If Evolution is real,

[RonPaul2008]

Where in the hell is the ocean equivalent of humans? If life started first in the oceans, and had how many millions of years, why such stunted progress? What the fukk?

But if God is real, how come he didn't tell those old fukks writing the Bible that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the Universe?

Stunted progress? Success in terms of evolution is about survival of the species. By that measure humans have a lot of catching up to do with sharks.

[TheMoneyShot]

Who made who? Who made you?
Who made who? Ain't nobody told you?

[McBa1n]

I believe in God as well, but studies have shown the human brain has NOT evolved since homo sapiens came to be. Intelligence has grown, but this is mainly because of socialization (not biology), and emotions and primal urges have stayed the same as they were 30 - 50 000 years ago.

Wow. An ignorant post quoting another ignorant post.
Evolution happens over time. You don't evolve in 1 generation, let alone 100. Science proves this. The more complex the species, the longer it takes. The average height of humans has changed dramatically in the past 50k years. What? Really? That's evolution, sir.

If you study microbiology or read about science, the less complex the life form, the easier it is for them to evolve. Humankind has changed a DICKLOAD in the last 100k years because of evolution, unless, you ignore neaderthals.

If you deny evolution, then you deny the science behind why anti-biotics are failing more and more. God didn't make the same strains something else, those diseases are adapting to kill us more efficiently. Microbes struggle to exist just as human-kind does. It'd be like if god changed us all into AK47 wielding ninjas in the next generation. Science dictates why that doesn't happen.

I have only contempt for those that don't, at least, pay attention to science, or believe in that system, as it's become politicized. I have STRONG contempt for those of faith that ignore science. You're fine having faith, if that's how you get thru your life? Good for you. But because you have that doesn't mean you have to ignore FACTS.
That's what pisses me off a LOT. Study=answers. Faith=faith. You're not wrong having faith, you're wrong denying that there is a LOT of science available to you to study or persue yourself. That's the shit that pisses me the F off. Selective fact checking doesn't equal reality, and what you're bringing to the table, sir, is not reality. It's actually very very very wrong. Brain size has 0 to do with evolution. Most of what you've learned on the brain has changed dramatically in the last decade (including that b.s. stat that we use very little of it).

Just read and learn. Science is the greatest thing we have, but yet, it's politicized. In that regard, we are de-evolving as a species.

[chilidog]

[statnerds]

You don't evolve in 1 generation, let alone 100. Science proves this. The more complex the species, the longer it takes. The average height of humans has changed dramatically in the past 50k years. What? Really? That's evolution, sir.

Human height as an evolutionary adaptation? We just couldn't quite reach the fruit 50 feet up in trees so we grew a few inches?

How can you say that an increase in height is evolution when there is no need tied to survival? What does the human race gain by growing a little taller?

[statnerds]

I asked myself this question once too...
age 13.

It's called "survival of the fittest" for a reason. Our land/air climate combo destined us to be the fittest. If it were instead, say, 250 degrees on land and had been that way for millions of years, then some fish or urchin would be the fittest.

So then your thought process is still on that 13 year old level?

So we are the fittest? Have any kids? I have one. They don't do shit for 6 or 7 months. Can't feed themselves, have zero mobility, cannot communicate. How fragile is the human body? Too cold, we freeze to death (not extreme temps, talking in the 40's) too hot, we're fukked.

I just find it hard to build a defense of 'survival of the fittest' on one of the most fragile species on the planet.

[Stocks]

Didn't things evolve to live out of water so maybe that's why.

Also things evolve to their enviroment so things in the water are not going to evolve the same as things on land.

[Maniac]

So then your thought process is still on that 13 year old level?

So we are the fittest? Have any kids? I have one. They don't do shit for 6 or 7 months. Can't feed themselves, have zero mobility, cannot communicate. How fragile is the human body? Too cold, we freeze to death (not extreme temps, talking in the 40's) too hot, we're fukked.

I just find it hard to build a defense of 'survival of the fittest' on one of the most fragile species on the planet.

The fact that kids are incapable of looking after themselves for the first few years is also the same reason why the older we get, the harder it is to concieve and give birth in the first place - the body has evolved so that we cant have kids when we are too old to properly look after them in the early years to give them a fighting chance.

