Amazon.com Widgets
  • The stages of evolution were never found to be proved.

    Darwin as much as I heard, called the theory of evolution a theory because the reason you can't prove it is because you cannot see the stages for yourself.
    Evolution in humans takes billions of years and until we get a specimen it'll take too long for us to remember the theory.

    So until we can watch it happen on multi cell creatures it's not possible.

    If you have proves (on multi cell creatures please post in the comments).

  • Try this method of making a compass

    Take a bunch of gears and put them into a jar and shake the jar. A thousand years of shaking should produce something as simple as a compass relative to the theorized 100 million years it took to form something as complex as a prokaryotic cell. As a bonus suppose that a quarter of star systems in our galaxy have planets that have life... That's equivalent to having a hundred jars each filled with gears and shaking them until half of them turn into compasses. If you saw a television set lying on the street you wouldn't assume that it was formed by rain, sedimentary deposits, erosion and random solar radiation would you? Well the evolutionist would, if he had never seen a tele. If evolutionists would bother studying radio metric dating they would realize how unreliable it is. Rocks aren't made of one element. They are made of countless chemical traces. Ultimately you're only examining the chemical composition of the rock, and assuming the age. That's not science that is hypothetical at best, but really it's just fantastical literature.

  • Faith, Philosophy, Politics

    Humans are capable of great discovery, mimicry and even a degree of invention (not to mention pride and greed). Put these capabilities in the revolutionary socio/economic/political setting of the last 200 or so years, with all its accompanying technological advances, and you have a new religion for a new culture, along with its own creation story. A science-based faith will of course be polarised to any concept of a non-material God, especially if it has it's own early saints and martyrs that were persecuted by the earlier religion. Is it surprising that the most materialistic culture of all time has created a totally materialistic faith to go with it? It's the perfect tool for keeping the Economy God happy.

  • The belief in evolution is faith based.

    Faith is the substance of things hoped for and the evidence of things not seen. I would say that evolution takes a lot of faith to accept as the answer for all the creatures in all the earth. I would say that the majority of nonbelievers hope that their theory is correct bout evolution because there's definitely a huge problem in it with things not seen.

    Posted by: DsB
  • "Confidence in Absent Evidence"

    Some try to assert that there are "mountains of evidence" for evolution and say they are confident because of all of the "evidence" yet when pressed on the issue they can't produce an anthill let alone a "mountain" the best attempts are usually pointing to some form of micro-evolution and then asking us all to take a giant leap of FAITH and assume that macro-evolution is now proven. That is akin to me saying since my poodle can be taught to make noises that sound like "singing" on command that I have now "proven" that if only he were given enough time he could turn himself into a canary!

  • "Confidence in Absent Evidence"

    Some try to assert that there are "mountains of evidence" for evolution and say they are confident because of all of the "evidence" yet when pressed on the issue they can't produce an anthill let alone a "mountain" the best attempts are usually pointing to some form of micro-evolution and then asking us all to take a giant leap of FAITH and assume that macro-evolution is now proven. That is akin to me saying since my poodle can be taught to make noises that sound like "singing" on command that I have now "proven" that if only he were given enough time he could turn himself into a canary!

  • "Confidence in Absent Evidence"

    Some try to assert that there are "mountains of evidence" for evolution and say they are confident because of all of the "evidence" yet when pressed on the issue they can't produce an anthill let alone a "mountain" the best attempts are usually pointing to some form of micro-evolution and then asking us all to take a giant leap of FAITH and assume that macro-evolution is now proven. That is akin to me saying since my poodle can be taught to make noises that sound like "singing" on command that I have now "proven" that if only he were given enough time he could turn himself into a canary!

  • "Confidence in Absent Evidence"

    Some try to assert that there are "mountains of evidence" for evolution and say they are confident because of all of the "evidence" yet when pressed on the issue they can't produce an anthill let alone a "mountain" the best attempts are usually pointing to some form of micro-evolution and then asking us all to take a giant leap of FAITH and assume that macro-evolution is now proven. That is akin to me saying since my poodle can be taught to make noises that sound like "singing" on command that I have now "proven" that if only he were given enough time he could turn himself into a canary!

  • Yes you need faith to believe in a theory

    Evolution has never been proven right so that means that it is only a theory and you need faith to believe in a theory. If evolution was real then why are animals not still evolving why are dogs not changing and why do humans still look the same. You need faith to believe in the scientists unless you have done the experiment yourself hundreds of times and it worked every single time.

