• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

One-third of Americans reject evolution, poll shows[W:571]

Peter Grimm said:
That's a loaded question. I know enough about evolution - a few college biology courses.
Click to expand...

Okay, then why don't you tell me, in your own words, what evolution is.
 
Cardinal said:
Okay, then why don't you tell me, in your own words, what evolution is.
Click to expand...

No thanks, because I think your tone is patronizing and you're not debating anything - you're just attempting to discredit me. I have no interest in engaging that.
 
Peter Grimm said:
No thanks, because I think your tone is patronizing and you're not debating anything - you're just attempting to discredit me. I have no interest in engaging that.
Click to expand...

Because you have no ****ing idea that's why.
 
Peter Grimm said:
No thanks, because I think your tone is patronizing and you're not debating anything - you're just attempting to discredit me. I have no interest in engaging that.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry if you find my tone patronizing, but what's many times more patronizing is your willingness to come into a thread and waste everybody's time on a topic you refuse to learn anything about. It's downright offensive, actually. Which I strongly suspect is your purpose here.
 
Peter Grimm said:
That's one example out of about 50 or so on that list. Are you really saying that scientific theories are never superseded?
Click to expand...

Scientific hypothesis? Yes. There is a difference. Observable and testable . . . over and over again, based in skepticism, and then getting the same result.

A hypothesis is an educated guess.
 
Peter Grimm said:
If that's all you get from what I've written, I'm sorry for you.
Click to expand...

You haven't given anything more than "I believe". That is the sum of your argument, correct? I cannot dent that way of thinking and I think I won't try anymore.
 
Cardinal said:
I'm sorry if you find my tone patronizing, but what's many times more patronizing is your willingness to come into a thread and waste everybody's time on a topic you refuse to learn anything about. It's downright offensive, actually. Which I strongly suspect is your purpose here.
Click to expand...

Wrong.

The subject of this thread is people who reject evolution - I happen to be one of those people and I'm here to debate my beliefs with whoever would like to do so.

I laid out my reasons for not believing in evolution as follows....

1.) The law of probabilities suggests our very existence via natural selection is unlikely (human beings are incredibly complex).

2.) History has shown us that scientific theories are constantly changing and being disregarded as new ones take their place. Odds are (there we go with probabilities again) that within a few years science will abandon the current theory of evolution for something else.

3.) Our understanding of how DNA and genetics work is in its infancy, to say the least. We have really just begun to scratch the surface there. How can we possibly think we have an understanding of evolution when the building blocks of what makes us evolve, our genes, are so poorly understood?



Those are issues that are fair game for debate. Questioning my level of education, accusing me of wasting everyone's time, etc are making this about ME, and not about ISSUES.

I'm not going down that road with you. I don't prove myself to anyone, so if you're interested in debating the issues, I may or may not join in, but as for the rest of the stuff, save it.
 
DiavoTheMiavo said:
You haven't given anything more than "I believe". That is the sum of your argument, correct? I cannot dent that way of thinking and I think I won't try anymore.
Click to expand...

I don't think evolution has met the burden of proof to the point where I would accept it.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I don't think evolution has met the burden of proof to the point where I would accept it.
Click to expand...

I could accept that from you if you had shown a little better understanding of it. You believing the theory states we come from monkeys was a clear sign the wall was already up and set in a foundation.
 
DiavoTheMiavo said:
I could accept that from you if you had shown a little better understanding of it. You believing the theory states we come from monkeys was a clear sign the wall was already up and set in a foundation.
Click to expand...

Show me where I said I believe the theory of evolution states we come from monkeys. I never said that.

Why do you believe in evolution? Do you believe everything you're told, or do you value independent thought?
 
Peter Grimm said:
Wrong.

The subject of this thread is people who reject evolution - I happen to be one of those people and I'm here to debate my beliefs with whoever would like to do so.

I laid out my reasons for not believing in evolution as follows....

1.) The law of probabilities suggests our very existence via natural selection is unlikely (human beings are incredibly complex).

2.) History has shown us that scientific theories are constantly changing and being disregarded as new ones take their place. Odds are (there we go with probabilities again) that within a few years science will abandon the current theory of evolution for something else.

3.) Our understanding of how DNA and genetics work is in its infancy, to say the least. We have really just begun to scratch the surface there. How can we possibly think we have an understanding of evolution when the building blocks of what makes us evolve, our genes, are so poorly understood?



Those are issues that are fair game for debate. Questioning my level of education, accusing me of wasting everyone's time, etc are making this about ME, and not about ISSUES.

I'm not going down that road with you. I don't prove myself to anyone, so if you're interested in debating the issues, I may or may not join in, but as for the rest of the stuff, save it.
Click to expand...

Your reasons for evolution being invalid mean nothing if you don't know what evolution is to begin with. Reading the wiki entry on evolution is the absolute bare minimum you could do and you can't even be bothered with that. In the time it took you to to contribute to the last two or three pages of this thread you could have read it and been more knowledgable for it. But you won't, because that's not your reason for being here. It's to waste everybody's time and take a giant smelly crap on this thread.
 
Cardinal said:
Your reasons for evolution being invalid mean nothing if you don't know what evolution is to begin with. Reading the wiki entry on evolution is the absolute bare minimum you could do and you can't even be bothered with that. In the time it took you to to contribute to the last two or three pages of this thread you could have read it and been more knowledgable for it. But you won't, because that's not your reason for being here. It's to waste everybody's time and take a giant smelly crap on this thread.
Click to expand...

And what are your credentials?
 
Peter Grimm said:
And what are your credentials?
Click to expand...

That has got to be the clumsiest attempt at deflection I've ever seen on this forum. Why don't you just admit you know nothing about the topic at hand and scurry off already, since you're clearly much too lazy to take the ten minutes required to learn anything about it.
 