Alright, you do get some instances where exceptionally old people do manage to give give birth - but these situations have a very serious risk of either the mother/baby/both dying in the process, or at least if the birth was allowed to happen naturally.

The fact that these births can be successful is only down to the fact that we have evolved enough to medically be able to assist with things like this, so what would normally be a dangerous birth these days, we can fix by performing a C-section, using drugs etc.

Come to think of it, are we even that much more of a "fragile species" than any other on this planet, considering that we have evolved to the stage where we can actually use modern medical science to fix our bodies when things that otherwise would have killed us generations ago, are now relatively simple procedures, for example removing the appendix when it is imflammed.

Also, on the subject of the appendix - is that not right there a perfect example of evolution ? The fact that we have an organ in our body that once aided in the digestion of high amounts of plant cellulose, from back when we were a more herbivorous species. Now that our diets have evolved to the stage that we are eating more meat (from animals that we evolved to learn how to capture + kill) and processed food that we have evolved to learn how to make (not necessarily a good thing!) then we have evolved to the stage where the appendix is now out-dated and defunct.

[statnerds]

My point on human babies being completely helpless was to illustrate that Evolution is spoken of in terms of survival of the fittest and adaptations that increase a species chance at flourishing. But in this case, if humans evolved from apes, why would infants seem to be a regression? We are talking about a species that had yet to master the elements and all manner of beasts. Extremely rough and rugged conditions. Such offspring would have been a distinct disadvantage to a species fighting for survival.

We are fragile and lucky. Lucky enough to survive our own stupidity. How many thousands of years did it take to figure out hand washing would kill germs, once it was settled that germs existed?

[8ArIvd5]

Where in the hell is the ocean equivalent of humans? If life started first in the oceans, and had how many millions of years, why such stunted progress? What the fukk?

But if God is real, how come he didn't tell those old fukks writing the Bible that the Sun, not the Earth, was the center of the Galaxy?

Isn't the sun the center of our solar system, which is in the outskirts of our galaxy?

[MC PICKS]

Pretty sure there's been more than 7 million babies born Or ar you saying that an army of 7 billion babies is taking over the earth now?

No im saying there are 7 billion people on earth, the 7th billion person was born recently i saw on the news, the world poipulation just went over the 7 billion mark currently.

[gauchojake]

dolphins you fukk

[McBa1n]

Human height as an evolutionary adaptation? We just couldn't quite reach the fruit 50 feet up in trees so we grew a few inches?

How can you say that an increase in height is evolution when there is no need tied to survival? What does the human race gain by growing a little taller?

You make a very good point in regards to 'modern' times, but it doesn't dismiss the fact. I'm no genius, but size is a critical point in survival as it dictates 'dominance' - that's my best argument (if you think about it a bit). Height can also include a larger frame for a human, which is also critical for labor. It wasn't until not too long ago that things like farming or taking down trees became mechanized, 2 things paramount in the survival of the species.

I'm not an expert on the topic, I'm sure there are others that know a dickload more, but it makes a lot of sense that things like farming/warfare/labor/climate factors lend themselves to larger or taller humans. Also, the availability of food increased over time as more tools were invented. That likely has something to do with it.

If you want to dig deeper into evolution - our best archeological evidence carries the species homo sapien back to Africa. Now, stop and think for a moment. Why are humans not EXACTLY as the first recorded homo sapiens if there's no evolution? Why are brown people differently colored than beigish people?

Evolution helps each race of the species adapt to their surroundings. I don't remember reading about Jesus talking about 'native' americans (except in mormonism) that came over beringia and settled the 2 American continents in the bible, yet there's evidence of them being here some 50kish years ago. Do the Europeans that conquered North or South America have any common traits of the natives, other than being humans? Nope. You'd have to prove that air travel or alien intervention was plausible for races to inter-breed prior - that's the only out in the discussion. Natives of the Americas, or Africa or Asia or any non-mediterranean culture (which has tons of human mixed-breeding/sharing of technology/culture - it's no wonder that region dominates history) evolved over a LONG period of time to adapt to their part of the world. Archeology proves the migration of human-kind.

