How could someone NOT believe in evolution?

Question

Do you know anyone who lost there Appendix?


Many organisms have vestigial organs, such as the human caecum (appendix). These organs are the remnants of fully functional structures in their ancestors. As a result of changes in lifestyle and cooking of raw meat the organs became redundant, and are either not functional or reduced in functionality.

With the loss of function goes the loss of positive selection, and the subsequent accumulation of deleterious mutations. Since any structure represents some kind of cost to the general economy of the body, an advantage may accrue from their elimination once they are not functional.

Other examples: wisdom teeth in humans; the loss of pigment and functional eyes in cave fauna; the loss of structure in endoparasites

Answer 1

It's shocking how blind some people can be.



There is such an overwhelming body of evidence to support evolution, how can one possibly deny it? I agree with one poster above me. They deny it because it would force them to take a long, hard look at their religion, and then make an informed decision. The indoctrination most Christians are subjected to as children never gives them a chance to make up their own minds. Once one embraces an idea for such a substantial chunk of his or her life, it's difficult to let go of. Believe me, I know. I was a Christian up until I was about twenty-three (almost twenty-seven now). But once I made up my mind and decided to accept the transition, it wasn't frightening at all.



Another interesting paradox that occurs with the Christian thought process is this: when one theory dealing with evolution meets some sort of roadblock, Christians immediately pounce on it, and decry the entire notion. However, when something from the Bible is refuted, they develop some outlandish excuse to justify it (i. e. "it's just God's mysterious ways").

Answer 2

My dad does not believe in dinosaurs..



Ralie there are strong proofs for evolution, please don't comment with false information I am in school and studying evolution.





Just look at some of our vestigial features such as piloerection causing goosebumps which does not hold its original functions of holding a thin layer of heat close to the body when humans had a lot of hair.



Or the human tailbone and the appendix which may have played a role in degestion but lost its originals fucntion through evolution.

Arguing with these types of proofs is just stupid and makes you look stupid.



Craig B you fail too man.

They believe we may have evolved from an eukayrote ancestor , I cannot wait for all the new things they will discover in the future which will shut idiots up, preaching about adam and eve and nonsense no offence lol



Let me ask you adam and eve believers where is the prood that adam and eve existed did we find their remains some where?

Or did someone just write it down in a book





religion is just to easy to disprove even my own/ whereas SCIENCE AND FACTS ARE NOT. Some of the comments just got me mad cause im a science student sorry





we may not evolve any further as it may not be needed but indeed we have evolved from the past.

Answer 3

regrettably, specific. i do no longer understand how they might cope with the cognitive dissonance. you're no longer properly-knowledgeable given which you do no longer understand that concept is the utmost point in technology. it is not a wager. that's ignorant to assert "in hassle-free terms a concept". the undemanding ancestor of all apes (which comprise people and chimps) is a monkey and which will properly be shown on your satisfaction. It would not rely on the thought of evolution. that's a reality. Theories have not got evidence which in hassle-free terms applies in arithmetic. Theories have information. there's no information of a god of any style. Theories are falsifiable. it rather is a characteristic, no longer a computer virus. If information is produced that shows yet another concept or this one desires exchange, then we found out something and are grateful for it. faith would not have that characteristic. And that's requred. So advent by way of a god isn't able to being a concept. because of the fact the invention of mitochodrial DNA ancestry would properly be desperate by way of genetic mapping and we don't prefer bones to ascertain the thought. Theories make predictions and can be used to strengthen different theories and open up completely new strains of inquiry. the thought of evolution is helpful because of the fact is works, no longer unavoidably on the grounds that's reality. Evolution is reality yet organic determination is a concept. base line is that it particularly works. God as a proof would not paintings for us and would no longer be an answer in that regard. Its an excuse to no longer think of roughly it.

Answer 4

The huge gap in the fossil record is enough for me. But that's not enough for some.



not to mention that evolution goes against the second law of thermodynamics, entropy, nothing goes from chaos to order, how can something just put itself together so nicely?



Look at it this way, you put a jumbled up alarm clock in a coffee can and shake it, it will never put itself together, even if you shook it up for a million years, it would never form a functioning alarm clock.... and the human body is a lot more complex than a silly alarm clock. It takes an intelligent creator to put something so complex together, something so complex can't just come together.

