Do You Believe in Evolution?

[DubaiSis]

Originally Posted by DrPhil

I believe in evolution and that life has evolved and that God and science go hand-in-hand. I also believe that while there is evidence of evolution, it is impossible for humans to 100% prove either side of the science vs. God debate.

I don't see any reason why belief in god and belief in science can't go hand in hand. I was raised in a relatively conservative Catholic family. The way I was taught it was at the beginning of time (for whatever that means) god caused the big bang. And the earth progressed. I was also taught that god doesn't punish you for not knowing better. I don't know exactly how that applies to this argument, but it seems like it should.

I personally think the problem isn't with god versus science which is not necessarily contradictory, it's religion versus common sense which IMO is very much in contradiction with each other.

[IrishLake]

Originally Posted by Sciencewoman

Yes. Over many generations, species can diverge into separate, new species. Often this is due to geographic isolation, ala Darwin's Galapagos finches. Let's say certain members of a species become isolated from one another...they're on different islands, in the case of the Galapagos. Over time, mutations occur in the separate populations, or environmental factors favor a certain adaptation. Members with this adaptation or mutation survive to reproduce. Over generations, the DNA differs to the point where members of a separated population can no longer reproduce with other members of the species, or other separated populations. At this point, you have new species with a common ancestor species. This has been happening throughout history. There is evidence in the geologic fossil record.

Individual members of species do not evolve into a new species.

Rock on, my sister in science. Long live the female science nerds!

Originally Posted by DrPhil

So the people who look like horses and other animals are just having a bad day?

Or bad life. Someone pooped in their gene pool.

Originally Posted by Kevin

The poll shows that magical thinking (or rather a caucus of magical thinkers) is key to GOP politics.

Damnit. As a modern, forward thinking GOP member, stuff like this almost motivate me to go into politics.

Originally Posted by ADPiEE

The only thing I found in the article was:

Sixty percent of Americans say that "humans and other living things have evolved over time," the telephone survey by the Pew Research Center's Religion and Public Life Project h.

Surely there was more to the article? I mean, how can anyone dispute that things change....look at dog breeding?? I thought surely I missed something in the article

Originally Posted by DrPhil

"Sixty percent of Americans say that "humans and other living things have evolved over time," the telephone survey by the Pew Research Center's Religion and Public Life Project showed.

But 33 percent reject the idea of evolution, saying that "humans and other living things have existed in their present form since the beginning of time," Pew said in a statement."

So, yes, there are people who believe that life hasn't evolved and people try to cite things like Noah's Arc. Dog breeding and "things changing" are not automatically considered evolution if people believe breeding and changes are not things that have occurred for thousands of years for whatever reasons. Therefore, evolution is clearly defined and the "debate" is regarding three things: (1) whether there has really been the changes in species as claimed; (2) if there have been changes, how did the changes occur; and (3) is it possible to believe science and the spiritual realm work together. I believe in evolution and that life has evolved and that God and science go hand-in-hand. I also believe that while there is evidence of evolution, it is impossible for humans to 100% prove either side of the science vs. God debate. The article AOII Angel posted highlights how this issue is rooted in an either/or mentality.

Yes, in my scientific career and faith, they are so woven together and create a beautiful tapestry.

A chihuahua is genetically the same as a german shepherd. "Breeds" are just the result of selective breeding (animal husbandry) over hundreds and thousands of generations. It's a genetics game, versus evolution of a species. Many are still of the opinion that Canis lupus (the grey wolf) is still genetically the same as Canis familiaris (the domestic dog), because they can breed and produce viable offspring. (Viable meaning their offspring can reproduce as well).

Animals who can breed and produce non-viable offspring are considered hybrids, such as a mule (a donkey x horse cross).




I had a great conversation at work one day. A new employee (very religious) was debating evolution vs divine creation with a fellow scientist. They were in a common cubicle area outside my office. I could hear them debating back and forth. Someone finally said "Hey Irish, I'm surprised you've kept quiet. What's your opinion?"

I replied, never removing my eyes from my computer screen,"Of course humans didn't 'come from' monkeys."

"THANK YOU!" Shouted the new girl. "Finally, someone with scientific sense agrees with me."

Silly girl, thinking an educated geologist would agree. "Humans didn't evolve from monkeys any more than I can evolve a third arm. Humans and monkeys DO, however, share a common ancestor. We just haven't found enough fossil evidence yet. It's out there."

To which she got all bent out of shape and said without proof, the "theory" cannot be true, blah blah blah. Then I had to explain to her what true scientific "theory" is. She got pissy and stormed off when I asked her is she agreed that Faith is believing in something even though you cannot see it. She said yes.

OHHHHHHHHHHH... I have faith as well, then. I see so much divinity in science, that my faith and science are completely entwined.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I don't see any reason why belief in god and belief in science can't go hand in hand. I was raised in a relatively conservative Catholic family. The way I was taught it was at the beginning of time (for whatever that means) god caused the big bang. And the earth progressed. I was also taught that god doesn't punish you for not knowing better. I don't know exactly how that applies to this argument, but it seems like it should.

I personally think the problem isn't with god versus science which is not necessarily contradictory, it's religion versus common sense which IMO is very much in contradiction with each other.