So lets break this down. If humankind, going off the best science available, began in Africa - then how come a person born of pure African decent looks nothing like someone of pure Asian decent? Why aren't native N/S Americans identical to pure Europeans? That alone proves evolution exists. Also, the bible does not explain how a person of the nordic regions of our globe developed differently than people than Africa, but environment makes a LOT more sense to why homo-sapiens developed in the way they have. It makes sense that in a region with a longer winter humans need to be bigger - to store more fat for those brutal months - than someone in Africa, whom has a totally different set of food reserves and shelter requirements. Both are efficient based on their environment.

Did some god do this? No. It's right in your f'n face. It makes a dickload of sense. It's factual human-kind evidence based on science, not a book that was stolen, perverted and then abused for capital gain.

IF we wanted to get back to debating your point, in today's age, human size is not much of a matter, outside of 'dominance'. Money is the new 'dominance', but yet, how many 'short' leaders has the industrialized world, or the US, supported? None in the modern era. Crap, what about powerful women? Humankind has evolved to allow women to be equals of men, in theory (it's still very debatable). Our world make up in the last 100 years has changed so much that evolution will dictate the need for humans to be efficient in their environment - and you know what? None of us will see it. 10 generations of your family won't, either. That's not how evolution works - and it's also why science is EVERYTHING to humans, not money, and that's why we fail. You can't take your poverty or wealth to heaven with you, if such a thing exists. The only thing that matters is survival - and that's why anti-evolutionists fail (not to mention that most anti-evolutionists believe humans walked with dinosaurs, yet there's 0 evidence of that happening via scientific study - actually, that bs is based off of a book, not science - and the book is off over MILLIONS of years).

I dunno, not studying science is detrimental to the advancement of humankind. Logic and the ability to put together a thought is much much more powerful than faith, in my opinion. We're a young species, of course we can't fill in all the blanks, yet. That doesn't mean that that faith fills in those blanks. It means we're not advancing enough as a species that has the ABILITY to have the answers, yet we have so many that think because MSNBC reports science that they're obviously full of b.s. and it's some scheme to take away guns and bibles.


I apologize for being long-winded, this debate is not twitter-sized.
I DO have a question, however, for those that don't believe in evolution. What about the earth's evolution and geology just on the planet earth?
How do you feel about plate tectonics and earthquakes and volcanoes and such? I am curious to those views of non-science believers. I really am interested. I can't debate topics if I don't understand where people are coming from. Also, I wonder how this all relates to living in 'god's channel', or if there is such a thing. It would seem that if god did everything, then why? I really am interested. I havn't heard well thought out arguments on these sort of things and I genuinely would love to know.

[ShawNee922]

Where would I start?

Jellyfish ...

You all have jelly for brains ... j/k

[Ernie Mccracken]

Does this go here?

[Goat Milk]

