It simply states that over time, organisms with genes most suited to survival will be more likely to survive. Can you really disagree with that? If I'm a giraffe with a long neck, that will allow me to eat more leaves on a tree, and not starve, right? The second basis is that those organisms that have genes that help it survive will pass on those genes more frequently than organisms without them. Can you take issue with that? That same giraffe is more likely to live to reproduce and pass its own genes down than a giraffe with a shorter neck, that thus can't eat as many leaves. The last thing to agree with is that random mutations occur, which is not as easy to reason out, but is certainly true. Red hair, for example, is a mutation of blond.
I'd really like to see some real opposition to those statements.
The real reason that some people disagree with evolution is that it requires years and years to work to its extremes; to create new species. Microevolution, evolving within species, really can't be debated. We can see it ourselves (http://evolution.Berkeley.Edu/evolibrary/news/110301_pcbresistantcod) in just a few years. But the problem is this: If you think the earth was created by God, a god, or gods, sometime in the last 10,000 years, then you just shouldn't be starting on evolution in the first place. Evolution takes for granted that the earth was created 4+ billion years ago.
It's analogous to trying to understand trigonometry while still believing that the pythagorean theorem is false.
One does not "believe" in a scientific theory, one accepts it or one rejects it- or in the case of the very religious and evolution, denies it. Since science is based on observable, testable, verifiable evidence there is no "believe" about it.
Evolution is one of the most heavily supported theories we HAVE in science- more supported by hard evidence than gravitation actually. Unlike creationists want to claim, it is about far more than the fossil record. Every piece of evidence in every field of the biological sciences in the past two centuries has simply confirmed evolution's veracity.
Of course, most creationists have a straw man view of what evolution IS- they think it means a cow will magically give birth to a duck. The ACTUAL definition of evolution is the change in allelic frequencies of a population over time. That's it.
Evolution says that by superior genes being passed on more and more frequently, mutations and natural selection, creatures will become more fit for their environment, and over time more complex life forms will begin to appear. I have asked this question, because too many time I have seen people completely misrepresenting evolution. What I have said evolution is does not cover everything, but the principle of it. I get very annoyed when people think that evolution talks about the origins of everything, or even life. It doesn't, and I think I am going to cry.
Darwin looked at certain bird species in different parts of the Galapagos islands and saw how some birds ate nuts and seeds and others focused more upon beetles and other insects and over time their beaks changed to better suit their hunting style, we (in a worldwide biological sense) evolve to better suit our environments. A fish did adapt to breathe and walk on land, they are called amphibians. They still had to lay their eggs in water, over time as they went farther from their nesting place and developed harder eggs capable of being born on land. They had to gaurd their young to propegate their species, animals continued to evolve until they eventually were able to carry their young. Evolution occured as certain species found a specific way to capitalize on their environment.
Creationists argue that we were, of course, created. That cannot be proven by any means. Think about this: In the Bible, all of the Ten Commandments were based off of humans sinning. Now, in the beginning of the Bible it states that there will be NO sin as long as Adam and Eve do not eat from the Tree of Knowledge; yet they can eat of the Tree of Life. This makes very little sense. Adam and Eve sin in a world without sin due to a talking serpent. The tree was placed in plain reach of them in the middle of the Garden of Eden. It's like he tried to make them sin. Anyway, without the sin, there would be no death. Think of the way we are today. We can DIE. We were supposedly created to not die. But, here we are with trillions dead. We were designed by evolution to die. We are living longer and longer, though.
Now, for the kicker. We are STILL evolving. Wisdom teeth are a sign of evolution. Our mouths are not yet big enough to house them. Not to mention we can become immune to certain medications and illnesses. This is not a miracle of God. This is the miracle of evolving.
Simply put, we are basically Pokemon. We started off small, like an Eevee. That Eevee slowly evolved into an Umbreon, a Vaporeon, a Jolteon, a Flareon, an Espeon, a Leafeon, a Glaceon, or a Sylveon; Of course, they all evolve based on what environment they are in! Just. Like. Humans. Research shows that many different races that were evolved in certain areas of the world show slight differences such as, cheekbone height, eye color, skin color, even the way they speak!
Evolution says that all animals evolved from more primitive lifeforms. Evolution should not even be a debate subject. The theory of evolution has more evidence supporting it than the theory of gravity. If you don't understand evolution there is so much that you don't understand. Evolution explains almost everything in biology, if not everything.
I believe in evolution ...Of course not as an explaination of the origins of life, earth and the universe but I totally agree with the concept that things change and adapt to their surroundings. Half of why I am a Christian is because I am fascinated by science and interested in what we as man can discover about earth. Science (though awesome) is a bit subjective in my opinion. I would love to see it unbound by all preconceptions to see where it can really take us
Do I believe in evolution? Of course. It's pretty silly, all things considered, because without evolution chances are we wouldn't be here. The theory of evolution says that, over time, people/creatures change and adapt to their surroundings. The theory of evolution is the basis for all modern-day science, in some ways.