Re: One-third of Americans reject evolution, poll shows

Peter Grimm said:
I can tell you that I believe in God because life is too complex to have occurred on its own.
Click to expand...

A lot can happen in 3.5 BILLION years. That's where you fail. You can't grasp the timeframe.
 
Peter Grimm said:
I'm not the one who said that, that would be a direct quote from Bishop Wilberforce back in the 1890's.

To answer the question you asked me on the other thread, the reason I don't believe in evolution is:

1.) The law of probabilities suggests our very existence via natural selection is unlikely (human beings are incredibly complex).

2.) History has shown us that scientific theories are constantly changing and being disregarded as new ones take their place. Odds are (there we go with probabilities again) that within a few years science will abandon the current theory of evolution for something else.

3.) Our understanding of how DNA and genetics work is in its infancy, to say the least. We have really just begun to scratch the surface there. How can we possibly think we have an understanding of evolution when the building blocks of what makes us evolve, our genes, are so poorly understood?
Click to expand...

1) No, the law of probabilities does not suggest that because you have absolutely no way of assessing how likely or unlikely human existence is. Besides, even unlikely, this is the outcome. It's unlikely that Jim wins the lottery, and it's equally unlikely that Jane wins the lottery. But over a sufficient time period, somebody wins the lottery, and that person's odds were just as low as everyone else. Our exact form might be unlikely, but it's not any more unlikely than some other critter. "We're complex" is subjective, and a cop out. Look at a snowflake under a microscope. Some might say the pattern is complex. This isn't evidence that the snowflake was designed.

2) Another cop out. "Human beings have been wrong about stuff, therefore this is wrong." While science does evolve over time, things like this don't change radically. For example, gravity being both a theory and a law proposed by Isaac Newton. You might say that Isaac Newton was wrong. After all, he hadn't accounted for relativity, which Einstein would figure out later. But Newton was still able to calculate motion and gravity pretty darn accurately at human levels. He had most of the picture, was just missing a piece. As a result, there were small discrepancies when he was calculating orbits of planets. So then relativity came along and solved the problem. Our understanding of gravity improved, but the underlying concept did not change radically.

Well, we'll certainly learn more about evolution as time goes on, improve our understanding of it. But the underlying concept isn't going anywhere.

3) Darwin had enough to know that evolution was happening and he didn't even know DNA existed. The discovery of DNA has added more evidence to evolution. The more we learn about DNA, the more we learn about evolution. But this is not a point that leads to the idea that evolution is wrong. I think you've moved the goalposts from "evolution is bull****" to "we don't know everything about evolution." Well, of course we don't. We don't know everything about... anything. Should we shut down nuclear reactors because we don't fully understand nuclear physics yet?

Peter Grimm said:
I can tell you that I believe in God because life is too complex to have occurred on its own.
Click to expand...

I believe snowflakes are too complex to occur naturally.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Show me where I said I believe the theory of evolution states we come from monkeys. I never said that.

Why do you believe in evolution? Do you believe everything you're told, or do you value independent thought?
Click to expand...

Originally Posted by Peter Grimm
I reject evolution. I think it's crap.

Also, did you know that there was once a debate between two guys named Wilberforce and Huxley, and Wilberforce asked Huxley "Was it through your grandmother or your grandfather that you're descended from a monkey?"
Click to expand...

You included this hypothesis in the group of so-called theories that have been debunked. If I misunderstood, it is because you seem to think theories like gravity and evolution are hypothesis.
 
Cardinal said:
That has got to be the clumsiest attempt at deflection I've ever seen on this forum. Why don't you just admit you know nothing about the topic at hand and scurry off already, since you're clearly much too lazy to take the ten minutes required to learn anything about it.
Click to expand...

You're asking about my credentials, so I'm asking for yours in turn. Tit for tat, seems fair to me.

I think it's funny that you're trying to push me out of this thread, it shows you fear me. And you should. I've convinced many, many people in my lifetime that evolution is baloney. From kids to teens to adults, I've changed many lives by challenging and ridiculing the teachers they're already predisposed to dislike.

You can't touch me intellectually, so you're trying, wishing for me to leave. Too bad bubba. Now STFU.
 
Peter Grimm said:
You're asking about my credentials, so I'm asking for yours in turn. Tit for tat, seems fair to me.

I think it's funny that you're trying to push me out of this thread, it shows you fear me. And you should. I've convinced many, many people in my lifetime that evolution is baloney. From kids to teens to adults, I've changed many lives by challenging and ridiculing the teachers they're already predisposed to dislike.

You can't touch me intellectually, so you're trying, wishing for me to leave. Too bad bubba. Now STFU.
Click to expand...

Why don't you try and convince someone that matters? Someone that reward you with a Nobel Prize? Someone that can analyze your results and evidence. Or is this more claptrap and internet "toughness?"
 
DiavoTheMiavo said:
You included this hypothesis in the group of so-called theories that have been debunked. If I misunderstood, it is because you seem to think theories like gravity and evolution are hypothesis.
Click to expand...

Read more carefully. I never stated that I believe this, I was quoting a famous historic debate.

Originally Posted by Peter Grimm
I reject evolution. I think it's crap.

Also, did you know that there was once a debate between two guys named Wilberforce and Huxley, and Wilberforce asked Huxley "Was it through your grandmother or your grandfather that you're descended from a monkey?"
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
You're asking about my credentials,
Click to expand...

No I didn't. I asked for you to define evolution, which you are clearly unable to do.

I've convinced many, many people in my lifetime that evolution is baloney.
Click to expand...

No you haven't, because first you'd have to know what evolution is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom