory is.

The difference being that evolution is definitely true. The jury's still
out on "God." Personally, as an atheist, I find God a silly notion,
though I can understand why some people disagree. All of my family are
Catholics and I've had religious education all my life, up to
college-level theology and philosophy courses (I minored in philosophy
at a Catholic school and studied under professors of various faiths), so
I'm well acquainted with people trying to "set me straight."

OK, "best guess" may have been a little bit of an exaggeration, but scientific theories are not "definitely" true. If they are the accepted current theory, it means that it currently fits the available evidence and has been successful in predicting the outcome of related experiments. This does not mean they are necesasrily true, although they are likely to provide a reasonably accurate model for further prediction.

For a lot of the Christians I've encountered who were more inclined to spreading the word, I get the impression they'd be more inclined to say that God definitely exists - the Bible and the world providing more than enough evidence to "prove" it - while the jury is still out on evolution. What you believe to be true will affect how strong you perceive evidence to be, and just because something is entirely obvious to you does not make it at all clear to someone else. Personally, I'm more inclined to accept evolution as true than an omnipotent, omnibenevolent being existing, but I believe that everyone is entitled to interpret the evidence provided in their own way. For the most part, I don't believe it will make a huge difference to most people's everyday life anyway.

For the most part, I don't believe it will make a huge difference to most people's everyday life anyway.

Now there's some words of wisdom.  Everyone always makes such a huge fuss over 'debates' like this, but at the end of the day is it really worth getting wound up about?  All that dose is serve to perculate hatred, not to mention shortening one's own lifespan through the stress.  And for what? Worrying that 'someone else might think difrently'?

Someday soon we will all be dead, and maybe some part of us will persist to find the answers that the human mind strives for.

But in the mean time we may as well poke around to see how/why stuff works, or have a slice of cake and enjoy the time we have rather then worrying. 

Infact, I think I might just go do exactly that.  Its a nice day outside and there are clouds that need watching.

..Hay! That one looks like godzilla!

Well, people are free to believe whatever nonsense they want, just as long as it doesn't obstruct progress. The reason we've advanced so fast in the last hundred years or so is due to a scientific awakening. The world is now ready to accept new theories and ideas, where back in, say, Galileo's day, new ways of thinking were strictly opposed by the powers that be. But now, in a world with a separation of church and state, we rarely have to worry about the ignorant and illiterate standing in the way of things they don't understand. To hyperbolize, the Intelligent Design "debate", if you can call that debacle such, could potentially stagnate human intellectual evolution, devaluing the theory of evolution by placing it beside a big fat "But what if maybe not?" and calling them equal.

The point being made is that the theory has enough evidence behind it that discussion of whether it's correct or not is void - because it's proven to be correct. If there's anything wrong with it it's only in the fine details - nothing to devalue the main theory.

The difficulty is in getting (stupid) people to accept it, apparently; the misinformation flying around on the subject - especially in America in particular - is ridiculous. *sigh again*

While it's not quite on topic, but this debate reminds me of a line from The Simpsons Game when Bart and Homer are in the museum early in the game and Bart jumps on the back of a dinosaur skeleton and says like (and I paraphrase), "Look it's those bones Flanders said God planted in the ground to confuse us (humans)!"

On the subject, there is ALOT of evidence to support evolution. As mentioned earlier who's to say God didn't experiment. There's a lot the Bible doesn't tell you about. Like where did other people come from (they were mentioned after the Cain and Able incident), or howabout those dinosaurs. People can't just turn to the Bible and say, "See here this is how it is!" because like it or not the Bible isn't a reliable source when it comes to our origins. It just says the world is created in seven days, man sins, man now must live with sin. And seven days to God could be thousands upon thousands of years to us, which one could easily fit all these scientific facts (Evolution, Big Bang, etc...) into the realms of religion. For the record I am a christian and that is exactly how I see it. Why does Religion and Science have to fight all the time, they could easily become friends!

I'm agnostic (haters gonna hate) but I pretty much agree entirely with eggpire. It is entirely possible that if a god exists then he/she could have caused all this to happen.

To me evolution is a fact of life that I am aware exists but don't really care enough to get worked up about. There is scientific proof that evolution exists, it's just up to whoever's looking at it to take it as it is (either caused by a god or otherwise) or to believe it's a hoax or joke or whatever other nonsense.

Also just for the record, I believe all animals are equal to humans. We aren't superior, we just have a larger brain size comparitive to our size making us more intelligent. Other animals use tools after all, like otters and elephants. We're inferior to many animals otherwise, like in speed and strength. I don't believe in heaven or hell or how being religious makes you an instantly better person. People probably disagree with me here but I don't really care 😀

The point being made is that the theory has enough evidence behind it that discussion of whether it's correct or not is void - because it's proven to be correct. If there's anything wrong with it it's only in the fine details - nothing to devalue the main theory.

The difficulty is in getting (stupid) people to accept it, apparently; the misinformation flying around on the subject - especially in America in particular - is ridiculous. *sigh again*

why so sure that you're right? and that if others dont belive it they're stupid? i love lots of people without hating them for having different views than i do. to me religion and such matters are as simple as liking bananas, just cause i love them and someone else doesnt wont make me dislike that person no matter how strongly i like bananas. and i wont call them stupid for not seeing how yummy they are.
and we're not that much different dear, you believe in scienes as much as religious people believe in god. you dont doubt what someone with a phd tells you, and that can be worrying. people should think for themselves and follow the belief that their hearts tells them is right, not follow another person's opinion.

    "But now, in a world with a separation of church and state, we rarely have to worry about the ignorant and illiterate standing in the way of things they don't understand."

i suffer so much from religious people i wont lie that i wish the entire world seperated religion from state (the statement should be general religion really), i have no love for forced faiths and ideas. nothing i hate more than being controlled and that ugly world full of suffering ignorance and pain existing yet still today.  
but that doesnt mean i'll hate god for it, religion people did all that evil using the people's love for god against them. its turning something as pure as "blind love" into a weapon which is the worst thing we humans ever did to each other. and it was all religious people's doing.
its a truth, if it wasnt for the none religious we wont have any of today's technolog, rights, order  and peaceful living.

but still that doesnt mean religious people are wrong, cant hang that mistake in history against us forever.  we might be wrong about those things but we might be right about this. humans being apes? nah we're right about this one, evolution isnt real.

god would've mentioned it if it was real, and if you dont belive in god than belive in the human mind. i strongly resist the idea of cavemen cause that means we are to consider past civilizations inferior to us which is something i cant accept.

And this, of course, is probably one of the less-expressed yet more-apparent REAL reasons for denial of evolution. The idea that we ought to do what our ancestors did gets a little hard to support when you consider that going back far enough our ancestors were unicellular organisms, hence the fervent denial of evolution itself, especially among traditionalists.

   "Also just for the record, I believe all animals are equal to humans. We aren't superior, we just have a larger brain size comparitive to our size making us more intelligent. Other animals use tools after all, like otters and elephants. We're inferior to many animals otherwise, like in speed and strength"

humans are much more complicated and superior to animals than by small comparisons like using tools and even then, we are a far more greater creation. its a bit scary to think we're related to animals, cause that means we're eatting undeveloped people if you think about it and it wont be a nice thought. but unless animals show complicated emotions and thoughts and most importantly be able to creat new things, there is no proof they can ever advance or in this case evolve.

no we're not like animals at all. and i dont think some humans are superior to other humans just cause of religion, we're all the same <hugs bunanigans> sweety i dont care what religion or not other people are,  i meant to say that we humans are superior to animals.... sorry if i wasnt clear. i love lots of people from each kind of background, i wont ever think that mean way ever.  

ah matt i know what you're saying but the evolution idea hasnt been fully proven yet. there's that missing link issue, without it tis just a theory.

You assume everything was stated as evolving into a state of 'eventually being people' or at least super-intelligent - that's not really the argument of Evolution at all, Mada.

What it actually entails is that every species/genus has it's own ultimate rate of evolution/evolutionary bottleneck that essentially is a point where a creature has reached it's optimal status and is actually perfectly adapted to it's environment...and thus, evolution slows down/stops altogether.

Evolution does not necessarily lead to all creatures being advanced super-intelligent creatures in comparison to us - it is more a case of them being perfectly adapted to their environment and their surroundings, and that's down to environmental and social interactions with both it's own kind and other species around it. In that case, they aren't underdeveloped anything...they're actually exactly what they are supposed to be as tested by nature and the trial/error rate of the species in it's current conditions.

I'm not going to deny people's beliefs when those beliefs have not been disproven outright. However, when they have, I will scream the truth at the top of my lungs until I'm hoarse.

Indeed it has not been disproven that we were created by God.

Indeed it has not been disproven that we are progressing along a pre-planned design arranged by God.

