View Poll Results: Does evolution happen

Voters
91. You may not vote on this poll
  • Evolution happens, and it is random

    65 71.43%
  • Evolution happens and is guided by a higher power

    10 10.99%
  • There is not enough information to know for sure

    7 7.69%
  • No, evolutuon does not happen

    5 5.49%
  • I don't know

    4 4.40%
Page 18 of 32 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast
Results 171 to 180 of 311

Thread: Evolution

  1. #171
    Equal Opportunity Hater
    obvious Child's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    0.0, -2.3 on the Political Compass
    Last Seen
    12-09-14 @ 11:36 PM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    19,883

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Bodhisattva View Post
    But you understood the point. Really, nothing is random, just chaos that appears random.
    Exactly. Hence why those who claim evolution is random are fools. Or more likely they simply do not understand the underlying principles of science. Considering the level of dumb here, it's probably both.
    "If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him." - Sun Tzu

  2. #172
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    You just contradicted yourself. You first say it's not directed, and then you said that the method for evolution is dependent on the environment. The environment is directing the selection for and against genes. Therefore, evolution is directed.
    The concept that you're scratching around for is responsive. Not directed.

  3. #173
    Sage
    Dezaad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Last Seen
    06-28-15 @ 10:43 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    5,058
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by obvious Child View Post
    Exactly. Hence why those who claim evolution is random are fools. Or more likely they simply do not understand the underlying principles of science. Considering the level of dumb here, it's probably both.
    Your definition of directed is suspect. Direction implies a consciousness which is doing the directing, especially in the context of this thread (see the Poll and a dictionary definition of 'directed'). It has already been explained many times that the randomness people should be considering should be limited to the randomness of gene mutation.

    Riverdad is not contradicting himself. He is being careful not to imply the consciousness that is indicated in the OP, while still accounting for the effect of the environment on the genes that flourish.

    Semantic games are stupid and it is rich that the one playing them calls others 'stupid'.
    You can never be safe from a government that can keep you completely safe from each other and the world. You must choose.

  4. #174
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by MusicAdventurer View Post
    Why do evolution vs creationism debates always end up in debates over the existence of some power that is beyond our understand? i.e. debates over whether or not a "deity" exists? last I checked science never proclaims things as absolute facts and instead declares them as lying on differing levels of evidence based support. right now evolution is the best explanation for how organisms came to be and there is little to no understanding of how matter came to be in the first place. science doesn't attempt to support the theory of a deity existing because there is currently no way to measure related variables, i.e. things are too subjective. at least that's how I understand it.
    From my rudimentary understanding, to believe in evolution seems to also mean you believe in abiogenesis. Others have claimed that is not so, so their views are a bit obscure to me in regards to the beginning. That power is believed to be the precursor of evolution/creationism. God or The Big Bang(abiogenesis). The many evolutionists and atheists I have talked to seem to declare that believing in God is irrational and that the abscence of His presence is proof that God does not exists. This leaves me wroth. To me, logic neither proves nor disproves God. Bias does. Evolution may be a better explanation in terms of evidence, but it annoys me when people assume evolution is the de facto belief that isn't to be questioned.

    With me, I connote evolution with abiogenesis. If there's been a procession of larger animals from smaller animals, what was before the littlest organism came to be? In my mind, evolution deands a beginning. An origin. The Big Bang? An obscure spark? Question the source and the whole procession in my mind becomes questionable. f one cannot tell me where the Big Macs came from, why should I trust and enjoy them?

    Evolution is questionable to me. I believe God created mn and woman. However, I suppose it's not impossible that in God's design certain animals were able to adapt in certain ways. Every answer you recieve ten more take its place.


    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    If you experience ridicule after comments like that one, it is because you don't have a basic understanding of the theory you seek to question the legitimacy of. Evolution is not likely to be something you will ever see "at work" yourself because it takes far more than a single human life-span for it to work. It's like saying "I'd like to see planetary formation at work, myself." It is a pointlessly impossible and uninformed request.

    What exactly is a basic understanding, here? Iirc, evolutionists are still quarreling amongst themselves. If the experienced are quarreling, what does that say about us repeaters? I merely ask for examples of evolution supposedly at work. If no examples can be given, then it makes me wonder.

