• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

[W:926]The central evolution problem

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time, at least since ancient Greece. There was always tension between science and the authority of the Catholic church, and religion in general. Atheism was sometimes a kind of defiance, a rebellion against dogmatic authoritarianism.

In the 19th century, Darwin's idea about the cause of evolution seemed to support atheism. Evolution was not a new idea, but Darwin's theory was new. He speculated that random variations occur, and the most successful of these variations are the most likely to survive and reproduce. Well how could that not be true? And does it actually explain evolution?

But somehow it seemed to be a breakthrough in scientific understanding.

In the 20th century DNA was discovered, and it seemed to validate Darwin's theory of how evolution may have happened.

Remember that evolution theory was around long before Darwin. What was new and different about Darwin's theory was that it said evolution could have happened entirely by chance, without any direction from any kind of supernatural forces or beings or gods.

The 20th century science of genetics supposedly verified Darwin's theory, and it made atheism seem plausible and scientific.

Then we had Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism.

And here we are now, with an increasing number of New Atheists, materialists, rationalists, naturalists, etc. In other words, denial of the supernatural, of spirit.

Ok, is there anything wrong with all that? Well yes, there is. Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically. Actually, there is no evidence for it. And it is wildly improbable.

So why do so many educated people believe it? Misunderstandings, trickery, politics.

The scientific evidence is for evolution. Evolution is not debatable, because we have enough evidence for it. But how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever.

Natural selection (Darwin's theory) is a fact. How could it not be? It says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive. In other words, it says nothing. But it is a nothing that had not been said before.

Natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know? They don't know, they just think they know.

The trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.

Intelligent Design theory says that evolution could not happen by chance. But ID has been called creationism and banned from science education.

One of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered because it's all tangled up in misunderstandings and confusion.
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time...

Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically...

Yes it has

It is now accepted theory

ALL the evidence points towards it, NONE of the evidence refutes it


...there is no evidence for it....

There are mountains of evidence supporting evolution


There is NO evidence supporting intelligent design


...it is wildly improbable....

It is HIGHLY probably and is the ONLY model that fits the evidence.


...how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever....

No, through natural selection and random mutation


...it says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive....

It says animals and plants that cannot survive are eliminated through extinction

The only animals and plants that do survive are though that "fit" their environment.



...it says nothing....

What it says fits the evidence

Of which there are mountains.


...natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know?


The mountains of evidence.



...the trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution....




Darwin didn't know what DNA is, so today Darwin's theory has been refined somewhat based on new evidence but the essential idea of origin of species remains true


... ID has been called creationism and banned from science education....

As it should be

ID is not science...nor is it true

We don't put the Arabian Nights and tales of flying carpets into science class either....the Arabian Nights and the Bible have their own place in the education system.


...one of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered....


Yes it can.

The answer is yes...because it did.
 
Last edited:

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: The central evolution problem

Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.

But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution.

Please try to pay attention.
 

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
155,985
Reaction score
54,792
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
Re: The central evolution problem

Not this nonsense again.

Evolution is fact. It is one of, if not the, most proven scientific theories out there. Denying evolution by invoking "god" is like denying gravity and arguing that it's glue on our feet that causes us to stick tot he earth.

End of ****ing discussion.
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.

But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution.

Please try to pay attention.


Natural selection AND random mutation

Please try to pay attention.
 

blarg

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
14,833
Reaction score
2,015
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time, at least since ancient Greece. There was always tension between science and the authority of the Catholic church, and religion in general. Atheism was sometimes a kind of defiance, a rebellion against dogmatic authoritarianism.

In the 19th century, Darwin's idea about the cause of evolution seemed to support atheism. Evolution was not a new idea, but Darwin's theory was new. He speculated that random variations occur, and the most successful of these variations are the most likely to survive and reproduce. Well how could that not be true? And does it actually explain evolution?

But somehow it seemed to be a breakthrough in scientific understanding.

In the 20th century DNA was discovered, and it seemed to validate Darwin's theory of how evolution may have happened.

Remember that evolution theory was around long before Darwin. What was new and different about Darwin's theory was that it said evolution could have happened entirely by chance, without any direction from any kind of supernatural forces or beings or gods.