This is what I don't understand. Why can't you have it both ways? I'm not religious by any means, nor do I pretend to know the specific teachings and beliefs of any religion (so someone tell me if DubaiSis and I are missing something), but it seems to me that even if you believe God created the universe and everything in it, that doesn't mean you also have to believe that evolution is a myth.

Creation and change (evolution) are two different things.

[DrPhil]

@ IrishLake: I am Team German Shepherd.

My memory fails but in which century did scientists begin studying human evolution beyond primates millions of years ago? I recall some people do not believe the earth is millions of years old. I also remember dispute over movies that depicted humans as existing at the same time as dinosaurs.

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

I don't see any reason why belief in god and belief in science can't go hand in hand. I was raised in a relatively conservative Catholic family. The way I was taught it was at the beginning of time (for whatever that means) god caused the big bang. And the earth progressed.

I personally think the problem isn't with god versus science which is not necessarily contradictory

I think a lot of people don't believe as we believe.

A lot of people around the world believe that God exists but science doesn't (which is one reason why evolution is disputed in some K-12 schools); or that science exists but God doesn't (including but not limited to atheists, some of whom believe only dumb idiots credit deities for things proven by science).

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

it's religion versus common sense which IMO is very much in contradiction with each other.

What is "common sense"?

[AnchorAlumna]

I believe in evolution directed by God.

I'm not sure about global warming. We've had weather a long, long, long time, but have only been tracking specifics for the last hundred and a half years.

[LAblondeGPhi]

While I have obvious concerns over the number of people who outright deny, or don't really understand, human evolution, my bigger beef is this trend toward teaching creationism in science classes alongside evolution as a competing "explanation".

Science and religion often conflict, but it doesn't mean that they are in any way opposite sides of the same coin, and I think to many people are getting that confused. Creationism is not a viable scientific theory. Period.

At least with the debate on global warming, most sides are usually using scientific tools to arm their arguments. Differing interpretations of the same(ish) evidence is an important part of science. (Big Ol' Caveat: yes, I know there are plenty of people who aren't using any science or evidence to inform their arguments, but there are plenty of people who do and express nuanced doubts over the causes, the trajectory, etc.).

[MysticCat]

I believe in evolution, without any conflict in my religious beliefs.

It's not something I spend much time thinking about though. I think the evolution that led to me somehow rejected the gene that enables me to find science interesting.

[DrPhil]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I think the evolution that led to me somehow rejected the gene that enables me to find science interesting.

Same here.

Can we get GCers who don't believe in evolution or are skeptical? You won't be called dumb.

[DeltaBetaBaby]

Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi

At least with the debate on global warming, most sides are usually using scientific tools to arm their arguments. Differing interpretations of the same(ish) evidence is an important part of science. (Big Ol' Caveat: yes, I know there are plenty of people who aren't using any science or evidence to inform their arguments, but there are plenty of people who do and express nuanced doubts over the causes, the trajectory, etc.).

The overwhelming agreement in the scientific community is that global warming exists. Not that there is some "debate" with both sides given equal weight.

[amIblue?]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

I believe in evolution, without any conflict in my religious beliefs.

It's not something I spend much time thinking about though. I think the evolution that led to me somehow rejected the gene that enables me to find science interesting.

I am almost positive that on any issue discussed on GC, I could just wait for MysticCat to post and then say ditto.

[DrPhil]

Global warming: Maybe, maybe not.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamestay...arming-crisis/

And the Internet has lists of scientists who disagree regarding global warming and the "global warming controversy."

Whether there is an overwhelming agreement among scientists can be discussed in a global warming thread. It would be a good discussion.

[ASTalumna06]

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

The overwhelming agreement in the scientific community is that global warming exists. Not that there is some "debate" with both sides given equal weight.

I think her point was to argue that religion has no place in a science class. Yes, there are people who don't believe in global warming, and to teach different theories in a science class would still be teaching science. To teach Creationism is to teach a non-science related topic.

[LAblondeGPhi]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

I think her point was to argue that religion has no place in a science class. Yes, there are people who don't believe in global warming, and to teach different theories in a science class would still be teaching science. To teach Creationism is to teach a non-science related topic.

Exactly! Thank you for helping clarify my point.

Originally Posted by DeltaBetaBaby

The overwhelming agreement in the scientific community is that global warming exists. Not that there is some "debate" with both sides given equal weight.

I happen to agree with you and I didn't say anything to the contrary - I didn't make any reference to volume/weight of evidence, just to the type of evidence.

[clemsongirl]

Originally Posted by ASTalumna06

I think her point was to argue that religion has no place in a science class. Yes, there are people who don't believe in global warming, and to teach different theories in a science class would still be teaching science. To teach Creationism is to teach a non-science related topic.

This times one hundred. In an anthropology class I took last year we spent an entire two weeks going over what evolution is and how while creationism is something that you can believe in, it is still not science and should not be treated as such. It drives me batty when people argue that both sides should get a fair say in science classes simply because there are two sides. Religion needs to stay out of public schools entirely, IMHO, but most certainly out of hard science classes.

[DrPhil]

Keeping religion out of public school science classes includes not allowing teachers and students to mock religion. I know of situations where teachers and students were allowed to laugh at religious explanations and overtly present science as counter to religious doctrine.

I hate the phrase "hard science." It is a ridiculous and inaccurate phrase for many reasons.