I sat down and looked at all the scientific evidence available. I came to the conclusion that, without a doubt, evolution has the most solid evidence backing it up, and believed that that any other theory was the not correct due to lack of solid evidence.
But, that was before I saw this video. They make make a tough point here. How can you argue when you’re going against evidence like this.
It is a theory that the Sun is at the center of the solar system and that the Earth, along with other planets, orbit it. It is a theory that there is a force called gravity which “holds” the planets into place. Is is a theory that natural variation in the genetic material of a population favors reproduction by some individuals more than others, so that over the generations all members of the population come to possess the favorable traits. It is called evolution. Everything is technically a theory. Evolution, like gravity, is considered a fact among the scientific community. What needs to be done is to now distinguish between that evolution is a fact and that now the theory is with the mechanism of evolution.
Anyway, I’ll end my rant here. I thought some of you evolutionists out there might enjoy this video.
Minor Point… The Sun is the center of our Solar System, not our galaxy.
Feign wrote:
That’s only a theory. Sure, 99.99% of all scientists consider it a fact but that isn’t the point!
(I’ll make the edit)
So, I watched the video and; besides the obvious inanity of the entire piece; here’s the MAIN problem… their entire premise is based on what is probably a purposeful misreading of the Theory of Evolution. “Evolution” does NOT address “Origins”, that’s an entirely different field of study. “Evolution” - change through time - picks up where “Origins” leaves off. If I leave a colored piece of paper out in the sun, it will fade over time. This is an observable fact. I may develop a theory to explain the fading (evolution) without addressing how the paper came into being or how it came to be colored (origins).
And now for a short lesson in logic:
First: “Evidence” and “Proof” are two completely different things, but are often confused. In the above paragraph, I stated that color fading in sunlight is an “observable” fact. Unless I can prove absolutely that other factors are not responsible for ALL of the color fade, I cannot say, as an absolute fact, that sunlight causes color fade. Experiments have be devised that show both: direct sunlight does fade colors; and, the mere absence of direct sunlight reduces the amount of color fading. Thus, strong evidence has been amassed that leads to the conclusion that sunlight does fade colors and; even in the absence of “absolute” proof; theories have been developed as to how and why it occurs.
Science seldom claims that something is proved “absolutely”. At best, it says that the “available evidence” overwhelmingly supports this or that theory. (Evolution - the idea that things change over time - is as close as one can get to being universally accepted as a “scientific fact”. The only thing that keeps it from being declared as such is that “Time” itself is not understood “Absolutely”.)
Second: “Absence of Proof” is not “Proof of Absence”, thus the “fact” that for over one hundred years no one has found NEW life in a jar of peanut butter (not sure where they obtained their data) does not prove that it cannot happen. The producers of the video might consider this: For over 10,000 years, people have argued the existence of God, but no one has ever produced evidence that “absolutely proves” God’s existence, but this “Absence of Proof” does not prove that God does not exist.
Third: “Absence of Proof” of a particular theory, or even proving that theory wrong, does not prove (or is even evidence for) a competing theory. If my theory of color fade (Space aliens suck color from our world to power their life-force) is somehow proved wrong, it does not mean that some other theory of color fade (e.g. http://www.madsci.org/posts/archives/oct2000/973012277.Ch.r.html) is correct.
Sigh. it is very hard for me to understand these anti-evolution Christians. There is proof of minor evolution / adaptation in our very world every day. Why do they have such a hard time understanding that? The Bible doesn’t say that evolution is wrong / evil / a sin. Without evolution / adaptation we would have been died off many moons ago.
I do not see it being far fetched to believe in God and evolution at the same time.
Darwinian evolution has never been shown to be true. Microevolution (change or adaptation within a species) was known before Darwin and is not disputed. This does not mean that Macroevolution (life forms changing into a new species) has ever occurred. In fact, there is no evidence to show that macroevolution has ever happened in the past or in the present. To say that Macroevolution is a proven fact is a total lie and misrepresentation of the facts. There is NO EVIDENCE for it in the fossil record, molecular biology, and many of the sciences. In fact. if you would look at the evidence openly without your bias, the complete opposite is actually true. The fossil record for example rather than supporting evolution actually cries loudly against it and for ID.