The 20th century science of genetics supposedly verified Darwin's theory, and it made atheism seem plausible and scientific.

Then we had Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism.

And here we are now, with an increasing number of New Atheists, materialists, rationalists, naturalists, etc. In other words, denial of the supernatural, of spirit.

Ok, is there anything wrong with all that? Well yes, there is. Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically. Actually, there is no evidence for it. And it is wildly improbable.

So why do so many educated people believe it? Misunderstandings, trickery, politics.

The scientific evidence is for evolution. Evolution is not debatable, because we have enough evidence for it. But how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever.

Natural selection (Darwin's theory) is a fact. How could it not be? It says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive. In other words, it says nothing. But it is a nothing that had not been said before.

Natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know? They don't know, they just think they know.

The trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.

Intelligent Design theory says that evolution could not happen by chance. But ID has been called creationism and banned from science education.

One of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered because it's all tangled up in misunderstandings and confusion.

dna directs how an organism builds itself and it mutates how do you avoid evolution with that?
 

Lionman

Banned
Joined
Oct 30, 2018
Messages
157
Reaction score
14
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Re: The central evolution problem

Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.

But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution. ...

Whether we select ("selective breeding") or nature selects ("natural selection") makes not a big difference in this "mechanisms" which we know since thousands of years. The theory of evolutiion tells you you have with every lifeform on planet Earth a common ancestor and so in general everything has a common living root.

 
Last edited:

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: The central evolution problem

This is NOT a debate about the theory of evolution. There is evidence for evolution.

This is NOT a debate about natural selection. Natural selection has to be true.

This is about whether natural selection causes new species to evolve.

There is NO evidence that natural selection can cause new species to evolve.

Neo-Darwinists have FAITH that it did, over very long periods of time.

Faith without evidence is not science.
 

zyzygy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
43,901
Reaction score
8,676
Location
Flanders.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Evolution is true. I said that already. Natural selection is true -- it can't not be true.

But we have NO evidence that natural selection causes evolution.

Please try to pay attention.

You'd be wrong there.

Natural selection is the process by which species adapt to their environment. Natural selection leads to evolutionary change when individuals with certain characteristics have a greater survival or reproductive rate than other individuals in a population and pass on these inheritable genetic characteristics to their offspring. Simply put, natural selection is a consistent difference in survival and reproduction between different genotypes, or even different genes, in what we could call reproductive success. [A genotype is a group of organisms sharing a specific genetic makeup.]

ActionBioscience - promoting bioscience literacy
 

zyzygy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
43,901
Reaction score
8,676
Location
Flanders.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

This is NOT a debate about the theory of evolution. There is evidence for evolution.

This is NOT a debate about natural selection. Natural selection has to be true.

This is about whether natural selection causes new species to evolve.

There is NO evidence that natural selection can cause new species to evolve.

Neo-Darwinists have FAITH that it did, over very long periods of time.

Faith without evidence is not science.

There is a lot of evidence.
 

Angel

DP Veteran
Joined
May 3, 2017
Messages
18,001
Reaction score
2,908
Location
New York City
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Re: The central evolution problem

Atheism and materialism have been around for a long time, at least since ancient Greece. There was always tension between science and the authority of the Catholic church, and religion in general. Atheism was sometimes a kind of defiance, a rebellion against dogmatic authoritarianism.

In the 19th century, Darwin's idea about the cause of evolution seemed to support atheism. Evolution was not a new idea, but Darwin's theory was new. He speculated that random variations occur, and the most successful of these variations are the most likely to survive and reproduce. Well how could that not be true? And does it actually explain evolution?

But somehow it seemed to be a breakthrough in scientific understanding.

In the 20th century DNA was discovered, and it seemed to validate Darwin's theory of how evolution may have happened.

Remember that evolution theory was around long before Darwin. What was new and different about Darwin's theory was that it said evolution could have happened entirely by chance, without any direction from any kind of supernatural forces or beings or gods.

The 20th century science of genetics supposedly verified Darwin's theory, and it made atheism seem plausible and scientific.

Then we had Richard Dawkins and the New Atheism.

And here we are now, with an increasing number of New Atheists, materialists, rationalists, naturalists, etc. In other words, denial of the supernatural, of spirit.