    Why do you seem to think that an explanation for the beginning of life would be needed in order to maintain rationality. Just because an explanation exists does not mean it is a rational one. In fact, irrational explanations are quite common.

    You seem to use "maintain rationality" in a careless way, since what exactly is rationality and how does one maintain it according to whom? That brain candy aside, Thus why I ponder the "rational" explanations of evolution.

    When the actual answer to the question is unknown, the most rational response is "I don't know".

    Hence my purpose to bring people to the great "I don't know." We don't know as much as we think we do, for certain.

    I have two issues with this question.

    One: You are asking a loaded question. The word "create" requires a will in order to occur. To rephrase the question so that it is not loaded, you can ask something like "if God did not create life, how did life come to exist?"

    Two: The second issue I have with the question is it's lack of relevance. A lack of alternative theories to explain a phenomenon doesn't lend credibility to a false explanation, nor does an abundance of alternative explanations remove credibility from a true explanation. The question you ask is a pointless one because even if the answer is "I don't know" It won't make the God explanation any more true or false, nor will it make it any more or less rational.

    The Big Bang has been considered the beginning of life. Thus why I used the word "create." Semantics aside, I ask questions for the sole purpose of understanding.

    This kind of question is also commonly used to set up an argument from incredulity fallacy as well



    The best thing about having a belief system where one does not have a creation necessity (i.e. one does not have to believe that there must be a creator for all things) is that one does not have to fall prey to the circular logic inherent in the question of "what created the creator". The answer given to that question is invariably "The creator has always existed", which is circular when one has the starting premise of "everything that exists must be created".

    When someone doesn't have that premise, though, it is possible to say "it has always existed" without falling prey to circular logic. I believe that ecofarm gave a perfect example of this kind of theory earlier in this thread (although it may have been a different one). Life on earth may have come from somewhere else, but life in the universe might have been here for as long as the universe has been here. Just because a lot of one group may believe a certain thing doesn't mean that the group demands it.



    The most rational answer to the origin of life question is "I don't know. I don't even know if it actually has an origin, in truth. Who knows how life on Earth got here. We do know that it's diversity on Earth can be explained by evolution, though."


    Interesting. At least you seem to not be binded and blinded by a belief. You say "I don't know" which, in my eyes, is the correct response because we truly don't know and any deviance from that is mere assumption.

    What's wrong with that?
    A belief is nothing but a belief. There is no absoluteness. Saying I believe in "this" is no more relevant than saying I believe in "that".

    Quote Originally Posted by marduc View Post
    There is nothing wrong with saying "We do not know" - in fact just the opposite, there is everything right in saying this.

    There are hypothesis, but to be able to test them is nearly impossible - especially when trying to say a particular hypothesis IS how life came about on earth. Even if we did somehow make life in a test tube at best all that would show is that it is possible to create life (or even more simplified and baby steps substitute self replicating molecules for life), this still would not be a definitive answer to whether or not it was how life came about here to begin with.

    So no there is nothing to offer regarding how life started, and your request for something more is impossible to fulfill (without inserting a "belief"). At best all that can be done is to postulate "this is how life MAY have started". It is folly, and thoroughly anathema to the scientific method to insert an answer that is not tested or testable and say "this is how it came about" The answer is "WE DO NOT KNOW" and this is the ONLY acceptable and proper scientific answer.

    In response to your last statement..



    It is not a religious versus atheist thing, it is religion versus science here, and science is NOT synonymous with "atheist". So lets change this to "Otherwise, I'd be left to think that both the religious and [science is], well, bound to nothing but beliefs.

    So let me see if I get this right.. you ask a question where ANY answer trying to say this is how life came about would be inserting <unsubstantiated> beliefs, yet the answers that would not be "bound to nothing but beliefs" ("I do not know" or "I cannot answer") - are what would leave you to think that it is "bound to nothing but beliefs"? You have this entire thing set up bassackwards.

    Not having an answer when there is none, and admitting so instead of trying to force an answer does not put one on the same "belief" field as inserting an answer. Your statement and your "warning" is ridiculous, no matter what is or is not provided you would think the same (erroneous or not) - you have your conclusion already made.. regardless of any answer or a non answer given I am fairly confident that you would view it as support of your preconceived notion anyhow.
    My preconcieved notion is that we don't know. It's crushing really, because it throws all beliefs in turmoil. No one can absolutely prove their claims.