Answer 5

It all goes back to evolution:



Through our evolutionary past we have learned from our parents, ancestors, following in their footsteps in order to enhance survival. This has been made easier because what we learn while yet in the formative years becomes "fixed knowledge". This knowledge is difficult for a great number of people to rise above, it is knowledge which can't be disputed; making logic is unavailable when confronted with disputing ideas.



One could say that people who do not see the obvious link to evolution are just too far down the evolutionary chain yet.

Answer 6

The Pope, Catholic Church, Church of England and mainstream churches all accept evolution and the big bang!!



Lord Carey the former Archbishop of Canterbury put it rather well – “Creationism is the fruit of a fundamentalist approach to scripture, ignoring scholarship and critical learning, and confusing different understandings of truth”!!

Answer 7

Here we go again.

You are at the bridge where this whole "evolution" thing goes haywire.



What you are speaking of is "micro-evolution" which no one denies. One can do this in a matter of weeks with fruit flies and a few months with many plants. We use micro-evolution to our benefit every day!



What is in contention however, is "macro-evolution" - the changing of one species into another. All those things you speak of are micro-evolution which cannot be argued. Take cave fish - did they really lose their eyesight over time or were they ALWAYS that way? You can't answer this - no one can. If you take these fish out of the dark - how many generations will it take for them to get their eyesight back? I submit to you that it will never come back. They have no need for eyesight. They adapt well in aquariums and I have had them for 10 years or more. They are not caught in the wild - they are all tank/farm raised so we have had experience with them for hundreds of generations. Guess what? No change.



Your question does not touch on macro-evolution which has never been proved. Even the finding of the archeopteryx as a "missing-link" was supposed to prove something. It really proves nothing. It is just another animal that is what it is and there is nothing else like it.

Like a cow. Like an ant. Like an oyster.



How can someone not believe? Easy. There's nothing there to prove.

Answer 8

I've always found this explanation of 'vestigal' organs humorous. The assumption is always that these are things that the species is evolving away from when the explanation of their existence could just as easily be what they are evolving into.



To deny the possibility that these 'leftovers' are are really for future use diminishes the entire theory...unless one is will to claim that entire organ systems come into being in an evolutionary flash.



Of course, to claim that these organs are for a possible future use also puts a major dent in the theory as organisms would then have to create useless systems and carry them from generation to generation over millenium until they reach their potential....something that the theory of evolution has a difficult time grasping.



Maybe that's one of the reasons I don't believe in Darwinian evolution...although it is obvious that limited evolution within species exists....this whole concept of speciation is experimentally, and thus scientifically, impossible to prove.

Answer 9

So You think you are Moving on up huh in Evolution ?

NOPE.

Read This

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/1041/1041_01.asp



And Consider this



Creation in the 21st Century “Caught in the Act”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MOdByKKvV6I (Part 1)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CQb7tS-EjM (Part 2)



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfN3UfoDZkQ (Part 3)



Creation In The 21st Century -- From Where did these Layers ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YZyoXQJ5Al0



Creation in the 21st Century - Overwhelming Evidence 1 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o226umqLdsU

Creation in the 21st Century - Overwhelming Evidence 2 of 3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-4O7AOYLqc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXLFFduC56Y&feature=related



Evolution: Against All Odds!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IS9o9cbQDLI



Creation In The 21st Century - Palace of Dinosaurs Part 2 (1 of 3)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SeK239U2fdE

Answer 10

Keep trying, and good luck.



Every single one of their ridiculous "complaints" against science are debunked on this website:

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/whatsnew.html



Also, faith and science are actually complementary. Most believers in God also understand how science illustrates God's awesome powers.

see this site: www.songofgenesis.org

Answer 11

It's hard for someone to appreciate evolution if they've never took biology and it's even harder if they're religious and raised to believe a certain ideology..

Answer 12

There are those who can't believe in evolution because it would make them take a long, hard look at their religion.

Answer 13

I think a big sky-fairy zapped down a guy, a girl made from his rib, a talking snake and the dinosaurs. SO WHAT!!!!?!?!?!

Answer 14

I couldn't agree more.