Ok, is there anything wrong with all that? Well yes, there is. Darwin's theory has not been verified scientifically. Actually, there is no evidence for it. And it is wildly improbable.

So why do so many educated people believe it? Misunderstandings, trickery, politics.

The scientific evidence is for evolution. Evolution is not debatable, because we have enough evidence for it. But how and why evolution happened is as much as mystery as ever.

Natural selection (Darwin's theory) is a fact. How could it not be? It says that individuals who are capable of surviving are more likely to survive. In other words, it says nothing. But it is a nothing that had not been said before.

Natural selection does explain certain things. But does it explain evolution? Lots of people say it does. But how do they know? They don't know, they just think they know.

The trickery is in pretending that evidence for evolution is evidence for Darwin's theory of evolution.

Intelligent Design theory says that evolution could not happen by chance. But ID has been called creationism and banned from science education.

One of the most important questions of our time -- Could life have evolved by chance? -- can't be asked or answered because it's all tangled up in misunderstandings and confusion.
Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.
The others, so far, are those who have surrendered their independent and critical faculties of thought to a faith in the infallible and unquestionable authority of physical science.
Why? Because science keeps giving them toys.

Are you familiar with the term "scientism"?
Are you familiar with those popular car tchotchkes with the bobbling heads?

You are a breath of fresh air, G4N!
 

Quag

DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
29,877
Reaction score
13,172
Location
Earth
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.
The others, so far, are those who have surrendered their independent and critical faculties of thought to a faith in the infallible and unquestionable authority of physical science.
Why? Because science keeps giving them toys.

Are you familiar with the term "scientism"?
Are you familiar with those popular car tchotchkes with the bobbling heads?

You are a breath of fresh air, G4N!

:lamo
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: The central evolution problem

Keep slugging, G4N! So far in this thread you're the only one thinking about this, the only one thinking critically about evolution, the only one thinking, period.
The others, so far, are those who have surrendered their independent and critical faculties of thought to a faith in the infallible and unquestionable authority of physical science.
Why? Because science keeps giving them toys.

Are you familiar with the term "scientism"?
Are you familiar with those popular car tchotchkes with the bobbling heads?

You are a breath of fresh air, G4N!

Thank you Angel. It is VERY hard to reason with science worshipers. After all, toys are proof that science gives us all the ultimate answers.

I have tried and tried, at other forums. Their only responses are:

A) Saying I am ignorant about evolution research.

B) Laughing.

C) Providing evidence for evolution and natural selection.

I have NEVER seen a logical scientific argument from anyone anywhere that actually supports the idea that natural selection caused the evolution of new and more complex species.

Neo-Darwinism is entirely a matter of faith, loved by people who hate religion, such as Richard Dawkins. And it is so persuasive, as long as you don't look at their arguments carefully, as long as you don't notice the trick.
 

blarg

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 19, 2014
Messages
14,833
Reaction score
2,015
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Thank you Angel. It is VERY hard to reason with science worshipers. After all, toys are proof that science gives us all the ultimate answers.

I have tried and tried, at other forums. Their only responses are:

A) Saying I am ignorant about evolution research.

B) Laughing.

C) Providing evidence for evolution and natural selection.

I have NEVER seen a logical scientific argument from anyone anywhere that actually supports the idea that natural selection caused the evolution of new and more complex species.

Neo-Darwinism is entirely a matter of faith, loved by people who hate religion, such as Richard Dawkins. And it is so persuasive, as long as you don't look at their arguments carefully, as long as you don't notice the trick.

dna wont always copy itself correctly

that leads to changes in living things that clone themselves you get even more with sex which is why sex is so common you get more changes faster with it
 

zyzygy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
43,901
Reaction score
8,676
Location
Flanders.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Thank you Angel. It is VERY hard to reason with science worshipers. After all, toys are proof that science gives us all the ultimate answers.

I have tried and tried, at other forums. Their only responses are:

A) Saying I am ignorant about evolution research.

B) Laughing.

C) Providing evidence for evolution and natural selection.

I have NEVER seen a logical scientific argument from anyone anywhere that actually supports the idea that natural selection caused the evolution of new and more complex species.

Neo-Darwinism is entirely a matter of faith, loved by people who hate religion, such as Richard Dawkins. And it is so persuasive, as long as you don't look at their arguments carefully, as long as you don't notice the trick.

