Evolution is real. Its a real thing that really does happen and did happen. Gah!

[Aurgelmir]

Snip

But it is stupidity. Because evolution isn't a vague concept which just sit by itself on a shelf. As I said earlier: Evolution is apart of Biology, which is a Science. You are not allowed to pick and choose what part of science you "believe in" Science = facts. Sure sometimes we are wrong in science, and we adapt out theories, but that is done by professionals who see that our understanding of some concepts were wrong. Like how Newtonian physics worked for us for ages, and still do, but it wasn't accurate on the quantum level, and lead to new theories being developed.

And you know, I have been educated in physics, didn't really like electromagnetism so I choose not to believe in it.
See how stupid that sounds?

Well it seems you do have some knowledge of the history of science. It seems to me that science overall has been a history of getting things wrong, and then adjusting and creating new theories to adapt to the previous incorrect understanding of the world.

Looking at the history of science, I'm just saying that there's nothing wrong with remaining skeptical of Evolution and Science in general since to me, a crazy person, there doesn't seem to be any real reason to believe that now suddenly we have discovered the absolute truth.

I'm not saying that one should completely disregard science or evolution as a whole, but it's perfectly normal to choose to remain skeptical and not accept Evolution as the complete and only truth.

The only time I would consider it to be "stupid" to continue to be skeptical/not believe in science would be when all the "professionals" are literally done researching everything and the absolute truth about everything has been confirmed. I somehow doubt that this will be happening anytime soon.

There has not been that many times where something in science has been 100% wrong. So it is not logical to think that evolution is 100% completely bonkers. Only time where it is okay to be skeptical is when there are two competing hypothesis that both seem to be right. But Evolution has no competitors (No creationism is NOT a scientific competitor).

Besides evolution is pretty well proven, there might be aspects that are not correct but the general concept is pretty solid.

You misunderstand my post.

I was saying that to be an advocate of evolution, you should probably know a bit more about it than "science says its right", if anything, the scientific community would not want you to do that because it's unscientific as you're blindly following something without any idea as to how it works. Granted that blindly agreeing with the scientific community is a much better bet than blindly agreeing with a holy text, but it's still an unscientific way to approach things.

I'm happy for people to blindly accept Evolution if they don't really care that much about it and don't care for other people's opinions on the topic, what annoys me is people try to convince creationists that Evolution happened by saying "science says so", which I'm betting they've heard quite a few times before and are still creationists, meaning they have brought nothing to the argument they supposedly support. If you want to try and persuade somebody that evolution is true, then you should probably know how it is true yourself, because it's not a very persuasive argument to say "true, done", if I didn't believe in evolution and somebody were trying to persuade me otherwise, I'd want to know exactly why I should believe in it, so many people on the internet (and on these forums) don't know anything about evolution yet are still huge advocates of it, proclaiming that those that don't believe it are stupid. What is stupid is that for all they know they might disagree with it, but they haven't looked into it at all so they don't know.

Oh, right, you're American. America seems to have way too much trouble accepting evolution. I've never met anyone in England who doubted it outright.

Some people who posted in this thread don't seem to know much about evolution. We didn't involve from any of the current monkey species, we just share the same evolutionary ancestor. We haven't just evolved quicker than them, they've evolved to fit a different environment.

What this guy said. Some people in this thread (some of them in support of evolution) don't know their shit. I don't think anybody should have a real input into an argument if they DON'T KNOW THEIR SHIT. There are plenty of people that do know their shit when it comes to evolution, so leave it to them rather than just saying "science says so", I'd like to actually see posts with evidence and reasoning in, not blind faith in science which would be frowned upon by a lot of scientists.

I did not misunderstand you, I am just saying that you don't have to be the expert of Evolution to know and accept evolution. It's not my fault a lot of people 1) didn't pay attention in biology in school, 2) go to a school where they are forced to teach creationism in science classes.

Again I will point out that I don't know or understand the concepts of quantum physics all that well. Should I just say "well they can't properly measure a particles position and speed at the same time? Well then I choose to be skeptical to the concept".

Evolution isn't a religion, its science, it is pretty well proven, I have read/ watched a lot about it, I understand the general concepts of it, so I can say that without just saying "science said so". But if it sound that way it's because you either accept science or you don't you can not pick and choose what to accept. And if some really smart people prove that evolution is not right, over and over and over again then we should probably start being skeptical. Right now? Nope. It's as much of a truth as gravity, electromagnetism, quantum physics etc.

 

[minimacker]

Don't be completely short sighted, evolution is only a theory.

If it were real, and we evolved from monkeys, how come there are still monkeys around? You can't explain that.

Next you'll be claiming that the world is round like that dude in the other thread. What's wrong with you people, has the world gone mad.

I was about to go apeshit (pun intended) on you until I saw the last two sentences.

 

[surg3n]

Why are people so fucking stupid?! I don't get it!