This is a fact: we ARE the product of evolution from earlier (yes, ape-like) forms. Consider the evidence:



Evolution is a model built upon proven facts. People will respond by saying it is "Only a Theory", but they don't understand (or refuse to accept) that a scientific theory is a model supported by many facts that nobody has yet disproved. Other scientific theories include: the theory of relativity, the germ theory of disease, and tectonic plate theory - all are scientific "theories", and we can reliably bet our lives on them every day.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_theory#Science



To be considered scientific, a theory must be based on ideas that are "falsifiable". Here are MANY ways you could falsify the basic concepts of evolution, but it is not proved false because... it's TRUE. Follow the links, read the citations, this is all real science backed by real evidence.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/



Common sense says: if we see small changes today within species, that small changes over a long time will become large changes. Walking for a minute gets you across the street. Walking for a year gets you across a continent. When people say "macroevolution is false because we've never seen it in our lifetimes", that's like saying "walking across a continent is impossible because we've never seen someone do it in a day." A LOT can happen in a million years.



Paleontology and the fossil record completely support evolution. The theory of evolution even predicts some fossils before we find them. Any good scientific theory makes many predictions. Here's a good example of a prediction made by evolution that then came true:

http://tiktaalik.uchicago.edu/searching4Tik.html



People will say there are no transitional species. Another outright lie. Here is just a tiny sample of the real evidence:



An exhaustive (and exhausting) list of text descriptions of transitional fossils between many different major classes of vertebrates:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-transitional.html



Nice readable document about the fossil evidence of continuous transformations from one species to the next:

http://www.indiana.edu/~ensiweb/lessons/c.bkgrnd.html



Powerful video on "transitional species denial" by creationists, and how utterly ridiculous it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qfoje7jVJpU&feature=PlayList&p=258CAE2F4546AA95&index=8



The paleontologist and Pentecostal preacher Robert Bakker predicted (based on evolutionary theory) that we'd find feathered dinosaurs, and sure enough, we did!



Geology supports evolution - we NEVER find fossils from one age embedded in the rock from a different age.

Genetics supports evolution 100%. In fact, genetics provided the mechanism of inheritance that Darwin predicted MUST be present. Another successful prediction courtesy of the Theory of Evolution.



If evolution is true, then we'd expect humans to share some genes with mushrooms, lots of genes with fish and most genes with primates. And guess what - they do!



Molecular biology (when you understand it) provides the strongest evidence that all life comes from common ancestors. Listen to the Evolution 101 podcast for a methodical, several-hour explanation of how the evidence from DNA at the molecular level provides overwhelming evidence of common descent.



Evolution can be seen happening today, in nature and in labs.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/06/26/science/26lab.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/04/080417112433.htm



This example even ADDED information (through gene duplication), something many evolution-deniers say is impossible:

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/15/8/931



Evolution deniers claim there are hundreds of scientists that reject evolution. First, this is false - the names on the list have been researched and only a tiny fraction actually deny evolution. And for every name on the list, there are 100 scientists in the US alone that support evolution. There IS NO DEBATE about evolution among scientists in the natural sciences. Only religious fundamentalists who also happen to have science degrees disagree with the concept of common descent.



Fortunately, people don't have to surrender faith to accept evolution. Here are 12,000 enlightened Christian clergy who accept evolution as a foundational truth of our origins:

http://www.butler.edu/clergyproject/Christian_Clergy/ChrClergyLtr.htm

Answer 15

There is a right way and a wrong way to do everything and the wrong way is to keep trying to make everybody else do it the right way;)

Answer 16

How did the talking snake get vocal cords if evolution weren't true?

Answer 17

Because their perception of reality includes supernatural, invisible beings.

Answer 18

If you believe in evolution, that's up to you. Just a note, though. You don't have to be insulting to those who believe the bible, in order to make yourself feel intelligent.

Answer 19

You can go back to the very first lepton or the very first thing that "started the evolutionary process" but something had to create it. Humans in no way can comprehend nothing or eternity. God can and does because He created everything.

Answer 20

Evolution is easy to deny, if it contradicts one's religous or spiritual beliefs, such as mine.

Answer 21

Evolution is just a theory.



If it had been scientifically proven it would no longer be called a theory. For it to be proven in the scientific way (since by the scientific method it needs to be repeated)they would literally have to take a simple, single celled organism and progress it to a human. and even then it would only show that it can happen in a lab, but not necessarily naturally.



edit: thanks for the thumbs-down. You know that what I'm saying is true.

