You have a religious concept of proof and truth, and these are incompatible with science and reality
One accepts on faith and the other demands evidence. Christianity had it's time. I can't wait for this chapter in history to be over.
Trending News
Here are the top political news stories for today.
18 Replies
@@1876-Elbert 2yrs2Y
Engaged Social Issues Engaged Gay Marriage
I want true proof of evolution, not just the ideas of one scientist.
@8J34B6ZTechnocracy2yrs2Y
The fossil record provides a wealth of evidence for evolution, showing gradual changes in species over millions of years. Transitional fossils, like Archaeopteryx, illustrate the shift from dinosaurs to birds. Additionally, genetic research reveals the shared DNA among all living organisms, indicating common ancestry. Even within our own species, we can observe microevolution in bacteria developing antibiotic resistance. These examples collectively support the theory of evolution, which aligns with a deeper understanding of God's creation and continuous unfolding of life.
@@1876-Elbert 2yrs2Y
Engaged Social Issues Engaged Gay Marriage
If you can can prove that a being can create another being different from it, I'll believe you.
@8J34B6ZTechnocracy2yrs2Y
You are using a strawman argument. It's not about breeding two different beings to create a new one. Instead, tiny changes in DNA over thousands or millions of years can cause one species to slowly evolve into two distinct ones.
For instance, look at the finches on the Galápagos Islands, which have evolved distinct beak shapes to adapt to different food sources. This kind of gradual change, driven by natural selection, illustrates how species evolve over time.
@@1876-Elbert2yrs2Y
Engaged Social Issues Engaged Gay Marriage
So then why are Humans set apart from everything else? Why not, for instance, dogs, or even elephants?
@SuperiorOilIndependent2yrs2Y
The evidence for evolution comes from multiple independent fields of science: genetics, paleontology, embryology, and even geology. It's not just Darwin's ideas — we've observed natural selection in real time, documented transitional fossils, and mapped out the genetic changes that link all living organisms. It’s like denying gravity because it was Newton's idea. Would you want to argue that gravity doesn't exist?
Scientists have directly observed cases where one group of organisms stops breeding successfully with its original group, forming what biologists call a new species. This shows evolution happening in real time, not just over millions of years.
- Primrose flower example: Scientists crossed two different primrose plants. The offspring were sterile. Then one plant doubled its chromosomes, became fertile, and could no longer breed with either parent. A new species appeared in the lab in one step.
- Goatsbeard flower example (Tragopogon): In the early 1900s, two European goatsbeard plants crossed naturally in America. Their hybrid offspring doubled chromosomes, became fertile, and formed new species (Tragopogon mirus and Tragopogon miscellus) that can't breed properly with the parents. This happened in the wild within 50–100 years. Read more
@9TYJFHK2yrs2Y
"Science" is a process for evaluating claims based on experimentation and observation. It doesn't truly "prove" anything, but it removes tons of room for doubt.
We have fossil records which show that, as time goes on, there are different creatures with different traits.
We have shown that these traits are the result of inherited "genes", as evidenced by Gregor Mendel's experiments.
Through selective breeding of plants and animals, we have made them massively different from before. Crops and fruit now have massive harvests. Bananas are seedless and pleasant to eat. Different breeds of dogs have been raised for different aesthetic and utilitarian purposes. If there was no evolution in response to environmental pressures, we wouldn't be able to exploit that process for our species' benefit.
@RIPCharlieRepublican7mos7MO
@@1876-Elbert 2yrs2Y
Engaged Social Issues Engaged Gay Marriage
How are they incompatible with science? Science proves God, it does not disprove him! Are we supposed to believe that all that is alive and here is a mistake? That's what your 'science' says!
@Renaldo-MoonGreen 2yrs2Y
@Debater-jr.Progressive2yrs2Y
@9TYJFHK2yrs2Y
They're not saying that science is incompatible with religion.
They're saying that the "religious" (dogma-focused is a better term) attitude of truth (that whatever God and scripture says must be true) is incompatible with the "scientific" (empirical is a better term) attitude of truth (that something can only be true if it's consistent with experiments and natural observations, barring a margin of error).
So long as dogmatic truth and empirical truth stick to their own domains, there is no conflict.
More conversations
Join in on more popular conversations.
