• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Does believing in Evolution say a lot about you

Status
Not open for further replies.
I'm just opening the discussion. I already stated I seriously doubt I could change someones faith
as easy as stating one fact.
Just that it is indeed a faith belief.

I'm actually very familiar with theory of evolution. I used to follow it blindly. Till I scratched the surface and realized the many holes in the theory. I felt betrayed. I was honestly astonished that the other side was never presented to me.

IM not saying that one has to believe what I believe. Just I have noticed many people will start right up with verbal attacks on you when you disagree with theory. This is a big pattern I see. Instead of a scientific discussion it generally always ends in a dogmatic discussion or verbal attacks.
And I never bring up religion for my support!
 
Just to be clear I believe evolution is a real thing, there is no doubt in my mind. I consider it to be a fact. Yet, I still have to take on faith the evidence presented to me because I am not a scientist studying evolution. Just as I have to take on faith that the Earth is spherical because I have never been to space to see it. And that we are made of atoms, and that the universe is composed of galaxies. I do believe these things with certainty, yet I have never seen them directly. That's what I meant when I said everything is a belief. So, maybe not everything, but a lot of what we know is in reality what we believe to be true.
 
Thanks for clarifying that Xorkoth. I'd have to agree with you that strictly speaking, this is the correct perspective. In this sense, many things that we consider fact, are actually things that we just trust have to trust the body of science on.

I've seen enough pictures of earth from space, and I've seen lunar ecclipses with my own eyes, so I'm quite certain that the earth is round, there isn't a more plausible explanation for these phenomena, so I must regard this as fact.

Similarly, phenomena such as speciation, adaptation, and the fossil record are best explained as results of natural selection. I don't even need to trust the experts on it, because just thinking it through, having spent a lot of time observing nature, and having considered the counter-arguements, there is no more plausible explanation. There are nuances and complexities to it that we don't know about yet that will continue to unfold, but natural selection is certainly a thing that happens in nature.

Personally, I don't know enough about particle physics to grasp the nature of quarks, so I have faith that physics has discovered this to be an accurate model of that scale of matter.

Richard Dawkins is a dick btw. He makes me want to believe that the universe was created in 7 days.
 
perpetualdawn said:
Thanks for clarifying that Xorkoth. I'd have to agree with you that strictly speaking, this is the correct perspective. In this sense, many things that we consider fact, are actually things that we just trust have to trust the body of science on.
Click to expand...

This applies to those within science as well, and not just the average person. Who has time to go back and do all the experiments and observations contained in the text books that make up their discipline? It comes back to trust in the end.

As for evolution.. I think it still has a lot of answer for when it comes to large scale morphological changes. We have a certain narrative/paradigm regarding the story of evolution.. but this is more belief than proven fact. Evolution happens no doubt. But the narrative we currently have does not convince me.
 
^^^
An honest evolutionist. Pat yourself on back for being honest with yourself.

"why, if species have descended from another species by fine graduations, why do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms?"
Charles Darwin-

"Often a cold shudder has run through me, and I asked myself if have devoted my life to a complete fantasy"
Charles Darwin-
(did you high school teacher present this to ya)

This man had enough chutzpah to a dmitt faults with his theory.

I'm not trying to hurt your feelings, just provoking you to think for yourself.
 
Last edited:
Yes evolution is a theory. It may not be 100% correct. However, it still makes much more sense than what most of the middle america sheep worship.
 
Dystopia35 said:
Yes evolution is a theory. It may not be 100% correct. However, it still makes much more sense than what most of the middle america sheep worship.
Click to expand...

How does what "the middle America sheep worship" help give any proof of evolution or refutes my points of living fossils and lack of transitional fossils.
Your just proving my premise when you attack a srawman.
THE BELIEVE OF SOMETHING ELSE BEING FALSE DOESN'T MAKE EVOLUTION TRUE FOLKS
I'm getting dizzy on this merry-go-round
 
Shrooms00087 said:
There are gaps, yes. But we're talking thousands of years worth of soil, land, and ocean. It'll take some time.
Click to expand...

I think you mean millions of years.....
kinda important for your "theory"

But I'm sure your much more educated than me on the subject.

But nevertheless the fossil record is good proof against evolution.
Why do we found an explosion of species in the Cambrian layer? Why do we find species in there that look identical to what we have today? That's a whole lot of millions of years there.
Why do vertebrates show up in the fossil record before invertebrates do? Backbones before non backbones??