    Simply, we don't know for sure. (I read your whole post and I appreciate your dedication in understanding things)


    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    You've had examples of evolution explained to you a dozen times in other threads. Don't pull the same time wasting crap here again.

    Also... Volcanic lightning may have sparked life on Earth - environment - 16 October 2008 - New Scientist << A few year old article in which scientists actually abiogenesis'ed. It's not theoretical. We can actually do it.
    I am only human; forgetfullness happens. Though, those examples, the ones I can remember, were not 100% absolute in regards to certainty. Logical fallacy, "ad hominem", noted.

    I'll look into that article, understand it, and then test it in a poll/thread to see what others more experienced think about it.

  5. #175
    Uncanny
    Paschendale's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    New York City
    Last Seen
    03-31-16 @ 04:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    12,510

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    I am only human; forgetfullness happens. Though, those examples, the ones I can remember, were not 100% absolute in regards to certainty. Logical fallacy, "ad hominem", noted.
    I'm not attacking your viewpoints by attacking you. I'm just attacking you, because you're incredibly dishonest and ask the same questions over and over in these threads and continually ignore the answers. I've had to explain the scientific definition of "theory" to you several times, and you keep asserting that evolution requires abiogenesis. This isn't the first thread where these exact same points have been discussed over and over. No one learns anything if we have to backtrack with every new thread. Yet that's what you keep doing.
    Liberté. Égalité. Fraternité.

  6. #176
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I'm not attacking your viewpoints by attacking you. I'm just attacking you, because you're incredibly dishonest and ask the same questions over and over in these threads and continually ignore the answers. I've had to explain the scientific definition of "theory" to you several times, and you keep asserting that evolution requires abiogenesis. This isn't the first thread where these exact same points have been discussed over and over. No one learns anything if we have to backtrack with every new thread. Yet that's what you keep doing.
    We all do that. Otherwise, everyone would be constantly be changing their beliefs. I am positive that you hve recieved answers in the past as well that you ignored as well. Change the perception, and the reality changes as well.

    Apparently others on your team don't do what you say. They say that evolution is fact. They say believing in God is irrational and stupid. They say that the Big Bang exists. I hear what you say, but those in your party only complicate the issue.

    Furthermore, if we backtrack, more information can be gleaned. I don't believe in evolution. I presume you don't believe in God. The more you debate these issues, the more your understanding grows. You see, we're like rocks in a tumbler that grind against others; we become polished in our knowledge and understanding. Are there any beliefs you have, like abortion or homosexuality, that no matter what you hear from the opposing side you'll never acknowledge? We are all guilty of that. Each and every one of us. There are some precepts and ideals we'll undoubtedly never let go of.

  7. #177
    Farts in Elevators
    OscarB63's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Alabama
    Last Seen
    09-06-14 @ 07:26 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    26,526

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Paschendale View Post
    I'm not attacking your viewpoints by attacking you. I'm just attacking you .
    admissions of this nature could lead to infractions
    The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.

    An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last.

  8. #178
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:34 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,288
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Wake View Post
    From my rudimentary understanding, to believe in evolution seems to also mean you believe in abiogenesis. Others have claimed that is not so, so their views are a bit obscure to me in regards to the beginning.


    Evolution and abiogenisis have exactly jack **** to do with one another.

    ]That power is believed to be the precursor of evolution/creationism. God or The Big Bang(abiogenesis).
    The big bang and abiogenesis have exactly jack **** to do with one another.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  9. #179
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 04:34 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,288
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by OscarB63 View Post
    admissions of this nature could lead to infractions
    Moderator's Warning:
    EvolutionDo not play mod. Report it and move on.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  10. #180
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Last Seen
    02-13-13 @ 12:05 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    18,536
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Evolution

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Evolution and abiogenisis have exactly jack **** to do with one another.



    The big bang and abiogenesis have exactly jack **** to do with one another.
    Yet why do so many people I've talked to who believe in evolution declare that evolution began from abiogenesis---the Big Bang?

Page 18 of 32 FirstFirst ... 8161718192028 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •