Quantcast
Prove that evolution is what actually happened.

Forums - General Discussion - Prove that evolution is what actually happened.

Tagged games:

The best way to answer the OP is to show that humans evolved the belief in religion...

They already know that people have a genetic predisposition to believing in religion.

They also are starting to realize how religions evolve and adapt to human circumstances. Humanity needed a reason for people to take care of the poor, sick, old, disadvantaged etc.



Around the Network

First off, very few religious people deny evolution by now. 2nd, evolution does in no way disprove existence of God by the slightest. I think this is a flamebait/troll thread to be honest



I'm not gonna give you proof because it would mean doing a lot of research, but I'm just going to say that you can observe evolution easily with virus and bacteria, which have a short lifespan and multiply very rapidly and in great quantity, and therefore evolution happens quicker with them.

That's why, when you create a medicine against them, they eventually become immune to it, because the ones that were immune to begin with are the ones that successfully multiply.

That's why penicillin was a great success back when it was invented but is not that useful today.



No troll is too much for me to handle. I rehabilitate trolls, I train people. I am the Troll Whisperer.

Reasonable said:
spurgeonryan said:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=133558&page=1

This not a joke thread. I truly would like to see if I have been actually wrong all these years believing in God.

Could it be that God just did his miracles and magic in a scientific way? Maybe 7 days to him was 7 million years and he made us evolve in that time? Then the Bible just starts off when Man was able to talk and think. Maybe the Plagues can be explained rationally and so can the flood.

So what proof is there that this was not the case? That there really is no God, and we all just came from anti-matter and matter exploding, slime, fish, monkeys, Adam, Me.


Read this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Greatest-Show-Earth-Evidence-Evolution/dp/055277524X/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1315394601&sr=8-4

It does the job very well.

Also note evolution does not preculde God.  For me it does personally but it doesn't literally.  The Catholical Church, for example, accepts evolution and God at the same time.  The current view from the CT is that God created the Universe and created it such that evolution was a mechanism within it to achieve his design of animals, etc.

Part of the problem, as Dawkins notes in the book I've linked, is that most people don't understand how the word "theory" should be used or aplied when we talk about the "Theory" of evolution or the "Theory of General Relativity" vs a simple matematical proof vs facts.

Anyway, as I say, why take my word for it, Dawkins has nicely collated all the evidence into one nice handy book for you to read.

he might also want to read The God Delusion too.... 



I'm not really here!

Link: Shipment History Since 1995


Runa216 said:
yo_john117 said:

Well there is one part of evolution that is true...I forget what exactly it is but it has to do with different breeds mating and creating slightly different breeds of the same kind of animal.

But the rest of evolution takes as much faith to believe in as it takes to believe in Creation or whatever other theory people happen to believe in.


....No.  Just no.  An observable, testable, phenomena does not require faith to believe in, that's just a truly foolish thing to say. 

Are you kidding me? Of course it requires faith to believe in. Since it cannot be proven 100% beyond reasonable doubt it requires at least a small amount of faith/belief in its most basic form.

Also, how can you say there is NO evidence of a God when hundreds of millions of people have observed acts that seem to give credence to a divine being? When all logic is defied and someone specifically observes an act of this nature themselves, that's a big thing. Sure you can try to call it "chance" or try to explain things scientifically, but I'm mostly just trying to point out that there are plenty of observations made out there to support a god. Science and it's evidence is based on observations, and there are just as many observations supporting a divine being/divine intervention as there are scientific based observations for theories.



Around the Network
GameOver22 said:
Ssenkahdavic said:

Ive always found these types of debates fascinating.

I do not think the question of evolution is does it exist, but in what form does it exist?

The reason we call it the "Theory of Evolution" is Darwin had a hypothesis that Natural Selection was occurring, and went to do research on his idea. (Granted it is much more in depth than this). Out of his research into Natural Selection, the scientific community began researching into his ideas further, and into other areas of Evolution (random mutations and the like).

For someone who believes in GOD or any other GODLIKE deity, is the above out of Gods reach? How do the two HAVE to be seperate and not of the same origin? People believe that GOD created everything (from Matter, to Energy to even all Idea's) so couldnt this GOD have created the "Theory of Evolution"  and the application of such?

And I would also like to put in on the Proven/Unproven debate. There is a reason the Scientific Community stopped using the term Law (Proven) to describe Scientific concepts. Newton came up with very specific laws of motion. At the time, these laws were seen as irrefutable. After many a year, we have determined that these laws are NOT absolutes but very good approximations that work great for the macroscopic scale but do not work on the quantum scale. Just because we can or cannot try to take these ideas to the level of truth, does not mean that it has to always be true. If it works here, maybe it does not work elsewhere? This is why the term Theory should always be used.

Just remember: Science just can't commit all the way to absolute - otherwise it wouldn't be science, it would be faith.

That is possible. The reason why people generally avoid making that argument is that it violates Ockham's razor (the idea that the simplest explanation is the best explanation). If evolution completely explains the origin of life, there is no reason to bring God into the picture as well. It just makes the explanation more complicated than it needs to be.

Ahh there is the Rub.  Glad you brought that up!  William (of Ockham or Occam) used the principle to justify many conclusions, including the statement that "God's existence cannot be deduced by reason alone." That one didn't make him very popular with the Pope.  Also, using the prinicple of "the idea that the simplest explanation is the best explanation" is not all together accurate.  The Razor is more of a guideline (hence being a principle) that says ""when you have two competing theories that make exactly the same predictions, the simpler one is the better."  Better, not best.  Ockham fully admitted his theories could be wrong or that they could be the only explanation.

 

Sir Isaac Newton said it the best I think "We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances."



kowenicki said:
Reasonable said:
spurgeonryan said:

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=133558&page=1

This not a joke thread. I truly would like to see if I have been actually wrong all these years believing in God.

Could it be that God just did his miracles and magic in a scientific way? Maybe 7 days to him was 7 million years and he made us evolve in that time? Then the Bible just starts off when Man was able to talk and think. Maybe the Plagues can be explained rationally and so can the flood.

So what proof is there that this was not the case? That there really is no God, and we all just came from anti-matter and matter exploding, slime, fish, monkeys, Adam, Me.


Read this book:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Greatest-Show-Earth-Evidence-Evolution/dp/055277524X/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1315394601&sr=8-4

It does the job very well.

Also note evolution does not preculde God.  For me it does personally but it doesn't literally.  The Catholical Church, for example, accepts evolution and God at the same time.  The current view from the CT is that God created the Universe and created it such that evolution was a mechanism within it to achieve his design of animals, etc.

Part of the problem, as Dawkins notes in the book I've linked, is that most people don't understand how the word "theory" should be used or aplied when we talk about the "Theory" of evolution or the "Theory of General Relativity" vs a simple matematical proof vs facts.

Anyway, as I say, why take my word for it, Dawkins has nicely collated all the evidence into one nice handy book for you to read.

he might also want to read The God Delusion too.... 

That might be overload... but I agree.  Both I believe are essential reads if you're really interested in this sort of debate.



Try to be reasonable... its easier than you think...

nightsurge said:
Runa216 said:
yo_john117 said:

Well there is one part of evolution that is true...I forget what exactly it is but it has to do with different breeds mating and creating slightly different breeds of the same kind of animal.

But the rest of evolution takes as much faith to believe in as it takes to believe in Creation or whatever other theory people happen to believe in.


....No.  Just no.  An observable, testable, phenomena does not require faith to believe in, that's just a truly foolish thing to say. 

Are you kidding me? Of course it requires faith to believe in. Since it cannot be proven 100% beyond reasonable doubt it requires at least a small amount of faith/belief in its most basic form.

Also, how can you say there is NO evidence of a God when hundreds of millions of people have observed acts that seem to give credence to a divine being? When all logic is defied and someone specifically observes an act of this nature themselves, that's a big thing. Sure you can try to call it "chance" or try to explain things scientifically, but I'm mostly just trying to point out that there are plenty of observations made out there to support a god. Science and it's evidence is based on observations, and there are just as many observations supporting a divine being/divine intervention as there are scientific based observations for theories.

Okay...here's the issue.  It cannot be proven 100%, no, but it already has been proven beyond a reasonable doubt. It's observed daily, we were able to test, restest, create, and recreate evolution in bacteria and plants.  To deny that is foolish.  evolution IS real, and while there is that infinitecimal chance we're wrong, evolution has been as proven as anything is going to get. 

Those who deny that are foolish.  

As for the whole God thing..that has nothing to do with it. Religious theory and evolution are NOT mutually exclusive and nowhere on this site, this thread, or the other infamous thread have I once tried to convince anyone that God is not real or that they shouldn't believe.  The entire original argument was based on the fact that if religion wants to be taken seriously as an origin theory, or to keep having its claws dug into our collective social psyche, we should stop treating it with kids gloves, and it should lose its supposed immunity to criticism.  

I'm not trying to cause shit, but people seem to jump on any bandwagon they can rather than addressing the issue initially brought up...which has been completely ignored in lieu of much more heated arguments about various oppressions, insensitivity, and mutually exclusive assumptions.  

Seriously, stop that. 



I got it all, baby! 

PS4, Switch, WiiU, XBO, PC
Vita, 3DS, Android

Top 3 this generation: 
Bloodborne, The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild, Dark Souls III

Haven't you seen X-Men First Class?All is explained there..



This thread. It really makes you think.



Twitter: @d21lewis  --I'll add you if you add me!!