Do you beileve in evolution? Why or why not?

[Xanikk999]

I would like to see some people on this thread take there stance on
Evolution VS Intellegent design VS creatonism. I havent seen a thread for this on awhile if there is one its probably many many pages back.

So tell me whats your stance on the issue and explain why? I beileve in evolution wholeheartedly. I cant understand creatonists or those crazy people who beileve the earth was created in 4000 bc or something.

Evolution exists on a micro biologic scale. That is already proven. And the similarities beetween animals on this planet compared to their reletives has made me beileve in evolution a long long time ago when i was a little kid.

 

[JollyRoger]

The theory of evolution was created, the story of creation evolved.

 

[Perfection]

For my views, simply click the link in my sig.

 

[MjM]

Not really. None of the exsisting theories are good. They all suck.

 

[Sidhe]

Well this is a can of worms type thread. But I think personally there are a few holes in evolution that need filling but I don't in any way think that makes it a bad theory just an incomplete one, to understand these holes you would need to know a little about genetics but they are there. As for Creationism and ID I'm afraid you can't use Creationism and or ID to argue with evolution as both are philosophy, so in fact all they can do is try to undermine evolution by pointing out the flaws which is great as that which does not kill science makes it stronger. Science doesn't set out to say this is the answer absolutley we leave that up to the religious.

Good theory=a theory that can proven wrong
Bad theory=a theory that can nevr be disproven or proven i.e. atm string theory is a very bad theory in fact it's mere hypothesis and evolutions a remarkably good one

But then I said all this on a different thread pretty much.

Creationism is guilty of delusional beliefs IMO because the Earth does not seem to be in any way shape or form 6000 years old the wealth of evidence against this is so overwelming that it lead the Pope to say that I cannot dismiss evolution as a mere hyptohesis. They church weren't saying evolution is true just that they can't currently dismiss it out of hand in any meaningful form without resorting to philosophy, at least as science stands now.

 

[The Last Conformist]

Of course like every other man of intelligence and education I do believe in organic evolution. It surprises me that at this late date such questions should be raised.

 

[Perfection]

Not really. None of the exsisting theories are good. They all suck.

In what manner does evolution suck?

Well this is a can of worms type thread. But I think personally there are a few holes in evolution that need filling but I don't in any way think that makes it a bad theory just an incomplete one, to understand these holes you would need to know a little about genetics but they are there.

I know a fair amount of genetics, please enlighten me onto what you find to be holes.

Evolutionary thoery of course is incomplete (as is practically anything that has to do with biology), but I've seen numerous people overestimate it's incompletenes. The core concepts of evolutinoary thoery are complete and valid.

 

[GenMarshall]

I dont know what I believe in honestly. I find myself more of a "God created the Universe" along with "God did not have a hand at evolution, but did provide the basic building blocks for life".

 

[Sidhe]

well for one I believe there is no explanation for is homochirality the protein chains are always found in the right handed configuration where as in nature I think they seem to exist in a 50/50 mix, why did only right hand chains become favoured when if any logic prevail you should of had self terminating DNA and no life at all. At least in the lab that is what happens? Im afraid someone else pointed this out to me so if it's popycock you'll have to excuse me I am not sure of the source.

Also Protein chains are extremely fragile there is a question of how it could have survived to become DNA in the first place because it will be unstable untill it has helicised and the bonds are robust enough to give it a solid structure.

Nopt one of these points dismisses evolution but they are interesting niggles none the less.

 

[Perfection]

I dont know what I believe in honestly. I find myself more of a "God created the Universe" along with "God did not have a hand at evolution, but did provide the basic building blocks for life".

Why can't you just say that god created the universe at left it bloody well alone?

 

[JohnRM]

I believe in Evolution as a creation by God.

 

[Xanikk999]

As i said in the past im agnostic so that means im not going to make up the rules of the universe or how people should follow morals. I just dont know if a god created the universe or not. But what i beileve is life happened by chance. I mean this planet is 4.6 billion years old and it seems the conditions were ripe for the chemical compounds for life. I think its mere chance a lot can happen in 4.6 billion years.

 

[Sidhe]

I don't see why we have to believe in faerie tales such as evoulution being all nonsense and the world being 6000 years old anyway seems far more logical to say that our limited understanding in the bible left us claiming things though ignorance that were simply not true or that weren't meant to be taken quite so literaly. Mos christians will tell you they believe the world to be 5 billion years old roughly and leave it at that. Why the need to be a minortiy group with a perception that argues directly against most christians ideas of the world?

 

[Atlas14]

There is nothing to not believe in. There is plenty to deny, but that would be completely anti-intelligent seeing as Evolutionary biology has so much evidence on its side and Creationism and other theories have philosophical/religious emotional assertions. Those who don't believe in evolution are either mindless religious slaves or have never taken a biology class worth a poop.

 

[Xanikk999]

Studying up on biology is my number #1 hobby outside video games. I mean its so convincing if you read the stuff!

 

[Perfection]

well for one I believe there is no explanation for is homochirality the protein chains are always found in the right handed configuration where as in nature I think they seem to exist in a 50/50 mix, why did only right hand chains become favoured when if any logic prevail you should of had self terminating DNA and no life at all. At least in the lab that is what happens? Im afraid someone else pointed this out to me so if it's popycock you'll have to excuse me I am not sure of the source.

Oh, it's pretty easy to explain it. Certain crystals will bond structures of one chirality on one side and of the other on the other side. Thus causing them to seperate, and once you've got chirality you can use it's cataylic properties to make more. Pretty simple teally.

Also Protein chains are extremely fragile

There not that fragile, protiens can be pretty tough stuff

there is a question of how it could have survived to become DNA in the first place because it will be unstable untill it has helicised and the bonds are robust enough to give it a solid structure.

1. many protiens naturally form helixes
2. DNA is not made of protiens
3. Few biochemists studying abiogenesis claim that DNA was the first genetic material, most claim that RNA was

Nopt one of these points dismisses evolution but they are interesting niggles none the less.

Not one of these actually addresses evolution. These are all ignorant questions about abiogenesis.

 

[Atlas14]

Why can't you just say that god created the universe at left it bloody well alone?

Personally, thats what I do.

 

[Xanikk999]

I dont even do that i just say he may or may not of. Without any real proof of existence of god i dont agree with blind faith il just acknowledge its possible either way.

 

[Dida]

There is no such thing as believing or not believing in evolution. Evolution is a fact, not a faith. Whether you like it or not, evolution is part of life.

 

[Wolfe Tone]

I don't 'believe' in evolution. Believing in this context sounds more like blind faith. From the evidence availble t me at the moment, evolution seems by far the most likely process responsible for the state of life today.