So what drives evolution, in your opinion?
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

This is NOT a debate about the theory of evolution. There is evidence for evolution.

This is NOT a debate about natural selection. Natural selection has to be true.

This is about whether natural selection causes new species to evolve.

There is NO evidence that natural selection can cause new species to evolve.

Neo-Darwinists have FAITH that it did, over very long periods of time.

Faith without evidence is not science.


Do you actually know what a "species" is ?

The evidence of the finches in the Galapagos islands is evidence of natural selection at work - whereby a species evolved into different species

How about the Indian and African elephants (and yes, there are more species of elephant) these are two distinct species of animal.
Explain that one



**************
ALL the evidence supports evolution.
**************



DNA supports evolution - that different species today had common ancestors.
ie: ONE species became DIFFERENT species

Scientists believe in evolution because of EVIDENCE. They do not have a responsibility for your lack of comprehension.


Faith is by definition a believe in something without evidence.

You're saying macro evolution (the process where a species splits into two or more) doesn't happen. You say this with no evidence, indeed you say it in the face of ALL the evidence.

You should ditch your faith and rely on the evidence.
 

zyzygy

DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 6, 2014
Messages
43,901
Reaction score
8,676
Location
Flanders.
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Re: The central evolution problem

Do you actually know what a "species" is ?

The evidence of the finches in the Galapagos islands is evidence of natural selection at work - whereby a species evolved into different species

How about the Indian and African elephants (and yes, there are more species of elephant) these are two distinct species of animal.
Explain that one



**************
ALL the evidence supports evolution.
**************



DNA supports evolution - that different species today had common ancestors.
ie: ONE species became DIFFERENT species

Scientists believe in evolution because of EVIDENCE. They do not have a responsibility for your lack of comprehension.


Faith is by definition a believe in something without evidence.

You're saying macro evolution (the process where a species splits into two or more) doesn't happen. You say this with no evidence, indeed you say it in the face of ALL the evidence.

You should ditch your faith and rely on the evidence.

I am waiting for his theory about what drives evolution. We have had no answers yet.
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

I am waiting for his theory about what drives evolution. We have had no answers yet.


I think he's trying to say that micro-evolution exists through natural selection; but macro-evolution does not.


ie: a species can change physically but cannot evolve into two or more species.

So different species of finches evolved independently.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: The central evolution problem

dna wont always copy itself correctly

that leads to changes in living things that clone themselves you get even more with sex which is why sex is so common you get more changes faster with it

That is the hypothesis. There is no evidence that it explains the origin of new more complex species.
 

Good4Nothin

DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
8,603
Reaction score
1,918
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Re: The central evolution problem

Do you actually know what a "species" is ?

The evidence of the finches in the Galapagos islands is evidence of natural selection at work - whereby a species evolved into different species

How about the Indian and African elephants (and yes, there are more species of elephant) these are two distinct species of animal.
Explain that one



**************
ALL the evidence supports evolution.
**************



DNA supports evolution - that different species today had common ancestors.
ie: ONE species became DIFFERENT species

Scientists believe in evolution because of EVIDENCE. They do not have a responsibility for your lack of comprehension.


Faith is by definition a believe in something without evidence.

You're saying macro evolution (the process where a species splits into two or more) doesn't happen. You say this with no evidence, indeed you say it in the face of ALL the evidence.

You should ditch your faith and rely on the evidence.

There is NO evidence that the DNA changes leading to the origin of a new more complex species are copying errors. NONE.
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

That is the hypothesis. There is no evidence that it explains the origin of new more complex species.

There are MOUNTAINS of evidence

ALL the evidence we have supports it.

Please, please, please research some of it.
 

Rich2018

DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 31, 2018
Messages
37,812
Reaction score
3,311
Location
Norcross, Georgia
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Re: The central evolution problem

There is NO evidence that the DNA changes leading to the origin of a new more complex species are copying errors. NONE.

There are MOUNTAINS of evidence.

You're either ignorant (ie: commenting on a subject on which you know little) Or
You just don't want to believe it.


Again do you actually know what a "species" is?


Do you know anything about the finches on the Galapagos islands ?


Can you explain the different species of elephant ?



Do you really think that different species of elephant evolved independently of each other ?
 
Top Bottom