Answer 22

It is very easy to deny if someone is not educated.

Answer 23

Very simple, God is the creator. Theres no more to say. God Bless

Answer 24

Theres major holes in Ev that also call in2 ? the BB/abiogenesis. Many will do anything 2 keep God out of the equation or as generic as possible trying 2 avoid accountability. The crux of the problem is many men (having limited knowledge) try 2 know what God did by imposing human limitations 4 understanding things 2 God's abilities (central problem with ur ?/statements). Issues with Ev:



Many scientific finds r true but it doesnt mean "all" their claims r true (many dont take time & energy 2 carefully think thru things b4 coming out 4 or against it). Many dont properly take in2 account all it takes 2 create a universe/life (they tend 2 focus on things "seeming" 2 support what they want 2 &/or u 2 believe).



In science we established laws of physics. We can't see actual laws of physics. Rather, we see the results & interpret & apply them in accordance with whats been observed 2 b true thru experiments/calculations. Same is true 4 God. Just b/c we can't see God doesn't mean He doesnt exist.



There may b forensic evidence 4 some micro-adaptation & 4 some "appearance" of macro-evolution but most is inconclusive @ best & pure conjecture @ worst. Finding the beginning & reason 4 it all is unattainable by scientific method alone (a billions of yrs old cold case). We didnt see it take place.



But things in creation show an Intelligent Being was involved or the universe & we wouldnt b here (ignoring where it came from). 4 instance:



1. We hv 2 lungs & 2 kidneys - each has a near perfect mirror-image companion organ. No matter how u try 2 explain it away, making a mirror-image organ takes full reverse engineering, knowledge & understanding of its companion's functions & purpose or it cant b created (2 witnesses in nature).



2. Our bodies r highly symmetrical from 1 side 2 the other. Its impossible unless 1 has an outside overview position allowing full comprehension of the entire organism (i.e. feather color patterns).



3. We hv 2 arms & 2 legs. Each is perfectly designed & precisely engineered 2 work with its mirror-image companion. An outside position is required 2 fully comprehend the whole organism & purpose 4 all parts, 2 create it 2 such perfection.



4. The "being" of a cell is confined 2 within the cell membrane & cant know or b aware of much beyond itself. A cell is magnitudes more intelligent than all humanity & has amazing powers 2 know all of an organism's functions & purpose or it isnt the "brain" behind creation 4 many millions of incredibly diverse species. If evolution had a chance of being the source of creation it would require there only be 2 or 3 "kinds" of different bodies with several related species (it would take many billions of trillions of years longer than the universe has existed 2 hv the slightest chance of producing many millions of species of such incredible diversity).



5. Many cells of an organism never contact others much beyond its tiny cell. Mostly, cells & organisms r just copies of their parents doing about the same things as all ancestors. U wont find a bird whom builds a better nest than their parents & their chicks build even a better nest. U wont find a bear improving his living conditions (or passing them 2 his young). Either a cell has 2 lives - 1 copying their parents & 1 secret life working on improvements or some1 of greater intelligence than all mankind created everything.



6. Others point 2 DNA (or RNA in the 1rst organisms). But a cell needs DNA 2 function & DNA cant function without a cell. So, we hv a which came 1rst a cell or DNA problem. Without 1rst having great intelligence, full knowledge & understanding of how an organism is constructed it cant be created. If an ape finds a combination lock he wouldnt know what it was & even if he turns the dial over & over again he wouldnt know what he was doing & the chances against getting it right is astronomical - especially if it had 150 or more no. 2 find in the right order & even if he got that far he still wouldnt know what a lock is 4.



A cell has little "intelligence" & DNA is much more complex than a combination lock (especially in higher life forms) so the odds against figuring out & using DNA (in the correct sequence) is many magnitudes higher than 4 a lock). RNA/DNA r building blocks common 2 all life - having 98% of other species' DNA doesnt prove evolution. DNA like a computer code (but more complex) requires great intelligence 2 identify & assign its proper order - its useless unless u understand it. Give a book 2 an ape. Its useless to him as he cant learn from whats written - intelligence is required.



7. In the fossil record we dont find millions of trial & error organisms that should exist if natural selection or fittest survivor is the source of creation (no organisms existed be4). The odds r so great against near perfection happening 4 many millions of greatly diverse species, it couldnt take place unless 1 had full knowledge & understanding of what theyre doing B4 millions of organisms could b created 2 such precision. If not true millions of misfit organisms with mistakes, having only 1 or 3 eyes in odd places, 1 leg growing out of a head or where an arm should be or a fin where a leg should be should exist. Millions more misfit fossils should exist than of the perfection found in nature.



8. U won't find species like a horse mating a goat, a frog mating fish, a rabbit mating an otter, a lizard mating a bird, a cow mating a hog, etc. Species with similar genes/characteristics rarely mate in the wild. Only a few succeed @ bearing young. Its very rare that a wild crossbreed/hybrid reaches maturity or can bear over 1 litter (usually that litter cant produce or has complications that kills off the crossbreed). Only human intervention brings more success but even that has lead 2 some bad results.



9. Evolution processes being "the" source of all creation would be like having a blind man build a car he's never heard of, seen, touched, heard or rode in. It cant b done without 1rst teaching him about the functions, necessary parts & how 2 put it all together so the car will function.



10. Look @ the huge amount of intelligence, knowledge, understanding, time & energy used 2 create & improve an airplane's capabilities (& many mistakes). If ppl didnt fully learn what 2 do we'd still b earthbound.



11. Creation is astronomically more complex than an airplane. The more complex an organism, the greater the amount of intelligence, knowledge & understanding needed 2 create it. It can only b done by an Intelligent Designer who already fully understands what He's doing - the sheer complexity of man is evidence of God (airplanes show we're created in God's image - God had 2 b the source of all Creation or it couldnt exist let alone evolve).



12. An incredibly Intelligent Being, capable of building a universe, would know the environment His earthly organisms r 2 occupy. So, He built in adaptability so His organisms could survive various earthly environments.



13. Earth happens 2 b in the best possible orbit 2 support life. It has the right amount of gravity, the right axis & rotation speed, the right atmosphere (& ozone layer, Van Allen belt, magnetic field) & needed amount of water. The moon's the right size & in the right orbit 2 provide tidal cycles needed by organisms. Just 1 or 2 relatively small variants in our orbit/environment & most likely life would b very different & higher forms of life wouldve died off in a relatively short time, if they couldve survived.

---

Problem is theres many religions, built on what man wants God 2 b like. I realized they cant all b right (Theres 1 Bible - why so many interpretations/fatal errors? II Pet 1:**19-21). Religion wont teach u much about God (they cant teach what they don't know) but God knows what He's doing. Who knows more about a house, the Builder or those moving in later?



Many miss this: Jesus is the only 1 in history whom stated He's "the" way, "the" truth & "the" life & no 1 gets 2 God w/o Him (Jn 14:6; 5:39; 10:1,7; Acts 4:12) & is the only 1 whom came from God. Its fully true or theres no truth & cant b any God (He knows what He's doing or He's not God). Either Jesus told the whole truth or He's a false prophet, among many, whom should b disregarded.



Since Jesus is the only way 2 know God, "the" whole truth was complete & finished thru Jesus. So any claimed new or other religious beliefs or from self-proclaimed prophets & teachers r null & void & wont lead u 2 God. God always knew all Jesus was 2 do.



Jesus couldnt hv done nor said whats written in the NT unless He fully knew the entire OT (NT didnt exist while Jesus was on earth). Jesus couldnt hv known the entire OT unless God was with Him. & the Apostles couldnt write the NT unless Jesus allowed them 2 remember & know what He was here 4 (Lk 24:25-27,45) - Not possible unless God caused it.



Whoever seeks Jesus Christ with all his heart & soul will find God & His Kingdom (u shall know the truth & it'll set u free). U can lead a horse 2 water but u cant make it drink. Why should God want u 2 live with Him 4ever if u dont want 2 know Him His way (reason 4 free will - Jn 1:12-13)? The truth of God remains 4ever unchanged while things of a man dies with him, including his religions/gods made in his image.



God hates us b/c of our sins - neither being a good person as judged by men or religion can save u. But God also loves us dearly enough 2 send His Son 2 die for our sins - so that thru Jesus our sins could b 4given if we sincerely turn 2 Him - Theres eternal hope only in Jesus Christ & His Bible.



voyc4rmwldrns