If anyone would look critically at evolution and honestly at Intelligent Design, they will come away realizing that the weight of evidence is not on the side of evolution but on the side of design.
To embrace Darwinism and its underlying premise of naturalism, you would have to believe that:
• Nothing produces everything
• Non-life produces life
• Randomness produces fine-tuning
• Chaos produces information
• Unconsciousness produces consciousness
• Non-reason produces reason
I don’t have enough faith to believe this fairy tale.
Lol, this video is hilarious.
seriously, can plz be getting a good argument? like, they werent being serious with that right?
learn to be less stupid plox k
ok ok, ill just say this then
h yah and the fact that evolution relies on millions of years has nothing to do do with it either
oh look, no new life has developed in my sterilized and sealed container of peanut butter in the week that it took to get from the factory to my house.
really, thats the lamest argument ever, what? expecting to find little creatures in there? if evolution did occur life started out as single celled organisms, not something with legs n crap you noobs. :\
ok as far as i have been concerned. evolution is just basically natural selection over a long period of time. you get the creatures with the best genetic traits surviving/ being able to reproduce and therefore their offspring are better too, then out of them only the strongest will survive and so on and so on and so on, and also allowing for small genetic mutations…. alot of things can change when extrapolated over afew million years.
now i dont think this happens on purpose, with the intention of making the species better as its not like genes and cells can make decisions. But strictly looking at the example ive given above you can see how this is possible right?
its not a case where “but how can it know to do that?” rather its just that it makes sense that whichever organisms survive will reproduce, and in the long run this mean that you would expect that the species would be better X amount of generations down the track then they are now.
now putting aside religion and whatever for the moment. can you see that this could be possible? because frankly i dont care which religion is right about things or whos better or whatever, half the religions in the world are all related anyway, i only care about what the facts are.
besides practically everything in any religious teachings can be interpreted in so many ways its not funny, thats why you get extremists and all the such because they see it as right.
Ive got a friend, we where talking about other life in the universe and they told me they dont believe there is any, i ask why not? they say because god would have told them…
now how people can think that god would work in such obvious ways is besides me, now if a god does exist, not saying one does or doesnt because theres no solid proof either way, dont you think their workings would be alittle beyond what we can comprehend? if they created the universe then in order for everything to work there would still have to be restrictions, rules that have to be followed. Which is what the study of physics is am i right?
so why can a god not have still created humanity/ all living creatures BUT not with just the snap of a finger, but through a process (such as evolution) with the end result in mind?
Theyre a god right? so whats afew million years to them, suns can burn for billions of years, to them the span that this planet has existed would be like us observing a microorganisms life for an hour, could be half the creatures lifetime but is but is nothing to us.
so whats to say that yes we where created by a god, but being the beasty minded chaps that a god tends to be has far more insight then we could imagine and has created everything and then let it roll, knowing perfectly well how things are going to turn out.
or something like that anyway..
.. seriously try being more open perhaps.
get real!
I don’t think evolution exists…first of all if we did evolve from different matter it would of been observable in the fossil records, only there are no intermediate fossils in the fossil record. Like for instance if we did evolve from apes, then it should show in the fossil record an intermediate fossil with like longer arms, or a body that is looking closer to being man, but we don’t see that in the fossil record. All these scientists say they have evidence for this and that, I want to see this evidence, if they actually have evidence I would be happy to listen to then.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/homs/
omfg how many retards walk among us and demand to be treated like a thinking human beings. grow up. if u can’t deal with reality, don’t expect others to be the same. universe doesn’t revolve around humans, adam-eve and all that BS. we will probably in near future nearly-destroy this planet and kill our own species, but LIFE will go on. Life is the 5 state of matter.
Yes 100 years of opening peanubutter cans equals 100s of millions of years of 24/7 experiments all around the world by nature on every inch of this planet. retards get ur proportions rihgt. btw - leave a billions of cans of beanutbutter in universe for billions of years and my guess is that u might get a life in one of them.
these idiots make my stomach turn because i lose the last remains of any respect i had for homo sapiens.
