• 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!

Do you reject evolution?

Do you reject evolution?


  • Total voters
    114
I do not reject evolution.

Far too much evidence presented; accepted by the general scientific community; No counter evidence of significance presented, as far as I know.
 
No, but I do suspect our genes have been manipulated somewhere along the line.
 
No, I don't reject evolution.

Evidence and logic have proven it.
 
Usually the question "Do you believe in evolution" or in this case "Do you reject Evolution" I think has different meanings to different people.

If you take the question literally, it would be foolish for ANYONE to say that evolution doesn't exist because we have record of it and we have proof.

Now to some the question might mean "Did humans evolve from apes". Now that is a different story. I think some people think it means this question instead of the literal question.
 
Vive la Evolution
 
I do not reject it as possible, or given the evidence, probable.
 
Now to some the question might mean "Did humans evolve from apes". Now that is a different story. I think some people think it means this question instead of the literal question.

Of course we didn't "evolve from apes", we actually are apes. Sharing a common ancestor with chimps and bonobos that lived 6 million years ago, a common ancestor with chimps, bonobos, and gorillas that lived around 7.5 million years ago, and a common ancestor with chimps, bonobos, gorillas, and orangutans that lived around 10 million years ago. (going with those numbers out of memory, if one is off by a million years or so, someone please correct the record ;) ).

Also, and this is not related to your post, but if someone says I accept evolution but I believe it was guided by God, then technically that is not evolution.
 
Also, and this is not related to your post, but if someone says I accept evolution but I believe it was guided by God, then technically that is not evolution.

"Technically," it's not? How's that? Who says so?
 
Also, and this is not related to your post, but if someone says I accept evolution but I believe it was guided by God, then technically that is not evolution.

Not really, because evolution could still be God(s) design. Now if you are specifically talking about a particular religion you could be correct, but not all religions believe in the bible, Kuran, etc.
 
It depends on what one means when they say "evolution."

To the degree one asserts we, as a species, do evolve, I absolutely agree; and as Steve said above, I think there is too much evidence to deny that.

To the degree such evidence is taken to unprovable extremes, into the realm of speculation and to belief to assert somehow unequivocally that our genesis and subsequent evolution to what we are today is not the product of design, but rather one of pure chance is to take it too far imho. I believe there is too much evidence that we are the product of design. In that vein, I also believe that our evolution is necessarily something that occurs only within the limits of our design.

Take the evidence that we do evolve outside the parameters of design, then I rest on my belief in design rather than on the contrary belief that our existence is purely by fiat and caprice.
 
"Technically," it's not? How's that? Who says so?

Because it ignores the RANDOM mutation part of evolution. Assigning God the mechanism undermines the entire concept of evolution. It becomes just "change directed by God" otherwise known as Intelligent Design.
 
Not really, because evolution could still be God(s) design. Now if you are specifically talking about a particular religion you could be correct, but not all religions believe in the bible, Kuran, etc.

No, either one accepts the mechanism of random mutation or one doesn't. Without it, we have only "changes happen".
 
Absolutely reject the theory of evolution.

There is no proof of it, nowhere has it been observed.
 
Not really, because evolution could still be God(s) design. Now if you are specifically talking about a particular religion you could be correct, but not all religions believe in the bible, Kuran, etc.

Well yes, if one believed that evolution was simply one of God's natural laws. However, guided evolution (theistic evolution) is technically not evolution.
 
Well yes, if one believed that evolution was simply one of God's natural laws. However, guided evolution (theistic evolution) is technically not evolution.

It's like someone claiming to believe in engineering but not physics.
 
Yes or No?




No, I do not reject evolution.

ill answer just as you asked the question and not making up stuff one would have to be very uneducated to reject evolution. The fact remains its exists.

No i do not reject it.
 
Last edited:
No, either one accepts the mechanism of random mutation or one doesn't. Without it, we have only "changes happen".

Who says it is is random and not by some design? The idea of evolution is about change and adaptation.
 
It depends on what one means when they say "evolution."

To the degree one asserts we, as a species, do evolve, I absolutely agree; and as Steve said above, I think there is too much evidence to deny that.

To the degree such evidence is taken to unprovable extremes, into the realm of speculation and to belief to assert somehow unequivocally that our genesis and subsequent evolution to what we are today is not the product of design, but rather one of pure chance is to take it too far imho. I believe there is too much evidence that we are the product of design. In that vein, I also believe that our evolution is necessarily something that occurs only within the limits of our design.

Take the evidence that we do evolve outside the parameters of design, then I rest on my belief in design rather than on the contrary belief that our existence is purely by fiat and caprice.

What is the chemical / physical barrier that prevents speciation? Hint: There is not one. You should read The Greatest Show On Earth. I think you will find that science know a lot more about evolution and speciation than you might think it does.

The Greatest Show on Earth: The Evidence for Evolution: Richard Dawkins: Amazon.com: Books
 
Absolutely reject the theory of evolution.

There is no proof of it, nowhere has it been observed.


Do you mean like physically watching a species change in front of them type of observation or the observation of a species over hundreds of years that certain parts mutated in order to survive?
 
Who says it is is random and not by some design? The idea of evolution is about change and adaptation.

The foundation of evolution is random mutation. Without that, we have only "change happens". Merely believing that change has occurred does not constitute a belief or understanding of evolution.
 
Well yes, if one believed that evolution was simply one of God's natural laws. However, guided evolution (theistic evolution) is technically not evolution.

I didn't say God(s) design had to be guided necessarily. If I build an ant farm, I have designed the box, put the ants in, and the sand. However, what THEY create afterwords and what happens to them is not necessarily MY design.
 
The foundation of evolution is random mutation. Without that, we have only "change happens". Merely believing that change has occurred does not constitute a belief or understanding of evolution.

You'll have to show me where the foundation is 100% randomness. What I have read and seen evolution is about change and adaptation.
 
Back
Top Bottom