In the last two days, I've actually come across several people in my daily life that legit think evolution is a conspiracy, a farce, *insert derogatory name here* etc.

Evolution is a measurable thing that we can WATCH HAPPEN! STOP THE STUPIDITY!!!

End rant. Someone please tell me these people are not the norm. Someone! Anyone!

Share your stories about interactions with people who say its not real.

One good rebuff is that laryngeal nerve, look it up, I'm sure you'll find it interesting. To summarise though - a nerve goes from a giraffes body, all the way up it's neck, just to come all the way back to near where it starts. In early evolution, when a giraffe didn't need it's long neck, the nerve was fine - it was short and efficient. Now that a giraffe has a long neck, the nerve goes for far longer than it should, or at least far longer than it really has to - far longer than anyone would ever design it to go. And it only goes that route because the neck got longer and longer over time, and that nerve adapted by getting longer and longer. It's inneficiency prooves the theory of evolution.

 

[DANEgerous]

Share your stories about interactions with people who say its not real.

The real question is: Micro or Macro evolution? I've had a science teacher that believed in micro, but not macro *shrug*

To bad no difference exists eh?

 

[DrDuckman]

I think the demonetization of Scientists as another form of random joe with opinions, or even worse, as some sort of cult or religious group, is particularly galling in this case simply because Evolution is NOT really a difficult scientific concept. This ain't quantum physics guys. This is a readily demonstrable fact that was observed by a failed medical doctor candidate in an age with no knowledge of DNA or even a widely understood notion of genetic inheritance(and actually, many others before him too). HE got it. And Darwin was no genius, he was just a guy who happened to have the conviction, social standing, money and patience to make a well documented and researched case for it, and present it well enough to the largely dogmatic scholar community of the time.

You don't NEED a background in biology to understand it. Just Google it, it's extremely easy to evaluate the empirical evidence yourself without relying on the eeeeevil scientists who apparently are out to get you.

Ofcourse, if you DO realize the fact that scientific knowledge is generally trusted because it's peer reviewed by a large number of experts again and again over a long period of time, with demonstrable applications and thorough experimentation, unlike most random musings from conspiracy theorists etc, then you can see some even more irrefutable proof. Like for example the fact that we actually CAN see evolution in action. In fact, cancer researchers see it infornt of their very eyes all the time(due to the fact that cancer cells reproduce rapidly and are prone to mutation). Seriously, you can witness evolution in days and weeks. So does any biologist who works on viruses. It happens all the time.

 

[Cpu46]

Also, it technically it's still a theory. It isn't right but like all beliefs it isn't wrong.

Sorry if someone else has replied saying the exact same thing.

When people outside of the scientific community say "I have a Theory!" what they really mean is "I have a Hypothesis!"

A Hypothesis is essentially an Idea that seems to support what is going on.

A Theory is a Hypothesis that has overwhelming evidence for it's support. It is the highest form of credibility in the scientific community. Sure there is the chance that it is not 100% correct but it's core principles are almost irrefutable.
For example we may not be 100% accurate in our mathematical understanding of gravity but nobody is going to jump off of a cliff to try and prove it wrong. No matter how wrong we may be about the math you will still hit the ground with the same force, because any error in it will not change how gravity works just how we understand it.

 

[DANEgerous]

Evolution is (currently) only a theory... is to be a little arrogant and a little closed-minded. Who's to say any other theories aren't just as plausible?

Gravity is currently only a theory, who is to say other theories are not just as plausible? how about the fact they have no evidence whatsoever.

 

[DANEgerous]

Bah. Evolution is for the weak.
Real man kill bears to acquire XP with their bare hands.

You use XP to evolve! What you think people just walk around doing it with no XP? If so press F7 to take a screenshot and capture game data and ban that hacker.

 

[Hollyday]

In response to this thread I would like to play the Tim Minchin card...

 

[Seneschal]

I was particularly pissed at Mass Effect 3 that they put this warped version of evolution as the Protheans' "cosmic imperative," as if it's some kind of ascension plan that's moving towards a single perfect form, and everything beneath that is somehow inferior. It stems from the common misconception that evolution has a single purpose, usually shamelessly anthropocentric. Hack writing, BioWare, hack writing.

 

[Patrick Buck]

While I do actually belive in Evolution, I think (I may be wrong) that it hasn't actually been proved has it? It's still only a theory. But I do agree, it's very probably true.

My soulution to dealing with people with this much stupid? Either ignoring them, or explaining my point in a clear, impossible to misunderstand way, with lots of big words to scare them. Nothing like proving someone wrong in an obvious manner, and leaving them no way to disagree without looking like a prick.

 

[direkiller]

Why are people so fucking stupid?

Evolution is a measurable thing that we can WATCH HAPPEN! STOP THE STUPIDITY!!!

I believe that evolution exists but I can understand why some people believe in intelligent design. It's kind of hard not to sometimes.

By the 1950s, scientists were in hot pursuit of the origin of life. Around the world, the scientific community was examining what kind of environment would be needed to allow life to begin. In 1953, Stanley L. Miller and Harold C. Urey, working at the University of Chicago, conducted an experiment which would change the approach of scientific investigation into the origin of life.

Miller took molecules which were believed to represent the major components of the early Earth's atmosphere and put them into a closed system


The gases they used were methane (CH4), ammonia (NH3), hydrogen (H2), and water (H2O). Next, he ran a continuous electric current through the system, to simulate lightning storms believed to be common on the early earth. Analysis of the experiment was done by chromotography. At the end of one week, Miller observed that as much as 10-15% of the carbon was now in the form of organic compounds. Two percent of the carbon had formed some of the amino acids which are used to make proteins. Perhaps most importantly, Miller's experiment showed that organic compounds such as amino acids, which are essential to cellular life, could be made easily under the conditions that scientists believed to be present on the early earth. This enormous finding inspired a multitude of further experiments.
http://www.chem.duke.edu/~jds/cruise_chem/Exobiology/miller.html

This experiment 'proves' that amino acids can be formed out of their raw materials. But to go from THAT to even single celled organisms is quite frankly mind boggling.

to go from that to a self replicating molecule is not that much of a stretch.(and that's what the first "life" was a cell is a later addition to the equation).

the simple cell is not that simple it like us is a product of billions of years of evolution.

 

[MrHide-Patten]

It doesn't matter what some monkeys believe, it doesn't stop Evolution from being the truth, no matter your messed up belief system. I also hate how people claim creationism is a theory as much as Evolution is. A theory in scientific terms means more than just a geuss, a theory in science is a closely examined possibility with EVIDENCE to back it up.

Dinosaurs were put there to test our faith. Get fuckin' real.

 

[Terminate421]

Also, it technically it's still a theory. It isn't right but like all beliefs it isn't wrong.

Sorry if someone else has replied saying the exact same thing.

When people outside of the scientific community say "I have a Theory!" what they really mean is "I have a Hypothesis!"

A Hypothesis is essentially an Idea that seems to support what is going on.

A Theory is a Hypothesis that has overwhelming evidence for it's support. It is the highest form of credibility in the scientific community. Sure there is the chance that it is not 100% correct but it's core principles are almost irrefutable.
For example we may not be 100% accurate in our mathematical understanding of gravity but nobody is going to jump off of a cliff to try and prove it wrong. No matter how wrong we may be about the math you will still hit the ground with the same force, because any error in it will not change how gravity works just how we understand it.

I'm assuming I used the word "Theory" wrong, yes?

 

[Terminate421]

It doesn't matter what some monkeys believe, it doesn't stop Evolution from being the truth, no matter your messed up belief system. I also hate how people claim creationism is a theory as much as Evolution is. A theory in scientific terms means more than just a geuss, a theory in science is a closely examined possibility with EVIDENCE to back it up.

Dinosaurs were put there to test our faith. Get fuckin' real.

Yeah, but that doesn't ultimately disprove thousands of years of belief in a higher power. Its like we have two different kinds of assholes on either side:

A. Assholes who think that everyone who isn't in there religion is burning in a hell.
B. Assholes who think that everyone who is in a religion is an idiot and wrong.

 

[FieryTrainwreck]

it's just as bad to appeal to the authority of scientists as it is to accept that evolution didn't happen due to a book saying so.

Just chiming in with this bit.

No. Wrong. Complete nonsense. This is exactly the sort of false equivalency that is undermining scientific (and honestly, most other kinds of) progress today. An opinion doesn't magically turn valid just because someone has it - not when it comes to natural phenomena. If you show me two people, one who takes a priest at his word and another who does the same with a scientist, guess who the bigger dummy is? Hint: it's not a draw.

Again: belonging to a group of people doesn't mean the things coming out of your mouth mean a fucking thing.

 

[Agow95]

Evolution can be proved simply with these facts and simple maths, 1. The genetic code of living creatures mutates, this is accepted as fact all round, we've seen it happen in experiments, 2. Natural Selection, a creature that is suited to it's environment is more likely to survive than one that is not, for example, a Camel will live longer than a Grizzly Bear in the sahara desert, again, this is fact. From those two facts we know that over time all living creatures will mutate, the one's who get beneficial mutations live, the ones who don't or are out-classed will die, and that over long periods of time more mutations will occur, so eventually over hundreds of thousands of years so many mutations will have happened that we are no longer Humans, and we outlived those of us who grew skin that melts at room temperature.

 

[Coldster]

Evolution is a theory. While it is the theory with the most evidence behind it (maybe even the only theory with evidence behind it when looking at what caused the biodiversity on Earth) and I do believe in it, it is still a theory. Let me put this in perspective though: gravity is a theory, the sun rising tomorrow is a theory, basically everything like that is theory. Not that hard to understand. Hopefully some people learned something from this.