How come when you present an argument about evolution atheists don't present a counter argument?

Question

They just insult you? Why are so many atheists Ad Populum biased when it comes to the scientific community? Do they not understand that evolution isn't 100% proven to be correct yet they say the amount of scientists who agree with the "THEORY" make it correct simply because of the amount of scientists who agree with the theory! Major logical fallacy.

I've realized a lot of atheists come in and act so pretentious about what they actually know and they are reinforced by the amount of atheists that actually answers in the first place. I guess idiocy hides in numbers; if one atheist presents an intelligent counter argument the other atheists feed off of it and just make jabbing side remarks like "you're an idiot if you don't know _____" yet I bet a lot of atheists don't know squat themselves.

And by the way I'm not a Christian, Muslim, or Jew. It seems like a lot of atheists want to jump to that conclusion a lot. They have so many holes in their argument for evolution so they attack instead of intelligently debate back. It's an obvious defense mechanism.

Answer 1

When they insult you - you know you've hurt them and made them angry. When they don't present a counter argument and insult you it's because they don't have one to present, so in order to get back at you for hurting them and making them angry is to insult you. It's so easy to see through their behaviours.



The person who puts their total faith in evolution is the one who lacks faith in God, if you don't believe in one you have to believe in the other to compensate. No human being believes in absolutely nothing.



You sound like an honest person who has the ability to see through other people.

Answer 2

I won't insult you, but I'm to lazy to write something new, so I'll copy something i just wrote.



How evolution works,simplified. You are actually right, an animal doesn't change into another animal. It really just changes within itself and humans arbitrarily give that animal a different name once it's went through enough small changes that it looks different. If we had a fossil of every animal that ever lived (the vast majority aren't fossilized) all lined up in a row, no one could pick any 2 side by side and say,"that is where it changed into another animal", because that never happens. However, if you were to jump ahead or back several of those small changes, you would see a dramatic change.



Another way to look at it would be if you laid out the transformation of an embryo to a 90 year old. Say you had a picture from every day of development, you couldn't pick a spot between 2 side by side pictures and say, "that is were the person changed into an old person". Each picture would look virtually identical to the one beside it (although small changes are happening). If you took the first and last and compared them they wouldn't even look like the same being. Now, obviously you know what the different stages of human development look like so you wouldn't assume they were something different, but what if you had no knowledge of that and only had 3 pictures (fetus, hot 20 year old, old and wrinkly). You would probably call them by a different name.



That is pretty much how evolution works (many small changes that add up to dramatic change over time). The first one cell animal (fetus) is still evolving and not really changing into anything new, it's just that we give the different stages (hot 20 year old, old and wrinkly) a different name, because they look so much different.





Edit: The truth is, evolution is a proven fact. It is corroborated by every field of science involved. It has withstood over 150 years of scrutiny and only gotten stronger. So many ways evolution could be proven wrong, but so far nada. It's a pretty bold statement to claim you are smarter then the collective scientific community, so if you are going to claim such things, you had better be able to back it up.





Edit: " I guess idiocy hides in numbers'



Seriously Art, do you really think you don't bring this on yourself? You can't say sh!t like that and expect respect in return.

Answer 3

Uh, we do. How come theists never listen or acknowledge them?



Let's get a few things straight: (not that you'll listen anyways)

Ad Populum is Fox New's argument for creationism, not my argument against it.

Evolution is both a fact and a theory. The two are not mutually exclusive, and a scientific theory does NOT mean what you think it means. The theory is a larger explanation for how the concept works. There is also the theory of gravity, explaining how gravity works. Obviously, gravity is not an invalid concept simply because we call it a theory.

The only people who think there are "so many holes" are people who are uneducated about it. Is it perfect and proven with 100% certainty? NO, nothing can be. Saying we don't have all the answers yet is not a reason to suppose some magician just poofed us into existence.

Answer 4

Why the hell do most thiests insist on posting evolutionary questions in the religion and spirituality section? it belongs in the biology section. so if they want to be idiots and post it in the wrong section they should expect some insults. But for some odd reason alot of thiests seem to think that every athiest should have an doctorate in biology and a complete understanding of evolution.



and not every person just insults the idiots who ask about evolution in the wrong section. i will copy paste my answer from the other day.