  • Yes faith is a very big part of it

    Evolution is based on faith. It needs faith for so much to happen. People claim that it is full of facts but it is full of unproven theories. It is called a theory for a reason. There is no complete cold hard fact that proves it is completely true. People just assume that. In fact evolution breaks some of the laws of science yet people never look at that. To believe in evolution you need to have faith in it. Many scientist and professors around the world have already said this, but people refuse to look at this.

  • Of course not.

    Evolution is based on over 150 years worth of hard scientific evidence. By definition that means it has nothing to do with faith. The only people who claim it does are the ignorant evolution deniers who so desperately must try to make evolution seem as flimsy as their religion to hold onto their beliefs.

  • No Faith Required

    The Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection is not based on faith, it is based on evidence. First, a definition:

    Faith generally has two definitions: "Confidence," and "Belief Without Evidence." I have confidence that the sun will rise tomorrow because of a basic understanding of physics and cosmology and decades of observation. I don't use the word "faith" in this way because we have a perfectly good word for it: "confidence." I use the word faith in the second way, the religious way.

    If we want to argue semantics, we can claim that evolution is based on faith because we have faith (confidence) in the scientific method, or faith (in the evidence), or faith (confidence) in this, that or the other thing, but as I mentioned, that is playing with the meaning of words and not actually saying anything.

    To restate: Evolution is not based on faith, it is based on mountains of evidence that span numerous scientific disciplines.

  • Not unless you strip the word 'faith' of all meaning

    The Theory of Evolution is not in any meaningful sense believed on faith. Faith is believing in something with insufficient evidence to justify that belief, or directly in the face of evidence that disproves that belief. Evolution is a proven, demonstrable fact of nature, it requires no faith to believe in.

  • Evolution is Science!

    Okay, so this "opinion" shouldn't even be open to discussion; it's not productive. Evolution is science, and science consists of logically based conclusions drawn from numerous collections of observations. One could question the legitimacy of this process in determining how the world functions, but doing so would call into question every other scientific theory (heliocentric theory, cell theory, atomic theory, etc.), not just evolution.
    Scientific processes are not the only way to understand the world (faith is not illegitimate), but singling out evolution as unsupported and faith-based is truly idiotic.

  • The very nature of Science is having no faith or pre-conditioned expectations.

    The reason scientists support evolution is because it's A: Observable. B: A fantastic explanation for every single solitary phenomena in the biological world. And C: Helps to throw out old ideas that try to explain said phenomena in a way that cannot be observed.

    In other words, a perfectly scientific -fact-.

  • It is based on scientific evidence

    A small amount of belief on evolution is based on faith but the evidence may be strong enough evidence to almost prove it true.

    Creation belief however is based on faith. Evolution is based on tracking down fossils and being able to tell how the species have evolved, belief on evolution is proven by facts.


Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
juslivin2013 says2013-05-29T23:00:39.340
Mrjosh.. Please enlighten us with evidence of evolution. Where is the missing link?
MrJosh says2013-06-16T04:18:03.540
@juslivin2013
First of all, the idea that we need a missing link is silly. The fossilisation process only occurs in a small fraction of dead organisms, so it to be expected that we will be missing a great deal. Secondly, we don't need fossil evidence. The genetic evidence itself is overwhelming, not to mention geographical distribution, the fact that speciation has been observed, and many other lines of evidence. Finally, what exactly are you looking for? A link between what two species?
juffu says2014-03-27T09:10:54.603
Darwin knew there was a problem with the lack of transitional fossils as did steven gould which is why he suggested punctuated equilibrium which is the same as saying new things fully complete jumped into existence.. No transitional fossils needed
if your following that idea sounds like creation where he spoke things into existance
juffu says2014-03-27T09:40:42.780
Natural selection- lets put the story straight.
Natural selection can only select from traits that naturally appear. It has no ability to create a new trait but only increase the frequency of the trait. In doing so it actually reduces the diversity of the gene pool and in the long term makes the group less diverse. It actually reduces the gene pool. Narrows it.
Take dogs as an example .If genes for small are advantageous and all dogs end up small thus the genes for big are lost unless somehow can be added again. If all the dogs were Chihuahuas no matter how you bred them, you would never get back to great dannes. If we went to the fossil record and found a jaw bone of a Chihuahua and a bull dog we would claim them to be different species yet we know all dogs are the same species.
How dodgy is the fossil record, selection can only occur from what is in the blue print,
natural selection works against evolution. Learn and read mandels rules on genetics
juffu says2014-03-27T10:13:18.987
What is a faith. Belief in something unseen
the first living cell coming out of the soup with all its dna and ability to create eyes heart liver lungs and the list goes on.
Which idea is not a faith
science is observable testable, origins are faith based
give us a break