Evidence for evolution

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
Hammeroj said:
spartan231490 said:
Monoochrom said:
Jegsimmons said:
renegade7 said:
Religion is not based in logic, so you can't use logic when arguing with a religious person =/
uh, not sure if being funny, or if i should feel insulted.
Uh, neither? Religion isn't based in logic, so that's correct, no joke hidden there. And about it being insulting...well, I really don't see how that is insulting, you can't bring up logic in a discussion with a religious person about religion seeing as their religion defies logic. They will just ignore it, in fact, thats what always happens.
Religion doesn't defy logic. Fundamentalists often twist religion to defy logic, but that isn't how religion is supposed to be. Religion exists outside the purview of logic. It is about having faith in times when logic doesn't have an answer.
I love how you know what religion is supposed to be. I also love the way you call the people who believe their good books the most the people who twist religion into something.

Outside of logic is not logic by definition. Illogical. Don't even try to spin this shit with your pseudo-intellectual rhetoric.
Bit over-aggressive don't you think? Someone's a little defensive me thinks.

I never said religion was logical, I said that it exists outside the realm of logic, and therefore can't be thought of in terms of logical or illogical. Further, I didn't say that all fundamentalists did that, I said that some do. And I suppose i misspoke myself, I meant radicals, but the two are so often synonymous I misspoke myself.
 

spartan231490

New member
Jan 14, 2010
5,186
0
0
Monoochrom said:
spartan231490 said:
Monoochrom said:
Jegsimmons said:
renegade7 said:
Religion is not based in logic, so you can't use logic when arguing with a religious person =/
uh, not sure if being funny, or if i should feel insulted.
Uh, neither? Religion isn't based in logic, so that's correct, no joke hidden there. And about it being insulting...well, I really don't see how that is insulting, you can't bring up logic in a discussion with a religious person about religion seeing as their religion defies logic. They will just ignore it, in fact, thats what always happens.
Religion doesn't defy logic. Fundamentalists often twist religion to defy logic, but that isn't how religion is supposed to be. Religion exists outside the purview of logic. It is about having faith in times when logic doesn't have an answer.
So, basically, believe this bullshit without any reason other then ''because'' instead of simply admitting that you don't know the answer or that their possibly isn't a answer?

Are you really trying to say that such a ''thought'' doesn't defy logic? What is not illogical about ''Believe this, we have no real reason to do so, but believe it anyway.''?
There is a reason to believe. It's called faith. That's the whole point of religion. Just because there is no evidence in favor of something, doesn't mean it's illogical to believe it. It's only illogical to believe if there is significant evidence against it, and there is no evidence against the existence of a god, or a soul, or an afterlife.

"I always admired atheists. I think it takes a lot of faith."
Diane Frolov and Andrew Schneider
 

BrassButtons

New member
Nov 17, 2009
564
0
0
Arrogancy said:
Isn't intelligent design just evolution with more of a religious background? Or do you mean creationism? Intelligent design is supported pretty much the same way evolution is supported, just with God at the start of everything. As far as science today goes it's as valid as anything else we have. Creationism on the other hand is up against a mountain of evidence. If your dad doesn't accept carbon dating then there's really not much else to do about it.
Intelligent Design is Creationism dressed up to sound secular in an attempt to get Creationism taught in schools, as part of a plot to turn the US into a theocracy. I am not kidding. [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy]

Macrobstar said:
So escapees, most convincing evidence for evolution?
I recommend this site [http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/index.shtml] for a good primer on evolution. If your dad is honestly interested in what is correct, this is a good start for him to learn what evolution is. If he's more interested in maintaining his current beliefs it won't matter what you show him.
 

The Funslinger

Corporate Splooge
Sep 12, 2010
6,150
0
0
Macrobstar said:
So I got into an argument with my dad today. He says that there is way more evidence for intelligent design than for evolution, and that evolution is "just a theory" and has "minimal evidence"
I tried explaining to him, about fossils and genetics but he wouldn't listen

So escapees, most convincing evidence for evolution?

PS: I also tried "Every noteworthy scientist believes in evolution" he just said, no.
You could try "years of documented scientific testing, and research trumps stuff written down thousands of years ago by a bunch of people that contradict each other." Also, do you own a dog? Because dogs themselves are an example of how we influenced natural selection. They are an example of realistic evolution to those who would be all like "oh, so things just keep improving for no reason?" They don't keep improving, and it's not for no reason.
 

Frostwhisper21

New member
Jul 16, 2010
56
0
0
Did anyone mention different ethnicities? Because that in itself is a decent example of evolution's mechanics. They may not necessarily be born from nautral selection, but they're still diversified slightly yet part of the same species(human).
 

lRookiel

Lord of Infinite Grins
Jun 30, 2011
2,821
0
0
No point in arguing with a religious person, you just can't win. they always have an answer that includes "thats how god did it" most of the time.

Let them be the pillocks and just move on.
 

chaos order

New member
Jan 27, 2010
764
0
0
TheEndlessGrey said:
chaos order said:
actually evolution is STILL a biological theory, its what the general population thinks a theory is thats WRONG
Well if you argue in caps I must be wrong. Instead of using my own words again, I'll be lazy and pull a quote from good ole wikipedia:

"Scientists continue to study evolution by constructing theories, by using observational data, and by performing experiments in both the field and the laboratory. Biologists agree that descent with modification is one of the most reliably established facts in science."

So again, any explanation of how evolution takes places is a theory, but evolution itself, not a theory.
the explanation for how evolution works is natural selection, and yes that is also a biological theory, but if somehow somewhere someone disproved natural selection, then evolution would not be a theory any more because the explanation of natural phenomena without any mechanisms to explain it would not fall in line with what a theory is. so you cant say that the mechanisms by which evolution occurs is theory but then say that evolution isnt because you cant have a theory for a natural phenomena without a mechanism by which it works
 

Daverson

New member
Nov 17, 2009
1,164
0
0
Evolution's been scientifically proven, what's there to debate about?

Trying to convince a creationist who's fully aware of the theory of evolution that it's true is like trying to convince a believer in the flat earth theory that the world's round. There's so many better uses of your time.

Remember: "You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink". (A pony though, you could lead that to water, and make it drink by tricking it into thinking you don't want it drink, ponies are dicks like that... I think this might somehow be relevant?)
 

Woodsey

New member
Aug 9, 2009
14,553
0
0
Well then your dad's a moron who you shouldn't waste your time with.

There's no evidence for intelligent design, just people bending what they see to fit the 'truth' they want.
 

Knusper

New member
Sep 10, 2010
1,235
0
0
How about the Peppered Moth or whatever it's called.

Back in Industrial Revolution, there were light grey moths that sat on the light grey bark of the solver birch tree. As the industrial revolution progressed and soot was thrown up by the chimneys of the many factories, the bark on the trees darkened and birds could easily see the moths and ate them. However, some of the moths (about 0.01%) were darker thanks to a mutation somewhere back along the line and most of the moths that survived to reproduce were these because they couldn't be seen by the birds and so eventually it was mostly dark moths that went on to define the species, so steadily the Peppered Moth grew darker.

However many years later, when there was legislation for factories to clean up their act, there was less soot being dispensed onto the trees and it was eventually all washed away by rain and the bark of the silver birch trees became lighter. This is why most of the Peppered Moths you see today are light, because the dark one are being eaten up and it's mostly lighter ones that reproduce, so steadily the species is becoming lighter.

Link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peppered_moth_evolution#Environmental_changes
 

Psub Xero

New member
Mar 19, 2010
40
0
0
http://www.cracked.com/article_19213_7-animals-that-are-evolving-right-before-our-eyes.html
 

ntw3001

New member
Sep 7, 2009
306
0
0
Well it's clearly evident that traits follow from parents to their offspring. Note that white couples will have white children, gazelles will produce baby gazelles and so forth. The process by which an offspring's traits are determined are observably non-random. So, we can all agree that traits pass down from generation to generation.

There are only two possible ways this logic can lead: either that eventually, a discrete species hits an invisible wall, the foreman blows his whistle and yells 'okay, all generations from here on in will be identical copies of the previous one', or that doesn't happen.
 

someonehairy-ish

New member
Mar 15, 2009
1,949
0
0
Darkasassin96 said:
WHy because you belive in odds greater than drawing a royal flushmore than fifty times in a row with just the amino acids forming a protien.
If something has a chance of happening equal to one over one million, you would suggest that it seems pretty unlikely. But if that thing has one million oppurtunities to happen then you would expect it happen once. And if that thing has a billion chances to occur, then it will happen one million times.*

Saying something has a tiny chance to happen is completely irrelevant in a universe so vast that even things with a tiny chance to happen are still going to happen. A lot.

*Or just one thousand, depending whether you use the English or American billion.
 
Dec 27, 2010
814
0
0
Tell him he should stop using most modern medicines then, and revert to treating any disease with the medicine that they evolved immunities to not particularly long ago.
If he won't listen, you should probably just start attacking his beliefs instead, i.e: calling him out on the supposed evidence for intelligent design. It's much easier to destroy someone's beliefs with their own logic than to use reason with them.
 

brainslurper

New member
Aug 18, 2009
940
0
0
brainslurper said:
Ask him why men have nipples.
That is actually because they are formed in the first three months of the pregnancy which is before the sex of the fetus is comes into play.[/quote]
Fine. Tailbones?