AND why am I the providing all the facts pretaining to evolution?
Could it be you are you a little shaky about what your faith really is?
 
methamaniac said:
How does what "the middle America sheep worship" help give any proof of evolution or refutes my points of living fossils and lack of transitional fossils.
Your just proving my premise when you attack a srawman.
THE BELIEVE OF SOMETHING ELSE BEING FALSE DOESN'T MAKE EVOLUTION TRUE FOLKS
I'm getting dizzy on this merry-go-round
Click to expand...
Yes, hence the word theory. Theories are not one hundred percent accurate. However I will go with science over fairy tales 100% of the time.
 
Dystopia35 said:
Yes, hence the word theory. Theories are not one hundred percent accurate. However I will go with science over fairy tales 100% of the time.
Click to expand...

Another attack on religion. You guys are making me look good here. MY claim your faith evolution says a lot about you has merit. The ironic thing is you ARE believing in a fairy tale for adults

I digress, I entertain you with another fact to chew on since I haven't been presented with one.

Symbiotic relationships give Darwin trouble.

"If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection"
(The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science )
-Charles Darwin

Symbiotic relationships are OBSERVABLE TODAY.
They are happening now folks. Bees and flowers for example. Another would be the bacteria in your gut and your body. We need the bacteria to surviveand it needs us. There are thousand or examples of this.

Again why do I seem to be only one producing factual information.
Why am I the only one quoting DARWIN, and why does what he says agree with me.

I not trying to be snarky, trying to make you think
 
Last edited:
Look I don't care what you say. I don't give a shit if you disprove evolution or prove it. I don't care. What I do care about is logic and common sense. Religion is not any of those. So yeah in my opinion if someone believes in the THEORY of evolution it does say something about them. It says that they are in my opinion more logical and not dellusional. Oh sorry for the insult.
 
"If it could be proved that any part of the structure of any one species had been formed for the exclusive good of another species, it would annihilate my theory, for such could not have been produced through natural selection"
(The Origin of Species, 1859, Masterpieces of Science )


"Although many statements may be found in works on natural history to this effect, I cannot find even one which seems to me of any weight"

The very next line in Origin of Species
 
Yes Im framilar with
"On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life."

Darwin honestly pointed out this was a problem for his theory. It was his OPINION his thoery could survive anyway
He naturally wouldn't try hard to disprove his thoery

EDIT: sorry Kittycat I went back and changed to current tense so it makes sense
 
Last edited:
But that statement is not describing symbiosis. Perhaps I am understanding you incorrectly but you did use that line directly before stating symbiotic relationships were a problem for Darwin. That is not what it is saying at all.
 
Have any of you ever looked at nature, at all the beautiful species of animals, the beauty of people, the magisterial scenery around us and just thought this wasn't happenstance from some dust particles in the universe colliding this all seems perfectly crafted from the most perfect tailor, architect, inventor ever: God.

Not to say I don't believe in any form of evolution, sure species begin to take on different characteristics over time based on genetics and natural selection this can be seen over a few generations of dog breeding but such a radical change as going from a monkey or chimpanzee to a human being is difficult to fathom.
 
Dystopia35 said:
Look I don't care what you say. I don't give a shit if you disprove evolution or prove it. I don't care. What I do care about is logic and common sense. Religion is not any of those. So yeah in my opinion if someone believes in the THEORY of evolution it does say something about them. It says that they are in my opinion more logical and not dellusional. Oh sorry for the insult.
Click to expand...

Its cool, I'm used to ad hominem attacks. Says more about you then me.

You claim you care about logic and common sense.
Riddle me this:
What came first, DNA code , or protein to read the code. Its not real complicated. Evolution has to answer this because it depends on mutations of the genome to create new species
(Note: you need DNA to know what proteins to make and how to make them, but you need proteins to synthesize DNA in order for it to be readable
It the old chicken and egg again)

I'll take "Evolution in trouble for a 1000", Alex....

See jokes are better when you got a little substance behind them
 
Last edited:
lol oh dear.. this will be fun but not now..

Just to settle this very common misconception that it's "only a theory"

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world that is acquired through the scientific method and repeatedly tested and confirmed through observation and experimentation.[1][2] As with most (if not all) forms of scientific knowledge, scientific theories are inductive in nature and aim for predictive power and explanatory force.[3][4]

Scientific theory with as much evidence to back it up, or all intents and purposes, is fact.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top