What is so hard to understand about evolution?

Question

We have bones from 2 million year old humanoid woman. She is not of the same species as we current humans are. We did not exist 2 million years ago. Nope our current evolutionary form first showed up about 50,000 years ago. Come on theist, can you really be so blind to science that you can’t put the puzzle pieces together in your own heads?

Evolution is not a law yet. That is because we require more proof before we’ll call it a fact. Creation has zero facts supporting it. Catch that? No facts at all. Evolution has hundreds of them. We find more evidence all the time. Science takes time because scientists want to make sure they didn’t overlook something and get it wrong. \

First they hypothesize. That means they have no real facts they are just guess. Then they look for facts to support their hypothesis. If they can find them then they can switch their idea from hypothesis to theory. A theory has some evidence that supports it.

Answer 1

When I was ignorant about evolution, I was very skeptical about the whole theory. But then we learned it in school, and it has opened my eyes. Evolution makes sense, and yes there are "missing links," but that's why scientists are constantly studying and trying to understand. If you do not believe in evolution because of "lack of evidence," how do you believe the Bible which has no evidence at all?

Answer 2

The agent behind mutation which spurs on diversifying, and more complicated system. Sure, viruses mixing their DNA with those of other cells makes great sense and all, but the other 4 (or more, especially in case of punctuated equilibrium) pairs simply mutate. Nobody can tell you why this occurs, what the agent driving it is, or how it knows that this will be an improvement over the previous model. (apart from common sense natural selection, bad ideas dying out.)



edit: That's what's hard to understand about evolution. And the person under me who claims too many Americans are scientifically illiterate hasn't taken the time to juxtapose that with the figures of the rest of the world. A handful of people in the world understand the math behind scientific theories. Everyone else, like most of you here, just try to understand the basic concepts.

Answer 3

You're confused a little bit. When we reference the "theory of evolution" we are talking about a specific vehicle for the development of life. E.g. Darwin's theory of evolution (by far the most famous) was based on natural selection. Another "theory" is that evolution happens through genetic drift (random mutations). Another "theory of evolution" might say the 2 processes work together.



The point is, the actual process of evolution is not "theory". Scientists know life evolved and continues to do so. This is a fact. The "theories" explain exactly HOW evolution occurs whether via natural selection, genetic drift, or both.

Answer 4

It is the phenomenon that we take note of that logically infers creation.



The fine-tuned universe, the vital force of life and biogenesis, living organisms are complete life support systems that CANNOT be explained by evolution, the multiple life cycles and systems that sustain life on our planet. Complementary sexes that can be in the same place at the same time to procreate in their generation life cycle-CANNOT be explained by evolution. Fossils are a product of a flood event and not this died and fell in a river jargon. I've seen the salmon run and they all die in a river and get eaten and eroded. Evolution has no facts that prove it. It is merely a grid of interpretation for the data or a belief system. Don't rant about facts being the basis because that is hypocritical.



Hominids are not the same as humans so it is a leap of faith to say we evolved from them. Come on! The anthropologists and archaeologists are a insult to peoples intelligence.

For instance, if they find a bronze axe and a stone axe in the same place they say the stone axe was from a prior age and man evolved into more complex axe building. My point. They never suggest that two axe makers could be in the same place at the same time. One an inferior axe maker or maybe even a child, the other a superior axe maker both in the same place at the same time. Do you get my point? They have the same old predictible dogma of evolution and NO common sense. I don't put all my integrity on some crusty anthropologist that is greedy for more grant money.

Answer 5

I've asked this question alot myself.

I believe a large part of the problem stems not understanding the process.

I hear things like "look at all the mistakes in evolution, god is perfect so evolution can't be true"

This only works if you see the current state of humanity as a completed product instead of an ongoing process.

It's a shame some people can't see the beauty of Gods ongoing creation because of their blind beliefs in old books.