It has been proven to a degree what form that design progresses in and how long it has and likely will progress for.

It has been proven that sentient behaviour is a product of the evolution of our species in particular, and there are signs that other species with a similar - though more basic - social structure have the ability to become something much more similar to our level of intelligence given enough time. A very long time.

You can refuse to believe anything you wish, but that does not make it wrong. True, it does not make the belief right either.

More importantly then, if you want to state something as a fact and not a belief, you need appropriate proof. In evolution's case specifically, that proof already exists no matter how hard religious people cover their ears and cry "la la la I'm not listening la la la". This particular matter is past the point of debate.

If you do not believe in evolution, you are wrong, and you can be proven wrong. The missing link was found a while back. Get over it already. ._.

(Also, the very idea that I should ignore the mountains of evidence presented by people who dedicate their lives to finding, analysing and utilising this evidence, double- and triple-checking it for accuracy for the benefit of us all - y'know, because THOSE THINGS YOU'RE USING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WERE MADE POSSIBLE BY THESE GUYS' COLLEAGUES IN THE COMPUTING FIELD WHO FOLLOW THE EXACT SAME STRICT NO-BS RULES - is absolutely ridiculous. Let's not bring that silly topic up again, shall we? )

WHAT HAVE I DONE

YOU CAUSED ME TO RAGE AT PEOPLE WHOSE INFORMATION IS DECADES OUT OF DATE

    "Evolution does not necessarily lead to all creatures being advanced super-intelligent creatures in comparison to us - it is more a case of them being perfectly adapted to their environment and their surroundings"

adaptation is a possible idea but complete evolution is just too strong of an idea, to think that humans were apes is too much to agree with. if apes could evolve why arent we seeing apes evolve now? why arent new humans poping up?

cause they cant, humans didnt evolve, there was only one human we came from. that's why we dont see new humans appear cause there was only one to start with.

     "If you do not believe in evolution, you are wrong, and you can be proven wrong"

i dont care if the whole world belived in evolution its too boring of an idea for me to believe in it. im just glad it cant be proven right.

      "y'know, because THOSE THINGS YOU'RE USING TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION WERE MADE POSSIBLE BY THESE GUYS' COLLEAGUES IN THE COMPUTING FIELD WHO FOLLOW THE EXACT SAME STRICT NO-BS RULES - is absolutely ridiculous. Let's not bring that silly topic up again, shall we? ) "

no need i know that's true, also freedom only started with such brains but that doesnt mean i will change my heart in gratitude to them, i will not deny their great works for humanity but it doesnt mean they'll be always right that's too over trusting.

So an idea has to be bizarre to be considered the true origin? Interesting but flawed idealism there, mada.

 adaptation is a possible idea but complete evolution is just too strong of an idea, to think that humans were apes is too much to agree with. if apes could evolve why arent we seeing apes evolve now? why arent new humans poping up?

brilliant point you win

*snicker*

Sorry, I, uh, just noticed the fig pig. Carry on.

"I don't believe in something because I don't want to believe in it", especially when that thing has been proven to be true, and especially when you've proven you know nothing about it, is absolutely lunacy.

Welcome to a viewpoint that still very much exists in middle america!

Rei-Rei: "Doctor! This Internet is taking itself too seriously! What ever shall we do!"  *Hysterics*

G.House: "Start the thread on a two to one kittens and humor IV, and stop trying to lick me its disterbing.  Now, I've got patients to berate and things to gloat about"

Rei-Rei: *swoon*

...How could anyone not love having her around? 😛

sonicsfan1991 wrote:

---

its a bit scary to think we're related to animals, cause that means we're eatting undeveloped people if you think about it and it wont be a nice thought.

Matt: It's likely all she knows is 'Evolution' - once some peoples minds just grasp the basics, they refuse to understand it further because it goes against the laws of god, or reality, or somesuch...this is why a lot of people are hesitant, because they tuned out the least important information and mentally blocked the subject behind it as complete white noise!

Matt: It's likely all she knows is 'Evolution' -

It's apparent, but I'd say at least give her a chance to respond before jumping to conclusions about her perspective.

I'm not invested enough to get into this, but I did notice Mada say there was only one human we came from, or two I suppose if you factor in basic biology.

But, I have a question. Given that we're talking about the Galapagos turtle theory, in which animals from different regions adapt different traits to deal with their habitat, this being Darwin's principal of evolution. Why do we have different skin tones and different hair colors in different regions.