The video would have been completely accurate to say that the food industry requires that abiogenesis not happen. That’s true abiogenesis doesn’t happen any more. At least not that we can ever be aware of. However there are reasons for that. Abiogenesis as far as I can tell, requires a reducing atmosphere, ours has far too much oxygen to be reducing, there’s hopefully no methane or amonia in your jar of peanut butter also.
People seem to miss that since life is all chemistry, the biggest challenge of researchers in abiogenesis is figuring out what the conditions were that made life possible. Once we bring things together under the right conditions, chemistry takes over and makes abiogenesis inevitable.
i am always amazed at the arrogance of evolutionists who come out with the same crap about not believing in evolution means someone is unintelligent.
why are there no living transitions? why at this moment in time and as far as recorded history can see, there is no examples of any species in transition to another one? the human one being obvious. everything seems to be set at the moment. many varieties of the same type of animal, no cross overs. why?
why can’t we so called intelligent humans reproduce what unintelligent nature has done? we can’t create life from non life. we can’t design anything as complicated as the simple cell. does that mean we are not really intelligent? because either we are not or nature is.
neither evolution or creation can be proved, both are beliefs. creation makes more sense to me.
I think there are quacks on both sides of the fence.
I believe this peanut butter example is silly, but I get what they are trying to say, you get no reaction until outside forces are introduced. Do I feel this disproves anything? Not really. Do I feel it proves anything? Again, no.
I believe in God, and I believe in science. I just believe that God is the foundation of everything, including science.
I love how I choose to have faith in something, and this automatically makes me stupid. Faith gives people hope, and we all know this world could use some of that.
I was taught the Theory of Evolution in public school and accepted it as taught continuing into my adult life until several years ago when my wife of 6 or 7 years (now ex- wife, lol) and I discussed the subject one day. I had always thought her to be extremely intelligent and was shocked to find her so “misinformed” as to believe that evolution did not occur. My assumption at the time: “Everyone accepts evolution as fact, right?”
We had some heated debate…well…arguements. Her position: “I believe that there can be and has been considerable adaptation within various species but not that one species can morph into another.” That intrigued me quite a bit because I had never even considered that possibility…it seemed ridiculous, but once she started supporting the statement with evidence I of course had to start studying to get some ammunition to fire back.
During that study/ongoing debate/heated arguement I came to realize that she was 100% correct and finally, reluctantly, reversed my position. We’ve been divorced over four years now but I have little choice but to conclude the same: I believe that there can be and has been adaptation within species but not that one species can morph into another.
I realize these guys who’s lives depend on their computer turning on every morning so they can pursue “knowledge” nearly 24-7 and worship at the alter of Einstein are not likely to admit to having been mislead, but if you are where I was: simply assuming evolution occurred due to never really questioning it, take a deeper look at it. I’m betting you’ll conclude otherwise. Maybe not. But don’t necessarily accept everything you were taught or everything scientists and/or geek-wanna-be scientists claim is “proven” (so don’t you go looking for flaws now) at face value. Or worse, let the evolutionists bully you with words, using tactics such as claiming or insinuating that those who question and disagree with so-called “facts beyong dispute” lack intelligence; that somehow this Theory is beyond a theory and beyond debate.
There are serious gaps and fatal flaws in The Theory of Evolution, no doubt about it. Sorry, but I can no longer buy it.
“Sigh. it is very hard for me to understand these anti-evolution Christians. There is proof of minor evolution / adaptation in our very world every day. Why do they have such a hard time understanding that? ”
Creationist believe in adaptation. Macro-evolution (One Kind changing into another Kind) is completely different then Micro-evolution which is adaptation. Christians shouldn’t believe in evolution (Macro-evolution) for two reasons. One, it is scientifically wrong (see my blog), and two, the Bible says that the earth was created in 6 days and the Bible has always turned out to be correct.
when arguing against evolution. They always say something in respect to, “If evolution was true, it wouldn’t be called ‘the theory of evolution.’”
I don’t know what creationist you have heard, but creationist never start off saying something like this. Creationism is a theory too. The question is which theory is sound, and which theory is based on lies.
If you really have studied the science behind evolution (as you claim), then you wouldn’t be an evolutionist.
Evolution is the greatest scientific lie of all times.