You make a very good point in regards to 'modern' times, but it doesn't dismiss the fact. I'm no genius, but size is a critical point in survival as it dictates 'dominance' - that's my best argument (if you think about it a bit). Height can also include a larger frame for a human, which is also critical for labor. It wasn't until not too long ago that things like farming or taking down trees became mechanized, 2 things paramount in the survival of the species. I'm not an expert on the topic, I'm sure there are others that know a dickload more, but it makes a lot of sense that things like farming/warfare/labor/climate factors lend themselves to larger or taller humans. Also, the availability of food increased over time as more tools were invented. That likely has something to do with it. If you want to dig deeper into evolution - our best archeological evidence carries the species homo sapien back to Africa. Now, stop and think for a moment. Why are humans not EXACTLY as the first recorded homo sapiens if there's no evolution? Why are brown people differently colored than beigish people? Evolution helps each race of the species adapt to their surroundings. I don't remember reading about Jesus talking about 'native' americans (except in mormonism) that came over beringia and settled the 2 American continents in the bible, yet there's evidence of them being here some 50kish years ago. Do the Europeans that conquered North or South America have any common traits of the natives, other than being humans? Nope. You'd have to prove that air travel or alien intervention was plausible for races to inter-breed prior - that's the only out in the discussion. Natives of the Americas, or Africa or Asia or any non-mediterranean culture (which has tons of human mixed-breeding/sharing of technology/culture - it's no wonder that region dominates history) evolved over a LONG period of time to adapt to their part of the world. Archeology proves the migration of human-kind. So lets break this down. If humankind, going off the best science available, began in Africa - then how come a person born of pure African decent looks nothing like someone of pure Asian decent? Why aren't native N/S Americans identical to pure Europeans? That alone proves evolution exists. Also, the bible does not explain how a person of the nordic regions of our globe developed differently than people than Africa, but environment makes a LOT more sense to why homo-sapiens developed in the way they have. It makes sense that in a region with a longer winter humans need to be bigger - to store more fat for those brutal months - than someone in Africa, whom has a totally different set of food reserves and shelter requirements. Both are efficient based on their environment. Did some god do this? No. It's right in your f'n face. It makes a dickload of sense. It's factual human-kind evidence based on science, not a book that was stolen, perverted and then abused for capital gain. IF we wanted to get back to debating your point, in today's age, human size is not much of a matter, outside of 'dominance'. Money is the new 'dominance', but yet, how many 'short' leaders has the industrialized world, or the US, supported? None in the modern era. Crap, what about powerful women? Humankind has evolved to allow women to be equals of men, in theory (it's still very debatable). Our world make up in the last 100 years has changed so much that evolution will dictate the need for humans to be efficient in their environment - and you know what? None of us will see it. 10 generations of your family won't, either. That's not how evolution works - and it's also why science is EVERYTHING to humans, not money, and that's why we fail. You can't take your poverty or wealth to heaven with you, if such a thing exists. The only thing that matters is survival - and that's why anti-evolutionists fail (not to mention that most anti-evolutionists believe humans walked with dinosaurs, yet there's 0 evidence of that happening via scientific study - actually, that bs is based off of a book, not science - and the book is off over MILLIONS of years). I dunno, not studying science is detrimental to the advancement of humankind. Logic and the ability to put together a thought is much much more powerful than faith, in my opinion. We're a young species, of course we can't fill in all the blanks, yet. That doesn't mean that that faith fills in those blanks. It means we're not advancing enough as a species that has the ABILITY to have the answers, yet we have so many that think because MSNBC reports science that they're obviously full of b.s. and it's some scheme to take away guns and bibles. I apologize for being long-winded, this debate is not twitter-sized. I DO have a question, however, for those that don't believe in evolution. What about the earth's evolution and geology just on the planet earth? How do you feel about plate tectonics and earthquakes and volcanoes and such? I am curious to those views of non-science believers. I really am interested. I can't debate topics if I don't understand where people are coming from. Also, I wonder how this all relates to living in 'god's channel', or if there is such a thing. It would seem that if god did everything, then why? I really am interested. I havn't heard well thought out arguments on these sort of things and I genuinely would love to know.

very interesting.

but a supreme entity is not just based on books and religion. God is just their name for that entity. I think that supreme being meticulously crafts science.

hypothetically, if their was a God, you don't think he would be able to make people believe that he isn't real. Perhaps he would want you to believe your existence is a result of science, which he provides theories for us to speculate. Why would a supreme being want us to know he existed?

[Goat Milk]

Does this go here?

lol if we evolved from these apes, why aren't these apes still changing appearance? Maybe if you caught a bigfoot you can get more information

[ShawNee922]

Creationism and Evolution need not be enemies except where certain religions are concerned ...

The Universe is a living, breathing, thinking and EVOLVING entity ....
It is also a creator, having created countless solar systems that support life as well as the sub-atomic particals that combine to make a man ...

Earth is alive as well ...
Kro-magnon did not technically evolve on Earth. He is the proverbial "stranger in a strange land". He is a hybrid species created by combining the DNA of Elohim/god with the DNA of neanderthal(Earth evolving entity). Therefore, you won't find his equivalent in the ocean. The Earth itself is probably more equivalent to man. Seeing that both consist of mostly water/liquid.


Someone mentioned Jesus?

I believe Jesus was crucified because he went against the religious grain of his day and tried to teach his fellow man about Pantheism..He tried and failed to bring religion and science together.

One such example:
"In my fathers house there are many mansions.."
.In the Universe there are many life yielding planets ...

They let him get away with that one but when he tried to explain to the leaders of judiasm that their "god" was an imposter who themselves were 'creations" he had to be disposed of ...

ALL speculation of course.

~peace

[neverstoppers23]

Go to your local library they will have lots of information on the theory of evolution. Now this is anther topic the word 'theory'. Man people believe and confuse the word as, the way we use the word theory. its not anything like that. Theory in scientific terms is just under law. They have 99.99 percent sure this is the way it is, but it is not a law.

So it just drives me nuts, when right wing nuts say, oh we should have cretionism in school its just anther theory.I just want to drive an ice pick through my eyes.

[warriorfan707]

Ewing is pretty much proof of evolution

[McBa1n]

very interesting.

but a supreme entity is not just based on books and religion. God is just their name for that entity. I think that supreme being meticulously crafts science.

hypothetically, if their was a God, you don't think he would be able to make people believe that he isn't real. Perhaps he would want you to believe your existence is a result of science, which he provides theories for us to speculate. Why would a supreme being want us to know he existed?

I LOVE your post/counterpoint. It's brave and it's smart.
You have to define what "god" is, first, though.
What is 'god'?
This debate ends there until 'god' is defined. I cannot define it. I think it's made up, to be honest. It is, to me, mathematically IMPOSSIBILE that make this conversation happen.

What you're saying makes a LOT of sense, but it also defines the judeo/christian Devil. The "devil" is what tricked us all into believing it didn't exist. Again, athiests make the best christians.
My faith? To be fair. I'm VERY spiritual. I'm alive. I type on here. I debate. How can you not appreciate EVERY f'n second you have to do that? There's no explanation. It's happened. I've happened. You've happened. It's impossible via math, but yet it's happened. How can you not appreciate every single breath from your body? It's life. It's whatever you want to do with those breaths. You can waste them being told why you exist or you can challenge them. It's up to you. As far as I'm concerned. To be typing now is mathematically impossible. God bless statistical anomoly.

Who f'n knows what is at the end of it. I don't. No one does. Faith does NOT equal fact.
The goal line, however, in this debate, has to be set by what 'god' is. To have a real debate about that, we have to define it. I think we're all way too small to have that definition of what 'god' truly is. In my opinion, worshiping short of the Sun is f'n arrogant. Fact is, we'll never know so long as we worship $$ over science, as a species... Or until we die. I sure as f don't, and I figure no one else reading this feels the same.

[McBa1n]

This thread shouldn't die so easiily. It's VERY important.

[nyed1010]

It's the year 2011 and people are still debating whether evolution is "real". That by itself makes me very sad.

[hoop22]

good luck

[statnerds]

It's the year 2011 and people are still debating whether evolution is "real". That by itself makes me very sad.

Never said it wasn't real, just asking some questions is all.

Like if it is real, why do humans:

1. Need sleep

2. Only reproduce through sex

On the flip side, if God is real, explain Jerry Sandusky.

[marcoloco]

earth is the center of the universe because so far that is the only place with intelligent life

[JohnGalt2341]

My favorite thing about God is... out of all the billions of planets in the Universe... he's mostly just concerned about the planet Earth. And out of all the problems on this planet... his biggest concern his helping R&B "artists" win Grammys.

[FourLengthsClear]

very interesting.

but a supreme entity is not just based on books and religion. God is just their name for that entity. I think that supreme being meticulously crafts science.

hypothetically, if their was a God, you don't think he would be able to make people believe that he isn't real. Perhaps he would want you to believe your existence is a result of science, which he provides theories for us to speculate. Why would a supreme being want us to know he existed?

Current scientific theories as to how the universe came to be are full holes and there are certain, very basic, questions that we have no real answers for. Dark matter and Dark energy, for example, are synonyms for "We have no fukkin clue".

The idea of a supreme being providing us with half of the pieces of an intellectual jigsaw is quite an attractive one from some perspectives but once you start to go down that road, there are other theories which have just as much/little merit. It could be suggested for example that what we experience is not, in fact, reality and that we are part of some sort of video game that was developed 100,000 years into what we perceive as the future.

[nyed1010]

Never said it wasn't real, just asking some questions is all.

Like if it is real, why do humans:

1. Need sleep

2. Only reproduce through sex

On the flip side, if God is real, explain Jerry Sandusky.