"The evidence for evolution is all around you if you open your eyes. i could talk about the genetic evidence, or fossil or even the vestigial characters found in a wide range of different species, even humans. but by far the most striking example of evolution is something we are all acquainted with and see most days. And that is the domesticated dog. The mitochondrial DNA ( the DNA passed down by the female and which changes little over time) of the dog shows that all dogs are descended directly from the grey wolf, from around 15000 years ago. Now in only 15000 years we have taken a grey wolf and from it got a chihuahua. So you see it is impossible to deny that evolution does exist.



But yes you can argue that the chihuahua still to some degree resembles a wolf. But then remember that from an evolutionary point of view 15 000 years is but a blink of the eyes. Can you imagine how much more different it could be in 150 000 years. Or how about 150 million years? So I cant understand how you can call evolution a myth when we can see such striking changes in a species over such a small time scale of 15000 years.



A common myth to do with evolution is that it is completely random, which is not true. They have done experiments on different organisms, from bacteria to plants where they have mapped there DNA and then studied what happened when that organism was exposed to unfavourable conditions. And they found out in a stress situation that the genes that are supposed to prevent mutations where de-activated and that the ensuing mutations where mainly directed at genes that could help the organism adapt to its new environment.. so while genetic mutations might still be a chancy game of dice, the dice are nevertheless loaded.



EDIT) the person above me is wrong in a few points he made.

firstly most mutations arent accidentally due to outside sources like radiation or chemicals but are mainly due to transposons and retrotransposons. a large part of our genome is composed of these elements which main function is to alter genetic information through a cut and paste or copy and paste function. secondly these elements can encode genetic changes made in the life time of a single orginism back into the germ cells and thereby pass those genetic changes into insuing offspring. for a more detailed understanding look up transposons, retrotransposons and reverse transcriptase."

Answer 5

Actually no, I don't insult.



If you think you have a strong argument against evolution, present it a national science conference or in a peer-reviewed, published article. That's not an insult. That's instructions on how to actually get your "facts" out there. If you want your idea seen as credible, share it with the scientific community.

Answer 6

there is more scientific evidence both observed, experimental, demonstrable and reproduceable confirming the theory of evolution than there is the theory of gravity.



We really dont know how gravity works but we know exactly how evolution works and have an enourmous wealth of evidence demonstrating it, reproducing it, confirming it, and predicting it.



Just because you choose to ignore the evidence or misinterpret it (either deliberately or not) does not make it go away.

Answer 7

It's just easier.



Normally their 'argument' is nothing but an overblown logical error, or something that may not look like it fits, but it would take a lot of effort to straighten them out.



A whole lot of, not my job. Go to school, read some books, find your argument online torn apart.



But coming to Y!A religion and spirituality for a 'serious' answer on evolution is a 'serious' mistake.



--not superstitious

Answer 8

I'm a Christian, and like Atheists and everyone else here, I'm sick of the same questions that have been answered over and over and they will only agree to disagree at best. Anything else is just antagonism (not a religion yet)

Answer 9

Because I don't care and I'm not a scientist. If you want to argue evolution, go to a University and tell the biology professors that everything they teach is wrong.



.

Answer 10

Because most christian dont care about the truth if u have a question i would be happy to answer just send it to me also a theory is not a hypothesis

Answer 11

In this "question" the "asker" complains about strawmen version of atheists. You have failed to present any of these so-called "holes" in evolution.



Science isn't correct because there's a large amount of people who say it. Science is correct because the obersvations and tests are reproduceable.

Answer 12

The question I keep asking is: "When is this ridiculous debate going to end in North America?"

Answer 13

It's not about "argument"-- it's about evidence. There is a *vast* body of scientific work on evolution. I suggest you read some of it.

Answer 14

There is simply so much evidence that supports evolution that to say that it does not exist is simply showing plain ignorance, or just you being a Poe.



:)