Anyone who doesn't "believe" in the theory of evolution has either been failed by our horrible U.S. school system or perhaps isn't bright enough to understand it. Evolution is a very well substantiated theory in science that basically states that heritable traits change over several generations for a particular species via natural selection. In terms of natural selection, what is considered "strongest" is dependent upon the needs of the species to succeed and thrive in its environment. Various mechanisms such as punctuated equilibrium can cause completely new species to occur in a particular environment. If you don't understand anything that I just said, please take it upon yourself to become better educated. Obviously, your teachers are not doing their jobs. I find it very disheartening that most of you are saying "No" to this question. Let it be known that your argument "we didn't evolve from apes" is not a valid argument against evolution. Evolution occurs over many thousands, millions even billions of years. Monkeys are actually very distant ancestors (20 million years ago or so) to modern day humans, where there have been many different speciation splits in the lineage since then. Also "It's just a theory" is not a valid argument either. A theory in science doesn't mean the same thing as it does in everyday usage. When it comes to a theory in science, that means that it is basically considered a fact.
The evolutionary theory is a term that is generally mistaken, Evolution is the changes in the structures, behaviours and ancestral backgrounds of each species. It is when variation occurs between a certain species of individuals and many factors can contribute to the change in them. Geographic isolation, gene mutation, comparative anatomy, comparative embryology, fossil records, vestigial organs, comparative biochemistry and comparative DNA are all evidence that state the truth that evolution exist and that we all have ancestral forms that aren't as thy are now.
This seems like a debate best left for evidence. Some say evolution is fact, so let's ask these guys:
I've read as many sources on evolution that favor the stance against God as I could find. None if them have convinced me. Since I haven't been convinced by anyone in the scientific community that evolution deserves my belief, I do not believe it. The articles I posted are just random articles I've found on the Internet that looked like they would be good reads for anyone who disagrees with me.
Evolution???? Please!! God created a rock to be a rock not to be a person or a people say "evolve" into a person the Bible talks all about creation and how it worked and evolution has no proof to say that the creation in the Bible was not so God is the ultimate creator
It's totally stupid to think that we humans were once these chimpanzees or apes.
My question to all of the Darwinists out there is: If your belief is true, then how come humans didn't develop into something more intelligent and physically different than us today?
I know that we are much more technologically advanced and more knowledgeable than the humans that existed 3,000 years ago for instance. But if we originated from Apes and Monkeys, then what will be the advanced stage for us? Perhaps being born without fathers as it is done in cloning?
This still doesn't prove that humans came from animals or vise versa. We are far more intelligent than animals. We co-existed with animals for thousands of years, and they have not changed a bit. In fact, many of them have already been extinct.
"God gives man the faculty of consciousness. Scientists still do not understand how consciousness comes about in human beings. For example, humans are conscious of their mental processes. Humans know that they exist, they have a 'spirit' "
Evolution on a micro-scale is verifiable and even observable on human time scales (beetles, birds...). The issue is with large scale changes (fish to mammals). Given the time scales needed and often cited by evolutionist, there should be all kinds of variations in the fossil record of incremental changes along the way, but there isn't. These 'missing links' are the thorn in the side of evolutionist and the theory because it leaves a gaping whole in the proof. To say that we evolved from slime and not have ANY proof of it ANYWHERE in the fossil record is a HUGE problem. This is why there is so much press anytime someone finds a "missing link" of human/ape evolution [which to-date, have all been found to be nothing but scientists fabricating evidence to ether prove the theory, advance their career or for fame]. Darwin himself pointed out that his whole theory would collapse if there was not enough evidence in the fossil record.
Scientists often accuse religious folk of imposing what they believe on reality. And there are times and with some individuals when this is the case. However, scientists suffer the same issue, being so biased toward an issue or outcome that any evidence to the contrary is rejected without consideration, true or not. Not to mention the role that politics/funding may have in their "belief".
To both sides I would say, don't let personal biases get in the way of good judgment and good science.
Christians do not have a "straw man" view of evolution, and 'cow giving birth to duck' is called the Hopeful Monster theory. Good try with Ad Hominem, though. Furthermore, saying evolution is just change in a species over time is true, but that's not the point of the Theory of Evolution. The Theory of Evolution states that we started as amoebas, the became fish, then primates, then man/monkey hybrids (despite the lack of any transition states in the fossil record) then cavemen, the Homo Sapiens.
Time is just a perception, like the rest of our universe. Therefore, no change occurs, just the way we perceive it changes by itself. Or, it could be that time is just a dimension, therefore, we pass by it like any other dimension, but it doesn't pass us. All things have truly been the way they are since the beginning, yet they only change to us. Time is but another way of looking at our universe.
If time is but a dimension, then what are our current definitions of words saying? Time doesn't pass us, we pass time, and therefore, change doesn't exist. If change doesn't exist (as all times and states already exist as determined by whatever created the universe), then how can evolution exist?!
Evolution is not real because change is an illusion. All times already exist and change is basically just like forced walking. Remember, time is a dimension too, and all dimensions were created in some way. Therefore, there is no such thing as change as the "passage of time itself" is actually the passing of us through time.
Time is just an illusion, and all times are already determined. Therefore, evolution doesn't exist as evolution is change, and all things are already set, but we have yet to see their existence. Change over time doesn't exist, and the current definition of speed is wrong. Change is just an illusion.
We were created by god and that much is true if we were evolved then who named the dinosaurs along time ago and if we did evolve then why are the paintings on the cave walls there during the dinosaur ages and why haven't we changed in 500 years cause if the evolution is real then how come we still have things around now that they are saying we came from