Basically, if we are all formed from "original humans", why do Asians exist? Your answer here is either "because the Asian terrain caused them to develop those traits" (ie. evolution) or God created the world with people segmented across the world with their bodies pre-adapted to the climates which not suggests that moving around the world is against God's plan.

Either one work, really. I'd like to hear your opinion, or third option, though.

its not that hard to understand if you look at how parents traits show in their children, take my parents i only have half their traits like skin color hair or hight.

adam had all the traits in his DNA and when he had kids those traits divided between them differnt kids got different traits, and since the earth was for them alone its not odd they all went a different place and there people started living. the first human had the strongest DNA that's why the traits were so clear. now even though there are mixed race marriages like between black and asian the result doesnt really vary that much from their parents DNA cause we are now something like a copy of a copy. although every now and then you do meet someone you're not sure of their race from these mixed race marriages
as for "the asian terrain caused them to develop those traits" that's not true, humans arent like animals they can adapt themselves to differnet weathers or enviroment by their own doing using tools and strategy. animals were created each in its enviorment cause they cant think like humans and they are helpless, that's why they have built in tools and programmed actions. animals arent clever they just do what they were meant to do, kinda like robots.

and mobius you were right by your last comment  there's nothing wrong with being like that hope you dont tease that cute girl of yours, its not a big deal to believe or disbelive in evolution, if we all thought the same thing life would be boring

So... Adam has DNA with all possible human traits and characteristics?

---that sounds like such an easy to argue statement, something which goes against all principals of genetics and yet... who the hell am I to say what Adam's genes look like.

This is why apathy is the best policy, there's no right or wrong answer on even the simple things which common sense dictates, how the hell can I as an uneducated grocery store manager contest that kind of philosophical and theological arguement. The answer: I can't. Also, I don't care enough to do so. Therefore, sure. I'm going to stop looking at this thread and go back to watching funny YouTube videos.

Ah, apathy. Some say it's an irresponsible waste of your precious opinion and immortal soul. I say "eh."

Animals functioning like robots?

Meh, Now that just sounds like you dismiss them as unfeeling automatons...not sure if that's an analagy ANYONE can really agree to.

They feel pain, show love, express gratitude, mourn loved ones, have fun, and pretty much everything else...you don't really seem to allow for that with the whole extreme idea that animals somehow are lesser in that respect - Octopus can unscrew jam jars...that's not quite a skill nature tells them to do!

waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa craigs not gonna debate   why why <hugs>
although now i know what you do for a living <adds notes to the craig data book> XD i almost gotten all the info on craig. just need more of his brains.

mobius, im surprised at you?! dont you watch animal planet? octopuses do that like they do with clams and such also animals use their expressions for survival. they do feel pain i totally support that but that doesnt mean they think the same as humans do, they are less developed.

Hehe, that reminds me of something.

"It is an important and popular fact that things are not always what they seem. For instance, on the planet Earth, man had always assumed that he was more intelligent than dolphins because he had achieved so much — the wheel, New York, wars and so on — whilst all the dolphins had ever done was muck about in the water having a good time. But conversely, the dolphins had always believed that they were far more intelligent than man — for precisely the same reasons.

Curiously enough, the dolphins had long known of the impending destruction of the planet Earth and had made many attempts to alert mankind of the danger; but most of their communications were misinterpreted as amusing attempts to punch footballs or whistle for tidbits, so they eventually gave up and left the Earth by their own means shortly before the Vogons arrived.

The last ever dolphin message was misinterpreted as a surprisingly sophisticated attempt to do a double-backwards-somersault through a hoop whilst whistling the "Star Sprangled Banner", but in fact the message was this: So long and thanks for all the fish."

Ch23 of the Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, by Douglas Adams.

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is my holy book man. I'm very cautious of the mice 🙁

Also good god sonicsfan stop being so creepy about craig. It's not funny or cute and you're probably making both him and sage feel awkward.

Tact is not my strong suit.

So... Adam has DNA with all possible human traits and characteristics?

Why not? The Pokédex says Mew has the DNA of all Pokémon in its body. You're not doubting the literal truth of everything in the Pokédex, are you? That would be sacrilege!

It's some of the pseudoscience creationists tell themselves to reconcile modern science with ancient superstition. For fun, another example: in the first days of Earth, most of its water was collected in a canopy in the atmosphere, but when the Earth's rotation shifted, it all fell, causing the great Flood.