1) the most basic hypothesis for the requirement for sleep using natural selection as a template is our inherent fear of the dark. This fear was developed throughout our human ancestral history as there was a time where there was no such thing as artificial light. At night, our ancestors were most vulnerable to predators and humans that required sleep and didn't venture out at night were most likely to survive and reproduce. There are various other far more complex hypotheses for sleep which have to do with the fact that our bodies are "refreshed" during sleep. Muscle repair, bone growth, and various memory and mental repairs occur in the brain during sleep. Furthermore, when the body is sleeping, it's essentially at a "low power" state, this preserves and restores energy so you can function at the most efficient level when you are awake. If we didn't sleep, we would be active the entire day with no rest and that is obviously not very efficient.

2) what exactly do you mean? Do you mean why do we require a male and a female to reproduce, instead of just producing asexually(one individual)? If so, just google "asexual reproduction vs sexual reproduction" and compare the advantages of sexual reproduction.

[statnerds]

2) what exactly do you mean? Do you mean why do we require a male and a female to reproduce, instead of just producing asexually(one individual)? If so, just google "asexual reproduction vs sexual reproduction" and compare the advantages of sexual reproduction.

fukk google.

on the real, it would appear on the surface that we have conflicting theories on the subject of reproduction. first we must establish the reason for reproducing. it is a selfish act. it is the desire to replicate oneself, is it not? every action undertaken by humans is selfish, there is no such thing as a selfless act. so why muddle our genes with those of another? it would be much more efficient to reproduce asexually.

do people/animals produce offspring in a selfless act to keep the species thriving? we can't use the most basic philosophy of self preservation only when it is convenient.

sorry, shouldn't have started this when i have to leave for work in 5 minutes. i will use google as you suggest, but i will also consider the source when i find info. did the mention how the risk of death (AIDS) weighs on the equation?

which would be another topic for discussion.

why do humans, or any living thing, die?

[FourLengthsClear]

fukk google.

on the real, it would appear on the surface that we have conflicting theories on the subject of reproduction. first we must establish the reason for reproducing. it is a selfish act. it is the desire to replicate oneself, is it not? every action undertaken by humans is selfish, there is no such thing as a selfless act. so why muddle our genes with those of another? it would be much more efficient to reproduce asexually.

do people/animals produce offspring in a selfless act to keep the species thriving? we can't use the most basic philosophy of self preservation only when it is convenient.

sorry, shouldn't have started this when i have to leave for work in 5 minutes. i will use google as you suggest, but i will also consider the source when i find info. did the mention how the risk of death (AIDS) weighs on the equation?

which would be another topic for discussion.

why do humans, or any living thing, die?

Mutations in the gene pool are absolutely essential for producing resistance to diseases and to ensure we all don't end up like this:

[marcoloco]

i took a anthropology class years ago in college and we had a classmate who was determined to prove evolution wrong. and he did a very good job at pointing out all the holes in the evolution theory. i never knew this until that class but evolution is just a theory. it has never been proven, so far cant be proven. there is facts to support the theory but there is just as many facts if not more to reject the theory as well. for those who are really interested i would recommended enrolling in an anthropology class at a local JC or even online. interesting stuff, the more you learn about this theory the more bogus it sounds. imo it take more to believe in evolution than to believe in that there just might be a god who created everything

[Dutch]

According to the theory of evolution, life began in the oceans. We are the "humans of the ocean".

[nyed1010]

i took a anthropology class years ago in college and we had a classmate who was determined to prove evolution wrong. and he did a very good job at pointing out all the holes in the evolution theory. i never knew this until that class but evolution is just a theory. it has never been proven, so far cant be proven. there is facts to support the theory but there is just as many facts if not more to reject the theory as well. for those who are really interested i would recommended enrolling in an anthropology class at a local JC or even online. interesting stuff, the more you learn about this theory the more bogus it sounds. imo it take more to believe in evolution than to believe in that there just might be a god who created everything

[statnerds]

No takers on why we die? Not just humans, but any living. What purpose does death serve in relation to evolution?

Another interesting point I heard came from Francis Crick. And while it is in no way evolution based, I thought it worth mentioning. He basically said it was a damn near impossible result of randomness that the DNA of every living creature spins in the same direction.