They can't see that God is all around them..what a shame

Answer 6

First, they still call it the Theory of Gravity and Atomic Theory even though no one is denying it now.



Second, this is not a rational decision made after considering all the evidence. This is someone whose beliefs need to be founded on the literal wording of a religious book and is unable to deal with metaphor.

Answer 7

Evolutionist and Creationist each attempt to claim ownership of "life" and each cannot have it.



The body is separate from the being, the spirit as each came together by agreement to experience the physical realm we call earth.



Evolution is the method in which the body came to be, nothing more.



Religion has a distorted view of how the "spirit" came to be as this is something that cannot be "prooved" by any standard one can agree to.



Creation is beyond what any Bible can claim and that is why it is called "faith".



Check the listed sources for clues to mans awarness.

Answer 8

you're able to desire to ask the comparable question any incorrect way around although: Why do Christians have this form of problematic time information advent and Evolution do no longer must be separate after which you slam into Genesis and the biblical account of conversing snakes and magical apples and Eve the undesirable lady. maximum Christians choose for to ascertain this account in strict literal trend and not as a metaphor and due to that Creationism will become no longer, as you have used it as sensible layout, however the account of Genesis. i think of that's what atheists won't be able to abdomen, the literal account of Genesis.

Answer 9

Evolution has only one critic.



That critic is religion. And religion has no scientific reasons whatsoever to question evolution.



They have a few passages from a variety of ancient mythology books that say "God wiggled his nose, and everything poofed into existence". (That's paraphrased, actually)



That is the dilemna in a nutshell.



And I am absolutely appalled that people with high school diplomas in this country do not see this laughable discussion for what it is.

Answer 10

carbon dating works like this: we know that there are certain isotopes of carbon that are radioactive and will therefore decay over a certain period of time. we also happen to know (through experimentation on smaller scale) that the half life (the length of time it will take for half of the amount of radioactive particles to decay) of this isotope is around 5730 years. we also know roughly the amount of these isotopes that will be present in a material, and so by counting how many of the radioactive particles are left we can see how long it's been sitting there decaying for. i don't understand why people can't grasp how obvious and simple the theory of evolution is, and how much more convincing it is than creationism. here in the uk there's so much less difficulty with accepting the truth, i wonder why it's so different in america.

Answer 11

Too many Americans are scientifically illiterate.

Think about it... the Bush appointed judge struck down the Dover School Board because I.D. is crap science and the real scientists educated him on the truth about, and validity of, evolution.

Evolutionary Theory doesn't have "some evidence"... it has TONS of evidence!

Answer 12

Can you explain to my how when using carbon 14 testing on a living organism it shows that the living organism has been dead for over a million years? Just want to know. I'm a Microbiology major and that question has come up a few times.

Answer 13

Evolution is accepted as the likely method of Creation for the Catholic Church. Most protestants even accept evolution as a reasonable theory. Why is it that atheists insist that Christians oppose the theory of evolution? And why is it that atheists treat evolution like dogma rather than science (which is SUPPOSED to be questioned)? That last part has pretty significant implications that atheists fail to recognize.

Answer 14

Lucy is a lie. No facts for creation ha man you must have been sleeping under a rock or something. For scientific proof of creation go to drdino.com and then click on downloads and hear the proof. Evolution has no proof supporting it period. All they have are lies which has been proved wrong over 50 years ago.

Answer 15

Actually I find what Darwin has written and the work done thus far on it very interesting

Answer 16

Have you heard about the "Missing Links"?



They are the missing evidence that we did evolve from monkeys.



Until they are discovered, which I seriously doubt will ever happen, you cannot PROVE it.

Answer 17

Evolution does not fit in your head. Does not fit in scientists heads. They want to make it fit. God is the Creator. You do not have any base to proof your evolution.

Answer 18

You know what? We've heard this all before. Only about as many times as you think the earth is old!!!!! Blah Blah blah blah blah-------------------------------------------!!!!!!!!!!!!

Answer 19

Ok.